Opinion Nebraskan Tuesday, March 29,1994 Nebraskan Editorial Board University of Nebraska-Lincoln Jeremy Fitzpatrick Rainbow Rowell. Adeana Left in. Todd Cooper Jeff Zeleny Sarah Duey. William Luuer. . . . .Editor, 472-17(ft .Opinion Page Editor Managing Editor .Sports Editor Associate News Editor Arts & Entertainment Editor .Senior Photographer F 1)11 OKI \l Victims every day Japanese on target about violence in U.S. When two Japanese students were shot in a carjacking Friday night, Japan again focused on violence in the United States. The Japanese people cannot understand our problems with guns and violence. When a Japanese visitor is harmed in the United States, it becomes an international concern. The Japanese arc appalled. How can they allow their children to come to a place where guns and violence arc so common? Why would they come here to visit? The U.S. government apologized profusely. What a horror, what a shame. Wc might think Japan is overreacting, wny snouiu our enure nation be damned because of a few isolated incidents? Our country isn’t more dangerous for tourists and international visitors. It’s dangerous for everyone. Every day, American citizens are victims of violence. Every day an American citizen is shot. How many Americans were killed this weekend? Why didn’t the U.S. government apologize for these deaths? Why didn’t our nation react as Japan did? These deaths may not affect international trade or tourism, but they arc just as tragic. Our country should not save its concern and horror for crimes against visitors. We should be just as concerned — more so — by our own victims. America has become calloused to violent crime. Wc arc not surprised or shocked by shootings, carjackings or drive-bys. Wc expect them. Japan’s reaction should show us that violence is not normal. It is not unavoidable. And it is not something wc should just get used to. () I III l| ION ‘Natural love’ In response to Christopher Winkelmann (DN. March 11, 1994): The Bill of Rights and the Consti tution, as a whole, originally intended to cover white men. Since then, vari ous groups have been recognized as also being protected. The Black Pan thers, while not a separate race, were instrumental in securing these protec tions for African Americans. Women only achieved the right to vote in the early part of this century. Currently, gay men, lesbians and bisexuals arc not protected. As such, we do not seek “special rights over and above the majority. Since you slate that no one you have known considers homosexuality “natural love,” it is obvious you know no well-adjusted gay men, lesbians or bisexuals. It would behoove you to make a trip to the second floor of the Nebraska Union to the Gay-Lesbian Biscxual Resource Center. The people there will be happy to talk' With you about your unfortunate misunder standing of this entire issue. Nancy Rivcnburg graduate student William Schultz sophomore arts and sciences Roe vs. Wade Whenever Roe vs. Wade is de bated, the predominate homosexual community seems to ally with the advocates of “freedom of choice,” never with the “right-to-lifers.” That appears to defy logic and seems to contradict their avowed positions. Unplanned pregnancy could hardly be a genuine concern for them. If, as they contend, their lifestyle is genetic, a fetus identified as having that gene would be more liable to be aborted. That would appear to be the ultimate in discrimination. Jack Wunderlich Lincoln