Relay for Life is a great cause that brings campus organizations, students, faculty and the community together to celebrate cancer survivors, honor people who lost their lives because of the disease and raise money for cancer research. It is also a good forum to bring cancer issues to the forefront.
Although this cause should be applauded, it is a shame that this is one of the only events each year in which campus organizations unite. The student body should come together more often in order to bring about a positive change.
There should be more student activism on campus. Students should be committed to more than one cause.
It should not be a life-threatening disease bringing black students together – especially at a Historically Black College.
The student body should also come together for other issues faced by the black community: AIDS, diabetes and obesity are a few.
The fact that we cannot come together more often for other causes says something about the maturity of the campus as a whole.
Why can the campus assemble peacefully at an event that deals with a terminal disease but at any other event, people argue and fight?
If the campus can come together so effectively for this issue, then it can surely find time to come together in order to change the state of the University.
Obviously there are talented people from FAMU who make Relay for Life a success each year. These same people should unite more often for the betterment of the University.
Peterson trial too “soapy” to be justice
Scott Peterson’s life took a drastic turn Wednesday when a judge upheld a jury recommendation and sentenced him to death for killing his wife Laci and their unborn son Connor.
The four-month trial leading up to the jury decision generated much publicity, and in return caused a seemingly sensational trial.
From the television network movies to the exclusive interviews to the books, Peterson was branded a callous, heartless murderer who had an extramarital love affair.
There was 24-hour coverage every day. The unrelenting television coverage that plastered this trial “turned the trial into a soap opera, even after the jury reached a verdict of guilty by subjecting the court to an emotional testimony,” author Thomas Sowell wrote this in his column “The Scott Peterson Trial: Law or Soap Opera?”
Does the public really want to hear a mother whose world has been destroyed because her daughter and grandson have been murdered? Does the public really want to hear a mother who obviously doesn’t want to see her son die of lethal injection?
As emotions were being vented, Peterson’s trial turned into a melodramatic scene of judicial mockery.
Whether the trial coverage served as a public service or as a wrenching emotional display is anyone’s guess.