Opinion
Why march for life?
Friday, Dec. 1, 2017
Every January, Notre Dame Right to Life leads between 700 and 900 students and faculty from Notre Dame, Saint Mary’s and Holy Cross to the March for Life in Washington D.C. Each of us marches for many different reasons, but overall, we all are striving to seek an end to abortion. This motive understandably draws a lot of controversy. But I believe it is through dialogue and storytelling that we are able to center ourselves around our shared humanity. I know that many disagree with the pro-life stance, but know that this is me starting a dialogue, and this is why I march.
Answering my hate email
By
Mary Freeman
· Friday, Dec. 1, 2017
Call it anything — hate email, cyber bullying or an electronic cry to counter an Oedipus complex or cure erectile dysfunction — haters relish an opportunity to lord over others by belittling peculiar physical characteristics, age, religion or other perceived weaknesses. Much of the hate mail I receive mentions my presidential appointment under Bill Clinton, like a recent email reasoning that I “pimped for two verified sexual assaulters in Bill Clinton and Al Gore.” By their logic, such guilt by association absolutely dooms me as an Italian-American Notre Dame alumnus who in their eyes definitively supports the disrespect and oppression depicted by the Columbus mural in the administration building.
A need for training tables
Friday, Dec. 1, 2017
Student athletes aren’t any more special than the regular student body, but we do have a need for training tables. Oftentimes student athletes are pressed for time balancing class, studies, meetings, training, travel and competition. Not being able to replenish our bodies with healthy options, or even not at all, is hindering our ability to represent the University as well as we should.
It is time for the murals to go
By
Bailey Boesch
· Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2017
John P. Slattery, Ph.D. ’17
Catalonia at an impasse
By
Devon Chenelle
· Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2017
For all their ideological intricacies, Marxists are remarkably pragmatic. Nowhere was this better demonstrated than in Lenin’s Oct. 17, 1921, address to the All-Russian Congress, when he stated, “The whole question is — who will overtake whom?” He thus reduced the entirety of class conflict, at its core, to a question of which side will achieve domination, making all incidences of debate, compromise and agreement between opposing sides in the great class struggle ultimately nothing more than disguised attempts to gain mastery. This ultimately reduced all political debates to confrontations of power, not arguments on right or wrong. Could this framework be applied to similar debates over popular sovereignty?
Trending
