Opinion The Battalion Fish's right not to vote From an Oct. 3 Corps of Cadets public relations memorandum to all commanding officers and 1st sargeants regarding freshman elec tions: “Voting should be made mandatory for your freshmen.” The memo informed commanding officers and 1st sargeants of the procedure which needed to he followed for freshmen to vote. At the bottom of the memo was a list of freshman cadets running for offices. The commanders were to emphasize to the fish that they ‘have to memorize the names in advance” because “they can not Dring a list to the polling site.” These procedures would ensure that Corps representation in Student Government would be “overwhel ming.” That Corps Headquarters encourage freshmen to vote for their fish “buddies” or that they want overwhelming representation in Student Government is perfectly understandable and acceptable. Ev ery other organization on campus would do and want the same things. However, that Corps Headquarters advise that voting be made mandatory for any of its members is a violation of that person’s right to choose whether or not to. The Battalion Editorial Board Mail Call Straight ticket voting not smart EDITOR: We all probably accept the idea that casting our informed vote in public elections is the highest form of expressing allegiance to democracy. The key word here is informed. Straight ticket voting is a hold-over from the days when a party boss could hand out money to the uneducated and instruct them to pull the lever with the elephant or donkey picture on it. Fortunately, most of us attending A&M don’t require a picture on the ballot when we vote. Unfortunately, many of us have acted like we do in recent elections. We have been the embarrassment of our district on these occasions by acting like illiterate voters and punching the straight party ticket which impacts many local offices. Remember, there is no requirement for competence or honesty to get your name on the ballot. Likewise, there is no assurance that an incumbent, whatever his or her party affiliation, is competent or honest. The only way to vote responsibly in a race is to be familiar with the candidates’ records or platforms. An uninformed vote is worse than no vote because you can be responsible for tossing out a good official or failing to get rid of a bad one. Our campus has been responsible for doing this in several past local races because we are such a large (but temporary) population. Remember, you don’t have to vote in every race. Vote with your convictions for the presidential race, but if you don’t recognize the names of the congressmen, judges, county commissioners or others, it is wiser to skip over those races. Let them be decided by the votes of those students and other citizens who have taken time to inform themselves on the issues. Please don’t leave the rest of the county with the impression that Aggies are as poorly informed as the illiterate. Remember, the permanent residents of the area will have to live with any bad choices we make. Bob Murry Graduate student Class of ’88 thanks Wilson EDITOR: On behalf of the Class of’88, I would like to thank Anthony Wilson for reviewing the gifts we were able to give to Texas A&M. I am only disappointed that it took an article such as his to finally give some attention to our University-wide contributions. The Battalion had been invited to cover several of our gift dedications and chose not to attend. I would also like to clarify our reasons for giving the Kyle Field lettering. Our seleciton of words welcomes visitors to our school and identifies our student body as the original 12th Man. The lettering is a gift to the University and the students, not the athletic department, nor is it intended to boost only football. Other events, even non-athletic, are held in Kyle Field. Because of the coverage the lettering may receive during television broadcasts, viewers will know the event is coming from our stadium. The lettering cost our class only one-fourth of the money we raised. Unlike the classes before us, we wanted to give more than one gift with all of our money. Lastly, Anthony, you left one significant gift — lighting for the World War II hero plaques in the Memorial Student Center. The Class of ’88 intended our class gifts to touch as many aspects of past, present and future Aggie lives we could. I believe we have been successful. Andrea Beshara ’88 Class of ’88 president Iron Maiden’s a musical genius EDITOR: I would like to reply to some of the comments made by Roy “Royalty” Davis in Friday’s Batt. I like U2, Jimi Hendrix and Mozart. And despite evidence to the contrary such as “Raspberry Beret,” “When Doves Cry” and “Little Red Corvette,” I admit Prince has talent. Your criticisms of Iron Maiden, however, show poor taste. My CD collection includes disks by Segovia, Rush, Malmsteen, Mozart, Van Halen and, of course, Iron Maiden. It is apparent to me that you have either never listened to them, or that you are completely tone deaf. Their creativity, innovativeness and brilliant melodies easily belie your attempts to criticize them. I suspect you wrote them off because they are labeled “heavy metal” and never gave their music a chance. To be frank, any musician would tell you their music is a lot closer in quality and spirit to the work of a genius like Mozart than any of the artists you listed. John Dumas ’89 Thursday, October 20,1988 Technology may be immorajlSa on Let’s take a brief look into the future. The date is Oct. 20, 2008 and you’ve just gotten home from a hard day at work. Your spouse, who greets you at the door, informs you that your nine-year- old, test-tube son has been reprimanded by his elementary school teacher for shooting spitwads at another another kid (some things just never change). On your way up to your son’s room you stop by to visit with your l 17-year- old grandmother who is hooked up to a machine that keeps her heart, lungs and kidneys functioning. Dean Sueltenfuss Columnist Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must include the classification, address and telephone number of the writer. “How are you feeling, Grandma?” She responds by making a wheezing, gurgling noise. “Good,” you say. “Glad to hear it.” After sternly lecturing your son, you are on your way back downstairs when your genetically engineered pet dog (patent pending) greets you by trying to bite your hand off. You make it down stairs, however, and sit down to a scrumptious meal of soybean mush and fried kelp burgers. A bit overstated, you say? Perhaps. But as our technology be comes more and more advanced, the ideas of a genetically engineered pet or a person who can live only if hooked up to a machine are becoming increasingly more commonplace. It’s situations like these that should prompt us to ask the following question: Does the fact that we have the ability to do something mean that we should do it? is that better strains of domestic live stock can be created and this would ben efit consumers. Genetic engineering can produce leaner pork and beef , chicken meat with a higher protein content, etc. It can also be used to produce labo ratory animals that can be used in new research on human diseases. The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Lydia Berzsenyi, Editor Becky Weisenfels, Managing Editor Anthony Wilson, Opinion Page Editor Richard Williams, City Editor D A Jensen, Denise Thompson, News Editors Hal Hammons, Sports Editor Jay Janner, Art Director Leslie Guy, Entertainment Editor The only rational answer: No. By way of example, let’s examine ge netic engineering. The rationale for tampering with the genetics of animals So the genetic engineering of animals can provide humans with a number of direct and indirect benefits. These ben efits, however, don’t make such genetic engineering morally right. By tam pering with millions of years of evolu tion, mankind is running the risk of making some huge errors. The researchers who are conducting genetic engineering experiments are like children playing with fire. In many ways these researchers bear certain simi larities to those men who created the world’s first atomic weapon — they knew how to build the bomb, but they didn’t really know what it would do. Another area of ever-increasing con cern is medical technology. While few people would question the benefits of new surgical techniques that can save many lives, there are other areas of medical technology that produce ques tionable results. Gate for the terminally ill is one of these areas. Lately, an increasing amount of research and time is being devoted to technology that auowd tremely sick people to survive. I cases this technology doesn’t cure ifj people — it just prolongs theirsii| ing. ()ne example is the person whoissj fering from a painful, incurablei and is surviving only because of ajf ficial life-support system. Manvj argue that it would be unethicalloiJ patients off of such machines-ii feet "killing” them. On the leav ing these patients on life-sun machines for months or years: is, in many cases, doing them a {’re injustice than pulling the plug. I here are no simple answersind ( al dilemmas such as these. The id are complex ones that we havej had to deal with before. Butwhct is right or wrong we must realizeM spending massive amounts ofmonti technology that will benefit only as few, we are neglecting masses t undernourished people — indivs w ho require only the simplest care jJ der to lead produ