It’s informative and exciting when The Tribune presents in-depth sides of an issue, such as the Cal Poly dorm proposal (Pro/Con, April 6).
One side called for a balanced integration of community interests with educational needs; the other side “redefined the issue” to be one in which any change to the dorm proposal attacked academic success.
Perhaps the next topic could be “money equals speech.” One side could reasonably argue that money may either support or stifle speech, and so money’s impact should influence but not control the political process. The other side could, once again, “redefine the issue” to view any control on money in politics as a direct attack on the First Amendment guarantee of free speech (think of guns and the Second Amendment).
These discussions highlight our Orwellian journey into a society where words define their opposites in practice, where our pursuit of happiness becomes a Kafkaesque journey.