»/1 • iwi iOiciiy, i v ViSrun J y fci /
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Loren Steffy, Editor
M ary bet h Rohsner, Managing Editor
Mike Sullivan, Opinion Page Editor
Jens Koepke, City Editor
Jeanne Isenberg, Sue Krenek, News Editors
Homer Jacobs, Sports Editor
Tom Ownbey, Photo Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta
tion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial
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 classes within the Depart
ment of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during
Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination
periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school
year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, Department of Journalism, Texas
A&M University, College Station, IX 77843-4 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, De
partment of Journalism, Texas A&M University, College Station
TX 77843-4111.
Pageant misses point
At a time when cuts in education spending are threatening schol
arship programs, financial aid, minority recruitment and faculty,
and when staff salaries, and tuition and service fees are increasing,
the prudence of using about $12,000 in student service fees to fill the
Miss Texas A&M beauty pageant budget deficit left over from 1986
is questionable.
Bonne Bejarano, executive director of the pageant, said the
$12,000 shortfall from 1986, resulting from inadequate fund-rais
ing, was absorbed by the Memorial Student Center and the MSC
Hospitality Committee, whose budgets are subsidized by student
service fees.
In essence, $12,000, which included prizes and clothes for the fi
nal contestants, was given to the pageant, compliments of the stu
dents.
While A&M’s beauty pageant may be a good time and — after
eight years — may also be considered an Aggie tradition, it’s not
worth taking $12,000 from students to pay for it.
If the people want the pageant, the people will pay for it. But if
money earned from ticket sales, concessions, $3 programs and dona
tions isn’t enough to cover costs, the obvious message is that the pag
eant isn’t something most students care to finance — at least not dur
ing hard economic times.
Bejarano said the financial problems of the 1986 pageant were
created largely by people who pledged donations but didn’t follow
through. That doesn’t justify digging into students’ pockets — that’s
cause for canceling the pageant.
If A&M continues to take money from financially strapped stu
dents for things most enjoyed by the general public, it will have a
tough time justifying any service fee increases when the need really
arises.
Right to life overrules
the right to privacy
Vanity Fair
magazine recently
ran a two-page
spread of pictures
of people, mostly
New Yorkers, who
have died of
AIDS. They in
clude some fa
mous persons, and
in impact the two-
page spread was a
bit like the one
Life magazine published years ago of
men killed in Vietnam. We are engaged
in another war.
And like Vietnam, this war is highly
politicized. Since AIDS first appeared in
the United States, the disease has been
linked to homosexuality. For that rea
son, it was almost immediately seized
upon by some as evidence of God’s
wrath. A timid and irresponsible federal
government, politically beholden to ho
mosexual haters, followed suit. Its initial
funding of AIDS research was nig
gardly.
But now the politics are coming from
the other direction. For understandable
reasons, some homosexual groups and
their allies in the civil-liberties commu
nity continue to see AIDS the way the
federal government and its know-noth
ing allies once did — as mainly a homo
sexual problem. As a result, they are in
the forefront of those who oppose even
limited mandatory blood testing and
who insist that the results of even volun
tary testing be kept either anonymous
or confidential.
The results can be downright chilling.
Persons who are known to have either
the AIDS antibody (meaning that they
have a good chance of eventually get
ting the disease), or who have AIDS it
self can keep this information to them
selves. Physicians, hospitals and clinics
not only keep the information to them
selves but, for the most part, are forbid
den from alerting others. Thus, there
are situations where a husband who has
been told he has either AIDS or is in
fected by the virus does not tell his wife.
And neither does anyone else.
For instance, a husband, secretly bi
sexual, was tested for AIDS and told
that he has the antibody. Neither the
clinic that performed the test nor the
man’s own physician could inform the
man’s wife. She does not know she is in
danger, nor would she know — in the
event the marriage dissolved or she was
having extra-marital affairs — that she
could be spreading the disease to others.
Moreover, she would have no reason to
suspect that, should she get pregnant,
she could infect her children.
There are serious and complicated
civil-liberties and public-health concerns
involved here. Homosexual groups and
their advocates argue that unless testing
is kept strictly confidential, persons who
suspect they have AIDS will not submit
to testing. They ask whether a secret bi
sexual or a man who visits prostitutes
would volunteer for testing knowing
that his wife would be given the results.
Disclosure that a person has AIDS is
still tantamount to evidence of homo
sexuality. That could have severe reper
cussions — loss of a job, loss of housing
and even loss of child custody. Besides,
your sexual preference is no one’s busi
ness. We are talking here of the most
personal of acts.
But AIDS is no longer only a homo
sexual concern. It has appeared in the
heterosexual community as well and,
while the caseload is still small, there is
reason to believe that it will grow geo
metrically in the coming years. (In Af
rica, AIDS mostly afflicts heterosex
uals.) We are all at peril. The
understandable concerns of homosex
uals and the anxiety of civil libertarians
over invasion of privacy have to be
weighed against what experts say is the
danger: an AIDS epidemic that could
claim 179,000 lives by 1991.
Mandatory testing conducted rou
tinely among persons admitted to hospi
tals or clinics dealing with sexually
transmitted disease (or as a marriage re
quirement) may run the risk of driving
AIDS-infected people underground.
But those people at least have reason to
know they might have the disease. Many
others — for instance, the wife of the bi
sexual man — are blissfully ignorant of
the peril they are in. The wife of the se
cret bisexual has a right to know her sit
uation and so do the people with whom
she may have sexual contact. Ignorance
may be bliss, but when it comes to AIDS
it can be lethal.
Government and the health-services
industry have an obligation to Find as
many AIDS-infected people as they pos
sibly can and then, as sensitively as pos
sible, take steps to ensure that the dis
ease is not spread. Personal privacy is
not a trifling matter. Neither are the
concerns of the homosexual commu
nity. But we all have our civil rights, and
foremost among them is to life.
Copyright 1986, Washington Post Writers Group
Plchard
Cohen
Th
Valle)
Bui
they z
sprou
and T
In
food i
Bryan
the toi
Un
offer!
about
Chine
Mano
Tht
Before SMU gets
it’s going to get
better,
worse
rants i
Kong
Egg R
Sjso
Kong
years,
busine
took t
House
year a
and h;
ageme
In
opene
the I
and t
Then,
the N
Who would
have thought the
NCAA would ac
tually do it? Not
Southern Method
ist University — it
was expecting
cancellation of two
or three non-con
ference football
games and some
sort of probation
from the NCAA
year, 13 football players were paid ap
proximately $47,000 dollars, and eight
student-athletes continued to receive
payments totaling $14,000 from Sep
tember to December 1986. Something
as drastic as the death penalty was nec
essary to correct the repeated recruiting
violations occurring there.
Paula
Vogrin
Committee on Infractions. Instead,
SMU received the harshest punishment
in the history of college football — the
“death penalty.”
The sanctions imposed by the NCAA
will alter SMU’s football program for
perhaps the next decade. To begin with,
there is no 1987 football season for
SMU — period. In 1988, the Mustangs
are allowed to play only seven games,
none at home and none against another
Southwest Conference team. None of
these games may be televised, and SMU
cannot make any post-season appear
ances (as if there could be any post-sea
son appearances for the Mustangs in
1988). Until Aug. 1, 1989, the coaching
staff is limited to one head coach and
five full-time assistant coaches. No foot
ball scholarships can be awarded in the
academic year 1987-88, and no more
than 15 football scholarships can be
awarded in 1988-89. Compare these
numbers with the 52 scholarship players
at SMU last season. Finally, until Aug 1,
1988, no off-campus recruiting is al
lowed.
But the sanctions affect more than
just the football team. Many people will
be unemployed as a result — members
of the Mustang coaching staff, some
members of the athletic department and
stadium personnel.
Other sports at SMU also will be af
fected. The football program generates
about two-thirds of the school’s $6 mil
lion dollar athletic budget. Football rev
enue supports SMU’s nationally promi
nent track and Field, swimming, tennis
and golf teams. Without funds from
football revenue, these teams surely will
suffer.
What about the innocent Mustang
football players — those who didn’t ac
cept any signing bonuses, “party” cash,
rent-free apartments or “good-game”
payments from boosters? They have a
right to be more than a little bitter. Be
cause of actions by some of their team
mates and various boosters, the inno
cent players will have to leave SMU if
they want to continue playing football.
This encompasses finding a school that
will offer them scholarships, moving to
that school and becoming accustomed to
new coaches, teammates, professors and
social surroundings. Is this fair to those
players?
The NCAA was not overly severe in
its treatment of SMU. The school has
been on probation six times in the past
12 years for recruiting violations and,
even while on probation, continued the
activities which got the school there in
the first place. While SMU was on pro
bation during the 1985-86 academic
SMU will have a difficult time re
building its football program. What
player wants to play for a school whose
team is sure to be a loser for Several sea
sons? And playing for a losing team isn’t
the only drawback involved for poten
tial players. Since only 15 scholarships
will be available in 1988, many walk-ons
will not l>e able to afford the highcostd
attending SMU, which has one of(k
highest tuitions in the Southwest Cot>
ference.
The university itself will suffer. Ha
ing its name dragged through the mu:
with its football program has tarnishe:
SMU’s reputation. Potential facultyim
be turned away by the “anything fori
good football team” attitude held hi
boosters and some staff at the univei
sity. The fact that so much attention!
focused on athletics instead of acadeit
ics may repel many faculty considem
teaching positions there.
Some potential students will decidf
against attending SMU because of tk
absence of a football team. Although tk
presence of football shouldn’t have am
thing to do with obtaining a degree,dif
hard fans will opt for a university will
an active team so they have somethin!
to do on Saturday afternoons instead'
study.
Finally, what will the boosters do will I
the thousands of dollars they “donatt
to certain members of the football teat
each year?
Maybe they’ll try recruiting acadeim
“bluechips.” High school seniors will
scores of 1300 or above on the SAT»ii
be flown into Dallas from all overik
country. Boosters will treat them toes
pensive dinners at exclusive restauraffi
like the Mansion and Ratcliffe’s. Thevi
offer these academic stars “signingbe-
nuses” like new IBM PCs with even
piece of software available on the raai-
ket. Are scenes like this part of SMI
future? Probably not.
But what better time than now forth
SMU boosters to direct their donation!
to the academic aspects of higher eduo
tion instead of the athletic ones?
opene
Orien
in Col
Jiang
when
Wh<
in 198,
more t
many i
tauran
delivei
A&M (
Aso
to ope
Gardei
in Dec
ingS4
mile ra
lunch <
Paula Vogrin is a senior journalist
major and a columnist for The B
Mail Call
Think again
EDITOR:
Nuclear nohow
EDITOR:
In response to Paul Svacina’s letter, I agree with him.
Blacks are just as — or even more — prejudiced as other
people, but the prejudice that blacks have does not deny
others of their equal rights. The problem arises when one
acts on his prejudices. The quotas that Svacina dislikes
were set so minorities would get the same chances as the
majority. Without these quotas, qualified minorities would
never be considered. Sometimes unqualified minorities
slip through the system, but most of the time these
minorities are the “cream of the crop.”
Someday, somewhere on this earth, a nuclear bomb
will detonate, taking human lives. Whether it will happen
by accident or on purpose, I don’t know. If we are lucky,
only one will explode. If we’re not so lucky, multiple
strikes will destroy major cities and produce catastrophic
aftereffects.
Svacina was wrong when he said “ambition and
perspiration is what made America come so far.” It also
took opening closed, biased, discriminatory minds. The
struggle for even a greater change still continues today.
It’s not that minorities are being given an unfair
advantage; they are only being given a fair chance. My
parents taught me to work for what I wanted because
nothing in life comes free.
How do I know this will happen? Because even if by
some miracle all present warheads were deactivated and
disassembled, the knowledge of their existence and
production will remain. The world cannot simply forget
the battering ram, the catapult, the bow and arrow, the
gun, or the nuclear missle. Someday, somewhere, a
country or the stereotypical mad scientist would recreate a
bomb and threaten to use it against others.
I’m sure when Svacina’s parents came to America with
$50, mine were here riding in the back of the bus and
drinking from a “black” water fountain.
Cynthia Green ’88
The knowledge and technology are with us forever,
unless, of course, the human race blows itself into
extinction. I would like to see some discussion on what can
be done to cope with this reality.
David Christenson ’85
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff rt-
serves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort It
maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must include the clas
sification, address and telephone number of the writer.