My July 19 letter, “Affirmative action ruling a good thing for everyone,” supported the Supreme Court’s rejection of race as a factor in college admissions (aka affirmative action). The court cited it as a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment equal protection clause. My letter suggested that the pursuit of equal protection under the law through the affirmative action ruling helps all. That simple idea was deemed a “non-historical belief” by John Mishler and Sigrid R.E. Fischer-Mishler in their July 26 letter, “Equal rights under the law? Prove it.

First, the Mishlers misquoted me, referring to “equal rights” rather than my reference to equal protection – two different issues. Equal protection under the law is included in the already ratified 14th Amendment. Equal rights are embodied in the yet-ratified Equal Rights Amendment. Their letter was a response to an issue I never raised.

Second, the Mishlers’ bizarre comments about internment, massacres and lynching are digressive and do not negate the benefit of the court’s affirmative action ruling. The Mishlers continue to blather about various national equal rights initiatives, superfluous to the content of my first letter. Finally, they offer support for unconstitutional affirmative action by citing its noble goal. Well, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Summarily, if the Mishlers are going to submit a response letter, they should quote the opposing view accurately and refrain from creating a new topic to address. To confuse the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, the subject of my July 19 letter, with the equal rights initiative is inexcusable when submitting their response for publication. Their blunder within a know-it-all attitude is obvious to anyone smarter than a sea slug and suggests that during history class, the Mishlers were playing frisbee in the quad.

Nancy Chesley

Comments are not available on this story.