Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, January 16, 1985
OPINION
'EOBrmno/M m Aim
-mt ncREM’!—
<73?
<2>
w
OT
AcMs "rotcEM r
Liberal AKT5>
STuvEAslT
&,
Q
&
&
\
43
r>io vow _
UNveR.'jTAn'p
WpV&Kf
TA'ice: sA/r>r,
/£°-r ktaccy
ttjjzzr&zir
ail)
CX ■
CJP
dP
gp
,c£P
f dX)
dX>
gx>
ga>
PROBLEMS
[ALL *5TUT>et^7S
A PPEP up
W MAKCOS/TAPE
cuMr?
L^£4
Gays seeking office draw criticism
KKK actions harm America’s image
Loren Steffy
The city of
Houston is em
broiled in the con
troversy of pre-
venting
homosexuals seek
ing city offices
from being dis
criminated against
on the basis of sex
ual orientation.
The subject of
gay rights is causing a national uphea
val. Supporters and protesters are ad
amant in their views. But homosexuals,
just like other minority groups before
them, will eventually gain social equality.
The American of ideal of “all men cre
ated equal” can’t be eluded for long.
The issue is not the social acceptance
of gays, but the methods some gay
rights protesters use to make their
point. A few days ago in Houston, the
Ku Klux Klan marched to protest not
only approval of city ordinances grant
ing equal opportunity to homosexuals,
but also Mayor Whitmire’s support of
the proposed ordinances.
As in any case where civil rights are
involved, the Klan is on the side oppos
ing the minority. Gays, in their eyes, are
un-American simply because they are
g a y-
The Klansmen, who seem to think
they are patriotic fellows who protect
America from any racial impurities, are
well-known for their lynchings of black
Americans during the Civil Rights
Movement. In addition to protesting the
influx of Vietnamese fishermen to Sea-
brook, Klansmen also run for public of
fice and teach Boy Scouts to use M-16’s
in order to perpetuate their twisted vi
sion of patriotism.
Basically, the Klan is a bunch of
schoolboy mentalities playing big-boy
games. They have nifty titles like
“Grand Wizard” or “Grand Dragon”,
cute ways to use “k” instead of “c” and
even have their own little secret code
words for undercover missions.
But beneath this Tom Sawyerish ap
pearance lurks a network of crimes
committed by men, who, when they
aren’t wearing sheets over their heads
and burning crosses, pass for everyday
citizens.
The Klan and violence go hand-in-
hand. Over the years every minority
group not covered by the White-Anglo-
Saxon-Protestant standard has fallen
victim to the Klan’s harassment.
Supporters of the minority’s cause
are, in the Klan’s eyes, no better than
the minority. Whitmire has thus far only
been protested against, but a white
woman who drove from Ohio to Ala
bama in the 1960s to show her support
for civil rights, was raped and murdered
by four Klansmen, merely because she
sympathized with blacks. Apparently
the old guilt-by-association trick isn’t
used only by fascist and communist gov
ernments.
Now, as the Klan turns its narrow
minded viewpoint to homosexuals, we
are sure to see some valiant defenses of
American morality. Perhaps naked, mu
tilated bodies of homosexuals will be
strewn hither and thither across Hous
ton, or maybe a simple riot will suffice.
After gays become accepted by so
ciety, who will be next on the Klan’s list?
Despite the advances towards racial
equality for groups such as blacks, immi
grants and women, the racist plague
continues to blemish America’s image.
How long will Americans tolerate these
sheet-draped fanatics with their archaic
ideals? How long will we allow the Ku
Klux Klan to turn patriotism into ter
rorism?
Loren Steffy is a sophomore journa
lism major and weekly columnist for
The Battalion.
Two modest proposals for disarmament
By ART BUCHWALD
Columnist for The Los Angeles Times Syndicate
In the world of nuclear arms, missiles
do not kill people, nations kill people.
Therefore at the start of the new
arms negotiations it’s time both the So
viet Union and the United States take a
new approach to the question of disar
mament.
Instead of negotiating the reduction
of offensive and defensive nuclear
weapons, we should negotiate limits on
how many times each superpower may
kill a person in an all-out war.
At the moment it is believed that the
U.S. and the Soviets have stockpiled
enough weapons to destroy each otner’s
citizens 10 times over.
The first step then is to produce an
agreement that would reduce the nu
clear arsenals in both countries to the
point where they could only kill every
American and Soviet citizen five times.
Cutting the KR (Kill Ratio) in half
won’t be easy, but it is possible to per
suade the superpowers to agree to it,
particularly when it can be argued that
you only have to kill a person twice to
make your point in an all-out holocaust.
With a KR of five, both sides would still
have a margin of safety in case their mis
siles fail to nit their targets.
The U.S. military will argue that the
Soviets may sign a treaty agreeing to kill
every American only five times, and
then cheat, by stashing away enough
weapons to kill them seven times.
Tne Soviet military could balk at cut
ting the KR in half on the grounds that
while the U.S. might reduce its weap
ons, they are still at a disadvantage be
cause if we refuse to include West Euro
pean warheads in the count, each
U.S.S.R. citizen could still be killed eight
times.
At this point the negotiators in Ge
neva would have to resort to compro
mise.
The Americans could address the
U.S. military fears by insisting on on-site
inspection of both nuclear stockpiles. If
it were found that the Soviet weapons
on hand had enough power to kill the
Americans more than the agreed-upon
KR of five, the U.S. could abrogate the
treaty and proceed to build new weap
ons that would kill every Soviet citizen
15 times.
In exchange for on-site inspection,
we would include the West European
nukes in our KR, and reduce American
stockpiles until both the U.S. and West
European KR came out to five.
If the Kill Ratio formula is unaccepta
ble there is no reason for the superpow
ers to leave the bargaining table.
Another solution might be to work
out a fair agreement on how many peo
ple each side may be permitted to wipe
out in the event of a war. Neither coun
try would have to reduce its arsenal, but
would be limited to firing only enough
missiles to waste 100 million people on
the other’s territory.
The obvious question is, who would
monitor the pact to see that the super
powers did not bag more than their
limit? This could be done by the Inter
national Red Cross, which would have
access to all the stricken areas. If either
side went over the 100 million ballpark
figure, the other would then be per
mitted to match them body for body.
With the limits set by the treaty, it
would not only be a waste of money for
the superpowers to continue the arms
race, but there would be an incentive to
reduce their nuclear arsenals accord-
ingly.
I have no illusions that either the Kill
Ratio reduction proposal or the 100 mil
lion limit on casualties can be success
fully negotiated overnight.
I’m throwing them on the table as a
starting point in the new negotiations.
When it comes to serious disarmament
talks you have to start somewhere.
nun
(Billfpii
!!i* .
Predictions
New Year’s Eve in
Oklahoma — sounds
pretty exciting,
doesn’t it? Well it
wasn’t. As 1 sat home
that night and
watched the sleet
and snow fall, I rem
iniscenced about all
the things that hap
pened at A&M in
1984. It was a year
nolog)
lege S
chang<
The
system
Kevin Inda
of controversy, change, life, death, triumpt,
tragedy, ami achievement. Hut nowitsnoik
ing more than memories and history.
While I sat there watching my Bassti
Hound lap up his allottment of champagne
1 couldn’t help but wonder what wasgoim
to happen in 1985. My curiosity was sun
pressed at 12:09 when my dog wetontti
Floor.
That little accident was quite predictable
as are many other things. After a fews«
onds of deliberation, I thought it might It
interesting to hxik ahead to 1985 and stt
what might occur.
The upcoming year will lie full of contm
versy and change. Issues that previoust
weren’t questioned, will become questiond
and dissension will occur between people.
Last year’s episode involving SVVAMI
wanting to sit on the MSC grass wasjusti
glimpse of things to come. Now tla
SWAMP has successfully demonstratedtlu
all the students at A&M don’t think the saint
way or believe in the same things, and
to tell about it, other groups will probabb
come out and stage demonstrations.
SWAMP got students to think about ho*
they feel and speak up about it, somethin!
that previously was unheard of. Eva
thougn it seemed most students wereagains
SWAMP, and what they were protestingfot
the group still made an important poini
People have the right to believe or speakou
about anything they want — they also haw
the right to disagree. Neither group
SWAMP or their opposition, was in therigii
more than the other. They both were jus
exercising their rights.
University officials will also have toaccep
something they’re not accustomed to -
change.
After two long and hopeless court banks
the Board of Regents will end up with
worse winning percentage than Jackie Shei
rill. Gay Student Services will finally haven
be recognized by the University and womet
will be marching in the band. Two trivialis
sues will finally be decided after a counties
amount of money and time has been waste
fully spent denying citizens their basic right)
The Corps of Cadets will also be under
watchful eyes in 1985. After the dead!'
hazing incident last Fall, the Corps will be
unable to continue functioning with the
vigor they’re used to. T he Corps will stillbe
the at the center of activity concerning Uni
versity traditions, but they will have to wall
lightly when it comes to late-night activities.
Nobody knows for sure what will happen
in 1985. Maybe the Liberal Arts Department
will finally ne able to offer degrees in the
fine arts, or maybe the governance of A&M
will become more democratic than authon
tarian. Who knows, the yell leaders mightbe j
scratched for cheerleaders, somebody be
sides Willie Nelson might perforin after bon
fire (if there is one), and more emphasis
might be placed on academic achievements
than athletic achievements.
I guess we’ll just have to wait and seewbat
happens.
Kevin S. Inda is a senior journalism major
and a weekly columnist for The Battalion,
The Battalion
CISPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Brigid Brockman, Editor
Shelley Hoekstra, Managing Editor
Ed Cassavoy, City Editor
Kellie Dworaczyk, News Editor
Michelle Powe, Ectitorial Page Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
The Battalion Staff
Assistant City Editors
Kari Fluegel, Rhonda Srtider
Assistant News Editors
Tammy Bell, Cami Brown, John Hailed
Assistant Sports Editor
Charean Williams
Entertainment Editors
Shawn Behlen, Leigh-Ellen Clark
Staff Writers Cathie Anderson,
Brandon Berry, Dainah Bullard,
Tony Cornett, Michael Crawford,
Kirsten Dietz, Patti Flint,
Patrice Koranek, Trent Leopold,
Karla Martin, Sarah Oates,
Tricia Parker, Lynn Rae Povec
Copy Editor Kay Mallett
Make-up Editor Karen Bloch
Columnists Kevin Inda, Loren Steffy
Editorial Cartoonist Mike Lane
Sports Cartoonist Dale Smith
Copy Writer Cathy Bennett
Photo Editor Katherine Hurt
Photographers Anthony Casper,
Wayne Grabein, Frank Irwin,
John Makely, Peter Rocha, DeanSaito
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper
'operated as a community service to Texas A&M anti Bryan-
College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the Edi
torial Board or the author, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of'Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the
Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for
students in reporting, editing and photography dasses
within the Department of Communications.
Letters Policy
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 tvords in length.
The editorial stall reserves the right to edit letters for style
and length hut will make every effort to maintain the au
thor’s intent. Each letter must he signed and nnist include
the address and telephone number of the writer.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday dur
ing Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and
examination periods. Mai! subscriptions are $ 16.75 per se
mester. S33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Adver
tising rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Build
ing, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. Ed
itorial staff phone number: (409) 845-2630. Advertising:
(409) 845-2611.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion,
Texas A&M University. College Station, Texas 77843
Sen
Demo
lion a
A&M.
tenant
to thn
sessiot
Cap
ated (
and w
and Ei
T a
these
some
faced
Caper
tech n i
discus
Pr
to
Al
civil
King
holid;
who
Chris
lawm
of fo
birtht
news