OPINION
Wednesday, November 28, 1990
'
Opinion Page Editor Ellen Hobbs 845-33 ;
Censorship infringes upon right to free speech
Some friends and I were sitting
around bonfire last year, enjoying the
evening and reminiscing about the old
days, when our night was rudely
interrupted. We were on the tailgate of
a pickup to which we had attached an
A&M flag, a Texas flag and a
Confederate battle flag to show pride in
our school, our state and our heritage.
We were approached by Mr. Bill
Kibler, the faculty bonfire adviser, who
informed us that if we did not remove
the Confederate battle flag he would
have a police officer remove it for us,
and if we raised a ruckus we would be
thrown in jail.
Quite shocked, we asked what
authority he had to order its removal.
He replied that former University
President Frank Vandiver had issued an
executive order which prohibited the
presence of the Confederate flag at
bonfire, and that he was acting under
that authority.
The fact that Vandiver, a noted
Southern historian, would issue such an
order was quite shocking. We asked if
there had been any complaints about
the flag’s presence and were told, “No,
but it ‘might’ be offensive to some
people.”
I’m quite sure Mr. Kibler overstepped
his bounds in threatening police
intervention, but this incident brings up
a very unsettling question: Does the
stereotype of a world-class University
mandate that only “socially correct”
expression be accepted and condoned
by campus authorities?
The sanctimonious presidential
decree which Mr. Kibler quoted is
Constitutionally indefensible, but is not
surprising given the recent trend in
universities across the country to stifle
expression which is socially incorrect or
“might” be offensive to the delicate
sensibilities of some preferred group.
Faculty club liberalism has
manifested itself across the country on
college campuses where comments or
opinions which “might” be offensive to
some are squelched or dissuaded.
From decrees which outlaw “racially
insensitive” speech to the firing of a
newspaper editor who allowed
unflattering articles about a
controversial faculty member to be
published, campus liberals have been
the guidon-bearers of the censorship
movement during the 1980’s.
It’s interesting to note that groups
and individuals who vociferously
defend the right of an individual to
burn the American flag or to display
homoerotic art are often the same
individuals who try to have Huckleberry
Finn removed from high school
libraries, because it “might” offend
minority students.
A good case in point is the protest
which will occur on Duncan Field before
bonfire this year. The “socially correct”
expression of the anti-bonfire club’s
viewpoint will be condoned and
defended by the University — as it
should be. They won’t be threatened
with arrest or the possibility of having
their signs confiscated unless they break
a law. A legal precedent exists which
exposes the contradictory treatment
which they will receive and which we
received last year.
In the 1970s case of Tinker vs. Des
Moines I.S.D., a high school student was
sent home for wearing a black armband
to protest the Vietnam War. The
student took the case all the way to the
Supreme Court, who ruled that an
educational administrator could not
dismiss or discipline a student based on
content or type of speech based on dress
(within the realm of good taste). More
importantly, the Court ruled that the
administrator could not discriminate
between types of free speech.
In our state, the Texas Education
Agency has ruled that two Fort Worth
area schools could not prevent the
students from retaining the
Confederate battle flag as their school
symbol. It’s discouraging to think that
high schools are more concerned with
protecting the right to speak and
express oneself freely than are colleges.
especially our own.
My purpose in writing this columi
not to comment on bonfire, or theft;
or the University administration.M\
purpose is to stress the fact that
censorship is wrong in all shapesanc
forms. Dr. Vandiver’s condescensioc
pressure, either real or perceived,
brought about a blatantly
unconstitutional decree and an
infringement on the rights of avoca!
minority — me.
I urge President Mobley to do ate
with all archaic rules which limit or
impede free speech. Keep up the
University’s battle to fight against
racism and discrimination — butdot
discriminate against me and myriglu
speak as I want or to show pride inn
heritage because someone else“migt
be offended.
Samuel Adams once said, “I donl
agree w ith a word he said, but I’ll
defend to the death his right tosayiif
Remember. And learn. Or we just
“might” lose one of our most precioi
rights.
Larry Cox is a graduate student in
range science.
How will history judge bonfire?
EDITOR:
Two questions to ponder as the bonfire burns:
How will history judge the bonfire?
How will Texas A&M University fare in the court of
public opinion if the peaceful protesters at this year’s
bonfire are seriously hurt or injured by aggressive and/or
drunk bonfire advocates?
Michael C. Worsham
graduate student
Destruction has purpose
EDITOR:
A number of opinions about bonfire have been pre
sented on this page. The reason usually given for abolish
ing bonfire is the destruction of resources on a large scale
for no purpose. I believe this argument is not valid.
First, the destruction is not without purpose. Theindi-
viduals involved with bonfire gain valuable experience.
Teamwork, working under hazardous circumstances,
organization and leadership are all important skills en
hanced at bonfire and cut sites. This is “the other educa
tion.”
The emotional value of bonfire for alumni, students
and the community is also real and significant.
Second, the destruction is more purposeful than many
other things in our culture. Bonfire burns useless natural
resources for social entertainment.
On the other hand, virtually all entertainment and
convenience in our culture involves destroying resources
— cruising by teenagers, driving to a movie theater, heat
ing the movie theater.
What about amusement parks? Watching T.V., can
dles, air conditioning or barbecuing?
Have you ever wondered how much wood is needed
every year so we can eat charcoal flavored beef? Or how
much lighter fluid? What if bonfire is abolished?
Perhaps Aggies Against Bonfire will be renamed “Ag
gies Against Christmas Trees”. Now there’s a waste of
natural resources we should stop.
Third, Aggies Against Bonfire claim that the energy of
all these individuals could be productive in the commu
nity. Perhaps it could.
However, bonfire gathers a group of people and pro
duces something significant, while Aggie Against Bonfire
gathers a group of individuals and produces nothing but
arguments and outright hate. Whatever happened to
leading by example?
My final issue is with those individuals claiming bonfire
should be abolished because it reduces the property value
of the homes near the site. This argument is wrong and
misleading.
Bonfire was there long before most homes were. The
owners knew the risk when they bought the property.
Therefore, their property value is not reduced: abolish
ing bonfire would enhance it.
]Mail Callt
Bonfire should not be abolished so a few property
owners can make a buck, whether they are faculty or not.
John Lambregts
graduate student
Don’t extinguish bonfire
EDITOR:
The thought of bonfire extinguished for good turns
my stomach as I’m sure it does most all Ags.
Bonfire is probably Texas A&M’s most precious tradi
tion, but there is a group who doesn’t quite feel the im
pact bonfire has on the spirit of Aggieland as we feel it.
These “environmentalists”, AAB, are hypocrites. They
probably haven’t stopped for a second to actually realize a
blatant waste of natural resources in their own homes.
I wonder how many of these Aggies Against Bonfire,
who are so concerned about the Earth’s natural re
sources, have live Christmas trees in their homes, as well
as in their apartments here. I wonder how -many people
in the world do. Oh, what a waste! ^
I also wonder how many of these environmentalists en
joy fireplaces in their homes and apartments. Almost ev
ery home built has a fireplace. They would probably say
this warms their house.
Right, let’s see them sleep upstairs that night. That’s
why all houses are equipped with heaters.
Natural gas is a much cleaner and efficient way of heat
ing, and still many houses in the world use their fireplace.
Oh, what a waste! A fireplace may warm your family
rooms, AAB, but bonfire warms our hearts.
I’m proud to be an Aggie and bonfire will always be a
part of me. No other alternative, manufactured, tradition
can take its place.
Bonfire, There is No Substitute!
Until you and your families do away with live
Christmas trees and logs in the fireplace, don’t go pro
testing bonfire. Practice what you preach!
Troy Lindsey ’92
A tree’s best friend?
EDITOR:
On behalf of the forest science department and the
Forestry Club, we totally disassociate ourselves with Ag
gies Against Bonfire.
Recently, Aggies Against Bonfire have used in their lit
erature and flyers what we in the forest science depart
ment have as our slogan:
A TREE’S BEST FRIEND
IS ITS AGGIE
Except Aggies Against Bonfire have added the phrase
“AGAINST BONFIRE” underneath in the same type.
Although there is no copyright for that slogan, the forest
science department has used that slogan since the depart
ment was established. We feel it is an infringement on
our values to be associated in any context with Aggies
Against Bonfire.
I confronted Kelly, the person in charge of Aggies
Against Bonfire, about this issue last Earth Day when we
both had booths. She merely said there was no copyright,
therefore they could use that slogan and would continue
to do so until there is a copyright.
This is not a letter associating ourselves with bonfire ei
ther. However, we in the forest science department asso
ciate ourselves with Professional Forestry.
In my mind, bonfire and forestry are not synonymous.
What students do on their free time is up to them. I have
worked on bonfire for over four years while working to
get my degree in forest management. I have no problems
with what bonfire does and will continue to support bon
fire in all that I can do.
The forest science department in no way condones, as
sociates or accepts the ideals portrayed by Aggies Against
Bonfire. Remember:
A Tree’s Best Friend is its AGGIE.
Mike Morrison ’90
TAMU Forestry Club President jjP
The poor could use firewood?
EDITOR:
Well, isn’t that special. It seems that the red pots do
nated a truck load and a car load of firewood to the stu
dents from Tan Kappa. (For those of you who missed it,
Tau Kappa was having a scavenger hunt to collect items
for Twin City Mission — and firewood was one of the
items the Mission had requested.)
Hey, wait a minute. Do you mean that there are people
— families, children, elderly people — right here in
Bryan and College Station who will be cold this winter be
cause they have no firewood??? My, isn’t that a pity.
Hey, I have an idea. Let’s invite all of them to bonfire.
That way, they can warm themselves up for at least a few
hours, before heading back to their cold, cold homes.
Think about it, folks. This winter, when you’re freez
ing your boots off before returning to your nice cozy,
warm dorm or apartment or house, think about the fact
that there are people right here in your town who are
freezing, perhaps literally, because they can’t afford fire
wood. Better yet, think about it when you watch bonfire
go up in smoke.
Think about it — please.
Jan Fechhelm ’81
research assistant
Have an opinion ? Express it!
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial stafj
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, address and
telephone number of the writer.
All letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald, or sent to Campus Mail
Stop 1111.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Cindy McMillian,
Editor
Timm Doolen, Managing Editor
Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor
Holly Becka, City Editor
Kathy Cox,
Kristin North,
News Editors
Nadja Sabawala,
Sports Editor
Eric Roalson, Art Director
Lisa Ann Robertson,
Lifestyles Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup
porting newspaper operated as a commu
nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan-
Colle^e Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion
are those of the editorial board or the au
thor, 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 regu
lar semesters, except for holiday and ex
amination periods. Newsroom: 845-3313.
Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes
ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full
year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur
nished on request: 845-2696.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed
McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col
lege Station, TX 77843-11 1 1.
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.
Adventures In Cartooning
by Don Atkinsoni
X TZ£MeMB€R MT VW
m RmowceD voo w&e
ewiUG tug strip, me
LOCAL few's 7f/R£P/ A
P£RLLQ B/6 VARTV.