age 6
( Slouch
“Before we get started, are you absolutely sure that your
ride doesn t leave early?”
PINION
ORC should keep canoes
Intra-university bickering has hit a new high, or low as the
case may be.
The MSC Outdoor Recreation Committee has $10,000
worth of canoes and backpacking equipment which the In
tramural Department wants.
Intramurals wants the equipment because it feels it can
distribute the goods to the students more efficiently. ORC
thinks it is doing a good job of distribution right now.
<
ORC is open to rent the equipment at the Grove on
| Todays and Fridays. The canoes and packs can be re-
* burned on Mondays and Tuesdays. The committee seems to
* ***6 a ghod set-up for the students and themselves.
8
But Intramurals insists it can do a better job. It wants to
have the check-out open five days a week. This means
paying a full-time checker. Also, it won’t have storage space
until the G. Rollie White Coliseum expansion is completed.
Dr. John J. Koldus, vice president for student services,
will make the final decision on who gets the equipment. He
says he will make no decision until Intramurals comes up
with an organized plan for managing the equipment.
Maybe the best way for Koldus to make his decision is to
ask himself, “Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”
the small society
by Brickman
Y&l) A
X C^M'T Y&T. X XlJ^T
^>T
c-CyG,
Washington Star Syndicate. Inc.
The Battalion
U S P S 045 360
LETTERS POLICY
its to thr editor should not exceed 300 mtrds and are
t to heinc iut to that length or lew if longer The
al staff ri \en ex the right to edit \u< h letterx and doex
arantci to fiuhhxh any letter b.ai h letter muxf In
shoti flu addn ss of the writer and li%t a telephone
t for unfit atton
rrvs < orrt sfnindent t to le tters to fht b.ditor. The
tin Room 216. Reed Mt Donald Budding ( tdlege
7H41
Repri-M ntrd nationaJh h\ National Kdiuattonai \d\t*r
isintf S«t\k* n Iim Neu York C it\. Chit ago and lao
Vrutflrs
The Battalion is published Mondas through Fndas from
ptemU r through Mas rtcrpt during evam and hohdas
rnuls and the summer when it is published on Tuevdas
rough Thursdas
Mail sul»MTiptKins .
luRilsear $35 00prf
i re«jHesf address
$16 75 per semester VTI 25 p**r
> per semester VJ.J per
ill! sear Adsertismg rales furnished
The Battalion R«»»m 216 Reed
It I>maid Building < ollege StatM»n Tetas 77M-3
I'nited Press InfernatmnaJ is entitled eulusisels to the
sc for reprodm tion of all news dtspatthes t redited to it
ghts of r«'prodiKtN»n of all «»ther matter hf*rein rrsrrsed
-tond ( lass postage paid at ( »»ll«*ge Station T\ * ■ S4d
MEMBER
Texas Press Asstieiation
Southwest Journalism Congress
Editor Roy Bragg
Associate Editor Keith Taylor
News Editor Rusty Cawley
Asst. News Editor ...... Karen Cornelison
Copy Editor Dillard Stone
Sports Editor Mike Burrichter
Focus Editor Rhonda Watters
City Editor Louie Arthur
Campus Editor Diane Blake
Staff Writers Nancy Andersen,
Tricia Brunhart.Angelique Copeland,
Laura Cortez, Meril Edwards,
Carol Hancock, Kathleen McElroy,
Debbie Nelson, Richard Oliver,
Tim Sager, Steve Sisney,
Becky Swanson, Andy Williams
Chief Photographer Lynn Blanco
Photographers Lee Roy Leschper,
Steve Clark, Ed Cunnius,
Viewpoint
by Jim Earle
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are
j those of the editor or of the writer of the
article and are not necessarily those of the
I'niversity administration or thr Board of
Regents 1 he Battalion is a non-profit. self-
supporting enterprise operated by students
as a university and community newspaper
Editorial policy is determined by the editor.
The Battalion
Texas A&M University
Thursday
March 6, 1980
Reader s Forum
Critiques based on inaccurate views
By JAY STANISH
I would like to respond to the comments
made by Mr. Springer and Ms. King in the
March 3rd “Reader’s Forum” concerning
the film series, “Whatever Happened to
the Human Race?” I believe that the major
ity of their critique was based on inaccurate
observations and mere personal taste. To
wit:
— The “monotonous repetition of irrele
vant symbolism was to my mind an effec
tive way of emphasizing the point. The
judgement of monotony and irrelevance is
a matter of pure personal opinion. I’m sorry
they didn’t like it; I and many others did.
— The rain on the table sequence lasted
perhaps 30 seconds. Big deal. Symbolism
again is a matter of personal opinion.
— I thought the movie was not only an
adequate visual aid; it was excellent. Again,
personal opinion.
— Black slavery was paralleled to infanti
cide and abortion because in both cases the
Supreme Court labeled those affected by
the practices as non-human, sanctioning
horrifying abuses.
— The Nazi extermination of not only
Jews but all those considered to be sub
human or an economic drag on society was
paralleled to euthanasia because of the in
creasingly vocal advocacy of using euthana
sia as a means of ridding society of un
wanted or burdensome members. The
point is that similar views of man are lead
ing to similar practices.
— To say that the film was without
documentation is to be categorically mis
taken. I heard plenty of documentation. I
challenge undocumented. It was “prop
aganda,” in the strictest sense of the word,
but that does not mean “no facts. Look it
up.
Dr. Koop should have been more
clear in his definition of euthanasia, but
there is little argument that the concept is
applied in the main to the elderly.
— The critique of the statue shows a
basic misunderstanding of the thrust of the
film. The point is that a changed view of
man has provided us with a morally schi
zophrenic and disoriented society which
can on the one hand hold up hundreds of
millions of dollars in dam contruction to
save the snail darter and on the other hand
calmly flush six million unborn children
down the drain. The counter example of
the boat people and Cambodian refugees
only serves to further illustrate the dicho
tomy.
— The churches in Germany were not
directly responsible for the atrocities com
mitted, and that was not the film’s point.
They do bear part of the blame for not
speaking out, in accordance with Ezekiel
33:1-6. The government of the Third Reich
was indeed military, but that does not
mean that it was not afraid of the people.
When I visited Dachau last summer *
first concentration camp, it was brought
hat the Nazis went to extraordi
lengths to prevent the German citi
from discovering the real purposes nf
camps. It should also be pointed out.
the inclusion of Jews in the camns
almost an afterthought; they were origin
ly for those deemed politically trouki
some for those who were expedient.nl
rid of.
— Finally, Dr. Thaxton was not a
mentator; he was simply there to answr
questions, which he did a fairly good job';
No matter what the criticisms mayfcj
the issues are significant ones and mnVt
dealt with Thank you for the opportuiit
to respond.
(Jay Stanish is a senior EDCI majrjr
from Houston. He is the chaplain of tb
Aggie Band and student president of tb
Campus Crusade for Christ.)
Pro-life films stand on their own merit
By BILL ROBERSON
I would like to express an alternative
view to the one submitted by David Sprin
ger and Celia King concerning the film
series recently presented in the Rudder
auditorium: “Whatever Happened to the
Human Race?” The series deals intellec
tually, emotionally, and artistically with
the questions and answers surrounding the
conroversial issues of abortion, infanticide,
and euthanasia. Mr. Springer and Miss
King, both personal friends of mine, have
critiqued the series in a harsh, negative
light and it is to this analysis that I would
like to address my refutations.
The critique dealt with two aspects of the
film; quality and content. The critics men
tioned instances of “irrelevant symbolism”
and “scenes devoid of meaning.” These
opinions call for attention. First, any art
form is an attempt on the part of its creator
to communicate specific concepts (o the
beholder. Personally, I did not find the
symbolism “irrelevant” nor the scenes,
“devoid of meaning. ” The scene described
by the critics as “devoid of meaning” which
showed rain pouring down upon a deserted
banquet table was probably meant to be
meaningful, but effectual. It was not.
Secondly, the director, Franky Schaeffer
V, demanded creative and artistic excell
ence in all phases of the film making pro
cess, using a large range of cinematic tech
niques to dramatize and illustrate its
points.
The critics alleged that “the films were
without documentation,” With this I must
make issue. Dr. C. Everett Koop is one of
the world’s most prominent surgeons. As
surgeon-in-chief at Philadelphia’s Chil
dren’s Hospital, he is in a competent posi
tion to voice the medical perspective on
these issues. The film series was simply not
intended to be a black and white, mono
toned documentary, sedating us with
techincal data and statistics. The film found
it sufficient to note that since the legaliza
tion of abortion in 1973, over 6 million
babies have been aborted in this country,
surpassing the number of Jews murdered
in the holocaust.
This brings me to my second point. It
was stated in the Springer and King essay
that the film paralleled black slavery to in
fanticide and Nazi extermination of the
Jews to euthanasia. Had they attended the
entire film series, Mr. Springer and Miss
King would not have so greatly misunder
stood Dr. Schaeffer’s statements. The films
did not claim that infanticide is a parallel to
black slavery, but that each generation
labels some group of humans as “non-
human” for social and economic conveni
ence. During the pre-civil war era it was
the black slave. In Nazi Germany it was the
Jew. In our generation, in a 1973 Supreme
Court decision (Roe vs. Wade), the unborn
child was arbitrarily classified as “non
human” with no civil rights. Schaeffer
pointed out that the Dred Scott case de
monstrated that the Supreme Court is not
above makeing significant mistakes.
Secondly, the films never drew a parallel
between Nazi extermination of the Jews
and euthanasia. The films point to early
Nazi German history, when Hitler first ex
terminated the socially and economically
inconvenient — the handicapped, the
mentally ill, and the elderly — before tie
focused his attention on the Jew. Dr
Schaeffer maintained that the legalizatior.
of abortion has opened the door to further
violation of human rights: infanticide ani
euthanasia.
Finally, though I agree with our film
critics that the commentator, Dr. Charles
Thaxton, did not handle the position as well
as he might have, I question the validity of
their pointed criticism of his “competen
cy. ” Were they offering constructive crit-
ism? Did Dr. Thaxton’s “incompetency”as
a commentator weaken the message of the
film series? I think not. The films stand on
their own merit as do their arguments.
I take off my hat to the critic, Springer
and King, in agreement with their fun
damental position that “the film was prop
aganda. Daniel Webster illuminates their
statement in his definition of propaganda
“ideas, facts or allegations spread deliber
ately to further one’s cause or to damagean
opposing cause.”
(Bill Roberson is a senior English major
from Amarillo)
Cop
Folk
the
mm
HORRORS!
YOU sm SHAH
'YOU?
PIPTH1SID'
tv
1
fwwz
% '>y
The li
an to y
tv. Dr
ry Cot
I rec
Jidelin
lopme
be up
»tt, vi
Fairs at
The ci
>a ma:
Visitin
'miner
escort
irchase
le qual:
ie exist
Theac
THOTZ
By Doug Graham
(ua t«- CLTKJIUS. YOOvJE GOT A TEST TUBE OF I, Tj's-TRl h ETHYLBENZEn^V 1C
'T SAIL YOU’UE GOT A TtST TUBE Ort
v L3,5'TRlMETHYL?£N2Eh!L' M VnuR> -
T ^
YOU VE got a test
■ — TUBS
OF
JRlMBTHYLr
B&JZEVG
IN
Ye«
EAR.
Yo^
DoDDSftVb
ou> Xocr/
r cakj'T hear you i
UAME A TEST TUBE OF
C* 3 J
I Nj MY
CH-.