The Battalion
OPINION
T
Monday, March 19,1990
Opinion Page Editor
Ellen Hobbs
845-33'
h
Protesters need make
commitment to causes
There was this guy named Earl
Rudder. On D-Day during World War
II, his unit was picked up to scale the
side of this cliff and destroy a gun
emplacement. Allied High Command
said that his task was very important but
30 to 40 percent casualties could be
expected. How do you work with
someone for six months or a year
knowing that three chances in ten say
that he will not make it, or that you
might end up dead? The members of
Rudder’s unit must of had a great deal
of commitment.
At an Aggies for Clayton Williams
meeting during the fall semester, a guy
in the room was wearing a Nazi party
armband. During the question period
the guy said that he felt Clayton
Williams’ drug camps were really
concentration camps. He did not argue
convincingly. The Clayton Williams
people were luckly he had so little
knowledge on his subject, because they
had not don a great deal of research
into the drug camps issue either. What
upset me about the guy who wore the
armband was his weak commitment to
his cause. When confronted with mild
arguments for Williams position, he
stopped protesting the drug camps and
switched to the issue of banning assault
weapons.
The drug camps idea cannot be
equated with concentration camps. The
premise of the drug camps is that if a
person is convicted of a drug related
crime, the option would exists of either
going to jail or going to the drug camp.
Some drug offenses are felonies, which
means that a convict loses the right to
vote, hold office, or go to colleges or
universities like A&M. By going to the
drug camp, the record of the criqie
would be cleared and all rights retained.
H. Alan
Montgomery
Reader’s Opinion
A person convicted of a drug-related
crime would have three months of boot
camps and six months of minimum
wage on a public works project. When
everyone is dressed the same and looks
almost the same, then a person begins to
see what there is underneath. A first
offender would be put in an
environment where some choices about
the future would have to be made.
When confronted with a set of peers
who have all committed the same crime,
an individual would have to say, “Do I
want to be part of a group like this?”
Most sane individuals would opt for a
no-drug future.
At a Clayton Williams rally in
February, members of the Medicine
Tribe held a disruptive protest without
making an effort to debate the drug
camp issue with Clayton Williams or his
supporters. Why didn’t these people
have enough commitment to try to
display their displeasure in a more
constructive fashion? The only
conclusion I can draw is that they have
taken up protesting as an entertaining
pastime, which is rather sad.
When Rudder’s Rangers got to the
top of that cliff on D-Day, they
discovered that the Germans had
moved the gun emplacement the day
before. Even in the face of this discovery
their commitment was not shaken,
because the did find the new position
and silence the gun. I just wonder
whether anyone will have that level of
commitment any time in the future.
Pageant demostration
not just a silly protest
I would like the opportunity to
respond to Scot Walker’s column of
Friday, March 2, which concerned the
protest of the Miss Texas A&M pageant.
Allow me to make an example which
is in keeping with Walker’s argument.
Let’s say that I am an employer, and I
have several applicants competing for a
position I need filled. As Walker says,
“Life ain’t fair,” so if I want to choose an
unqualified white man over an
unqualified African-American woman,
so what? As Walker says, “Everybody is
judged on something,” and if I want to
judge on skin color and the other
differences in physical characteristics
between the races, so what? Did I hear
someone say that race should have
nothing to do with such a decision —
that only the fitness of the two for the
job should be judged? Then you are in
agreement with the protestors. What
does physical beauty, a completely
inherited characteristic, have to do with
fitness for a college education? It does
not demonstrate a capacity to work
hard, as good grades or even the
development of a talent do, nor does it
demonstrate a naturally valuable
intellect (both of which are clearly
related to success in college). It is, and
always will be, purely discrimination
based on an inherited physical
characteristic. It is the same as race
discrimination.
I realize that the results of the
pageant are not based entirely on
apearance. I am arguing that no part of
the results of a scholarship competition
can be justified in having such a base,
except where discrimination on such a
basis renders it necessary to prevent the
continuation of such discrimination —as
is the case with affirmative action
programs.
If you oppose affirmative action on
the basis that no decision about
Cara Shannon
Clark
Reader’s Opinion
advancement should be made on the
basis of inherited characteristics, then
you are already obvioulsy in opposition
to beauty (or even partial-beauty)
pageants.
If you do not oppose affirmative
action, I would like to point out the
following major difference between the
awarding of scholarships to minorities
on the basis of their membership in
minority groups and the awarding of
scholarships to women on the basis of
their physical attractions: Physically
attractive women have not historically
been discriminated against anymore
than women on the whole. Affirmative
action is a temporary attempt to rectify
past discrimination, which passively
produces present discrimination. Since
attractive women have not experienced
discrimination exceeding that
experienced by women on the whole,
there is no logical justification for their
being offered special advancement over
other women .
Women have many valuable abilities
and talents with which they could
rightfully compete for scholarships.
Having them compete on the basis of
their sexual desirability is degrading to
all women, and simply reinforces the
idea that it is a real and important of
measure of woman’s worth. I think that
is justification plenty for “silly protests,”
Mr. Walker. If you cannot find better
justifications for the continuation of
unjustifiable discrimination than “Life
ain’t fair,” perhaps you should
reconsider your silly opinion.
I answered the
Census taker at
the bus terminal.
another census
taker at the soup
kitchen ...andI
answered one
under the bridge
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Scot Walker, Editor
Monique Threadgill,
Managing Editor
Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor
Melissa Naumann, City Editor
Cindy McMillian, Lisa Robertson,
News Editors
Richard Tijerina, Sports Editor
Fredrick D. Joe, Art Director
Mary-Lynne Rice, Lifestyles Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting
newspaper operated as a community service to
Texas A&M and Bryan-College Station.
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 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 request.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed Mc
Donald, Texas A&M University, College Sta
tion, TX 77843-1 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station,
TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas
A&M University, College Station TX 77843-
4111.
Plus, I answered
a census taker
at the shelter.
Mail
Traditions promote unity
EDITOR:
In response to Marcus Johnson’s letter to the editor,
we would like to express our opinion.
Marcus is as narrow-minded as he thinks the Corps is.
Substitute the word discipline for conformity, narrow
mindedness and seniority. It is unique to what those Ags
desire to do, and that is to serve their country in the
armed forces.
Remember Marcus? Those men who gave their lives so
you could have yours?
Those who do not pursue a contract desire the comra-
dery, discipline, sense of belonging and pride that the
Corps promotes. Many believe in the benefits the Corps
discipline provides once the student leaves A&M.
Traditions are voluntary. They promote unity among
Ags and remind us of the history and beliefs A&M was
founded on. Is honoring fellow Ags who have died so
bad, Marcus? Traditions are a rich part of the Aggie ex
perience.
Rivalries are a part of all schools, and the teasips know
this as well. Walk around t.u. with an Aggie shirt and we
quarantee you’ll get just as many smirks and snide com
ments.
As for Ags hiring Ags, they are obviously doing some
thing right. Just take a look at Clayton Williams and the
success of his businesses. He recognizes the quality of ed
ucation here and the type of person A&M produces.
I am sure Cary Moore’s statement had no racial over
tones. As for A&M being held back competitively, I
would not call being a top ten university non-competitive.
As for your astute observation about Highway 6, I
think it means if you don’t love it, leave it. Nobody is mak
ing you stay.
Eric Peterson ’93 and Andrew Whelpley ’93
Faculty memos waste forests,
too
EDITOR:
I am writing so that none of your readers will have the
misimpression that Professor Stephen H. Daniel’s anti
bonfire stance pervades A&M’s philosophy department.
Philosophers, to the annoyance of some of our stu
dents and colleagues, delight in picking apart arguments,
so let me begin by criticizing Daniel’s. He draws an anal
ogy between land-clearing, on the one hand, and hazing,
sexual harassment and racism on the other.
He then quickly moves to equating land-clearing with
“the systematic destruction of forests.” Since the systema
tic destruction of forests is “fundamentally immoral,” just
as is sexual harassment, we cannot use tradition as a justi
fication for either, he writes. But, of course, land-clearing
need not destroy forests; indeed, some land-clearing is
necessary in order to preserve ecological balance and
thus prevents destruction of forests.
Had Daniel shown that bonfire cannot occur without
destruction of forests (systematic or otherwise), then per
haps he would also have shown that bonfire is immoral.
But he has not even argued for the claim that bonfire
cannot occur without destroying forests. • -.'‘HlaL—
To my mind, a question far more important thanthcl
morality of bonfire is this: VV’hen are faculty attempts! I
influence, even coerce, student behavior morallyjuffil
fied? As educators at A&M we have a challenging and ex i
citing responsibility to our students. To meet this respon-l
sibility we must’take care to impose upon ourselves at thtl
very least the same standards of conduct that we expetil
of our students. Yet as faculty we routinely waste vax B
amounts of paper (processed trees), by sending unnecevI
sary memos around campus and by engaging in researdil
of dubious historical importance. ( This is true in ino. i ;|
universities, not just A&M!)
Unless we, as individual faculty members and as 11
group, stop contributing to this quite systematic destrut I
tion of forests, we cannot ask students to do likewise with-1
out standing rightfully convicted of hypocrisy and uni
warranted self-righteousness. (A similar, and morel
important, point could be made about academic dishdn I
esty; again, A&M is not unusual in this regard.) Let Dan |
iel crusade to reduce the nuinhei oi-uiemos (excluding 1
those from student organizations) I get in my campus!
mailbox by 75 percent or so! Then I shall respect his anti I
bonfire crusade, even though I may still disagree with his!
opinion.
Susan C. Hale
Assistant professor of philosophy
Ags should know A&M history
EDITOR:
We Aggies pride ourselves on being a part of a school!
rich in tradition and history. But how much does theav jj
erage Aggie know about A&M’s wonderful history? I was
walking past the Academic Building the other day and
observed what seemed to be a young Ag show ing her par
ents around campus.
The three were standing in front of Sully’s statue and |
as I walked by, the parents casually glanced up at the |
statue and said, “Now what did this guy do? He must be |
important.” The girl, much to my surprise, remarked. I j
don’t know,” and then turned around and walked away.
Did this Ag not even know that if she had walked around
to the back of the statue’s base, she would have learned
that Lawrence Sullivan Ross was a brigadier general in
the U.S. Army, governor of Texas and president of
Texas A&M College?
I can’t believe that any member of the Aggie student
body would not even know who Sully was. Please Ags.
read an A&M brochure, take a tour of the campus and
learn about the history of this wonderful school! You'll
definitely better appreciate the honor of being an Aggie
if you do so.
Rebecca L. Hall ’93
Have an opinion ? Express it!
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. There is no guarantee that letters submitted will
be printed. Each letter must be signed and must include the classification, ad
dress and telephone number of the writer. All letters may be brought to 216 Retd
McDonald, or sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111.
Adventures In Cartooning
by Don Atkinson Jr.