I agree with Denny. While I was listening to the debate, it seemed to
me that a compromise could very easily be reached between both sides.
And yet I was observing and listening to the people around me, and many
would give each other very offended looks at certain things that a
debater or an audience member would say. It seemed clear, as Denny said,
that people came to hear their biases defended, and to support the
defender. I felt both Jimmy and Kate did a wonderful job of presenting
their side, and I think that many of the points that Kate brought up are
definite concerns for the Greek community. Jimmy was very honest in
admitting some problems, but it seemed to boil down to whether the
system should be fixed or scrapped. I believe that it should be fixed,
that it is not beyond redemption, and that eliminating fraternities
would not eliminate the underlying social problems that create the
problems we associate with the Greek system, namely, rape,
discrimination, and alcohol abuse.
 
        I just wish that more people had come with an open mind for both sides.
I will admit to looking for holes in Kate's argument, I think it is
natural to want to defend your position. But I feel that I was able to
overcome my initial defensiveness and look at the argument objectively,
and I felt that both sides made very convincing points, and a compromise
could be easily reached.
 
Thank you.
 
Dave S.
--
 
mailto:[log in to unmask]