Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 27, 1992)
inion Monday, April 27, 1992 The Battalion Page 7 The Battalion Editorial Board DOUGLAS PILS, Editor-in-Chief The Battalion BRIDGET HARROW, Managing Editor BRIAN BONEY, Opinion Editor JASON MORRIS, Night News Editor MORGAN JUDAY, Night News Editor MACK HARRISON. City Editor KARL STOLLEIS, Photo Editor SCOTT WUDEL, Sports Editor ROB NEWBERRY, Lifestyles Editor CKNOR/TheB#* 3 B finals of tf i the A Finals t the SoiAes on April 30. IS dot ise round pid ontractta exas (AP) le run-and-sk' Dallas Gowk: >n draft day. can corns! af Texas AM eptor in S dory, was and thettlli! the Herschdf Minnesota, ich lost linek nd DarrickBt ree agencyse linebackerliii endous o[ 24 th spot of Iff rry Jones came to fa r ith bothfefc SIo terms wf >oth contradsw Desegregation Should federal government opt out of enforcing equal education? PRO CON Dallas dim® sideline to» asn'tbeentw* uvvik said 9pm ins The Supreme Court of the United States Monday moved to end federally supervised school desegregation in Topeka, Kan., subject of the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education case almost 40 years ago. It overturned a federal appeals court ruling ordering the Topeka school district to correct imbalances in the racial distribution of students in its schools. In so doing, the Supreme Court staved off the likelihood of forced busing and frustrated the designs of civil rights attorneys who would push the courts into the role of arbiters of social issues as well as legal ones. Those lawyers cited the fact that four of the city's 26 elementary schools enrolled half of Topeka's black students and argued that such statistics supported a mandate for governmental action. However, the original Brown vs. Board of Education ruling held only that segregation of students as a matter of law or policy was unconstitutional as a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The clause states that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." "Separate but equal" facilities were neither equal nor justifiable, and the 1954 Brown ruling was a great victory in ending that indignity. Nevertheless, that decision was designed to bring an end to legal segregation and not segregation incidental to demographic and social conditions. When, years ago, black students were shut out of nearby schools reserved for whites and forced to travel to distant all-black ones, the Supreme Court had a constitutional responsibility to end that legal injustice. It did just that. It would be unreasonable for us now to expect the judiciary to take responsibility for inequities that are not a result of legal injustice but rather of existing social and economic standards. Besides, the government has already shown us its ineptness when it enters the arena of social reform and welfare. Extrapolating the Brown ruling to include a legal obligation to "correct" unequal distribution of students would have been the wrong move for other reasons. Moving students around to schools away from their homes and neighbors is wrong in any situation, whether to separate whites and blacks or to put them together. No student should be discriminated against on the basis of race or color, no matter what that race or color may be. No student should be bused across town to pay the debts of social inequity incurred by adults. Discrimination involves making distinctions among people and treating them differently because of those differences. It is always wrong. And if we are ever to see a truly colorblind society we must first have a colorblind government. And that's just the way it is. ;C0N^ Final CMO' 1 ECO# c# gpflto^ In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that the separation of grade school children "from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone." That decision, known as Brown vs. Board of Education, became the basis for federal intervention into public schools in order to eliminate legalized discrimination and segregation based on the "separate but equal" spirit of an earlier, racist, "Jim Crow" era. Last week, a conservative Supreme Court overturned a lower court order that Topeka, Kan., the city at the heart of the original debate, take further actions to end racial imbalances within the school district. This ruling ends the 38-year-old federal control of the Topeka school district which resulted from the 1954 Brown decision. Returning to the battleground of Topeka offers an ironic, if not tragic, opportunity to end federal intervention in public schooling and, in effect, to end federal attempts to bring about a more egalitarian country. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, speaking in the majority opinion on the decision to halt the process of desegregation in Topeka, stated that "federal supervision of local school systems was intended as a temporary measure and were not intended to operate into perpetuity." However, this decision establishes an ominous precedent that allows other school districts to chip away at measures aimed at protecting the integrity of our public schools whose mission is to provide equal access to educational opportunities for all students. When students in inner city schools suffer from inadequate facilities, out dated texts and teaching methods, and often times apathetic, unconcerned and hopeless faculty members, the "temporary measures" of the federal government sorely lack in their attempts to provide an equal education for all. When an equal education yields new standards of mediocrity in order to comply with a federal numbers game, the "temporary measures" of Chief Justice Rehnquist rob our children of a good education and rob this country of a future. Yes, the original intent of the Brown decision was noble in its goal to provide an equal education for all. Yes, the measures of the federal government have proven inadequate in their efforts to find a workable solution. But, the original goal of an equal education for all need not be abandoned though current methods fail. Rather, the federal government should focus its efforts on investing in the future through correcting unequal school districts by building new schools in minority areas, by funding all schools equally regardless of location and by recruiting able, excited and innovative teachers for all schools, not simply the separate but unequal "white bread" schools that can afford them. £ Loughman is a senior journalism major Feducia is a senior English and history major Quit whining about rape You women just don't realize how good you have it. Patricia Ireland, Jan Parshell and followers, you just aren't seeing the big picture. Thousands of men are constantly attempting to buy you dinner, get you drunk and have sex with you. It just doesn't get any better than this. If you ever take 30 minutes out of your busy schedule, you'll find that sex is rather enjoyable. Your breasts can cause us to buy ou rocks worth a year's supply of eer, yet you still continue to bitch. How can you ask for anything more? So get off of your soapbox and start enjoying life. Dimitri Filippov Class of '94 Ags don't care about integrity This goes out to all the Ags out there that have a crazy notion that Texas A&M University is all about integrity, fairness, and good people. Well to educate these misguided people, "I gotta little story for ya Ags!" For a long time I thought this too. This "well known fact" is what attracted me to Texas A&M. Making the A&M Women's Varsity Soccer Team clinched my decision. This fact turned into a myth Wednesday night when I found out that the A&M athletic department is actually full of hard-hearted businessmen interested only in a profit. Wednesday night Lynn Hickey told the A&M Women's Varsity Soccer Team that they would no longer be able to compete at the NCAA level. Among other excuses, the team was told that they were an insult to the school because they did not "look" as good as the other teams. The meager $12,500 budget that A&M allots the Women's Varsity Soccer Team, compared to approximately $200,00 allotted to the basketball team, goes towards uniforms, travel expenses and the coaches' salary. Although the team was willing to continue with the small budget, the administrators felt it best to drop the team to club status and divert the funds to other women's sports like basketball. I do not understand how the team, with their 11-6-2 record, including their win over West Point in Washington D.C., could possibly be an insult to A&M. If anything the team make up for the other unsuccessful programs at A&M. Allowing the soccer team to continue with their varsity status would also set A&M apart from other Texas schools who do not offer soccer at this level. This in turn would keep talented soccer players in Texas who otherwise would be forced to go out of state to play. Soccer is the fastest growing sport in America, and with America hosting the!994 World Cup A&M will surely regret their decision. When I entered this school I Was told, "Once an Ag, always an Ag!" I must have misunderstood. They must have said, "Once an Ag, play the 'little business game' or leave." That also reminds me of another catchy phrase heard so often at A&M,"Highway six runs both ways!" I just hope that Lynn Hickey, and John David Crow, realize the quality people they are losing. If these individuals along with every Ag on the face of this Earth wish to support losing athletic programs in their snazzy outfits rather than a winning soccer team, then the athletic department upholds nothing that A&M stands for. Anna Whitehead Class of'95 Soccer team needs support All right Ags, I've finally had enough! I think it's time the student body became aware of the politics that goes on behind the doors of the Texas A&M Athletic Office. Many people do not realize this, but A&M does have a Women's Varsity Soccer Team. This mass ignorance of the soccer program is caused mainly by the athletic director's failure to support the team financially. They back their decision with the argument that the team does not bring in any money for the school. We would like to know how we are expected to bring in money when the board fails to provide any advertising for us and they make us play our home games on a field miles from campus. Another of their "reasons" is that the men's soccer team is club, and therefore the women's should also be a club team. We think that is a blatantly sexist fallacy. With that logic, A&M should have a women's football team. The board believes these reasons are sufficient enough to cut the program after the '92 season, and this letter is written to let the board know that the team is not going down without a fight. The team had a winning season last fall, including a defeat of West Point. The team is highly talented and has the potential of becoming nationally ranked if it received more support from the school. On a more personal basis, we would like to make the Athletic Board of Directors aware of the dreams they are shattering with the termination of the soccer program. Ever since we were little, we dreamed of playing NCAA soccer, not club, but with the program eliminated, our dreams are shot down. Telling us we can play club soccer is like telling the football players that they can play intramural flag-football. If you agree with us, and would like to see the team kept on with Varsity status, we ask you to write to the Athletic Director John David Crow in support of the team. Let's join together Ags and fight for the team and give A&M another winning program. Any support would be appreciated. Look for the schedule of games next fall. Casey Hamre Class of'95 accompanied by two other signatures Follow Christ for the truth "The truth can be your best friend or your worst enemy." I have found this statement to be so true. Most of my life. I've avoided the truth of Jesus Christ and of His Love. I lived in my own ways, seeking what I thought was best. I was brought into misery as I sought what I thought what I wanted. 1 found that the void in man's life will never be fulfilled until you come to grips with the salvation of Jesus Christ. It was a very hard lesson to learn because I came to nearly destroying myself. I'm sharing these things because like Michael Sullivan and many others, we have found that the truth is in Jesus Christ. It has been a fulfilling, purposeful and challenging life. Several students have written some words against Mr. Sullivan's article and are thus fulfilling Scripture. Paul writes in II Timothy 4:3-4 "For a time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." (Case in Point: Homosexual leaders saying God approves of their blatant and unnatural sin) "They will turn their ears away from truth and turn aside to myths." Just like in Jesus' day, they rejected Him and crucified Him because they rejected truth. Jesus said, "I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6. Again, "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him." John 3:36. Know that Jesus loves you, so do I and I am praying that students here at Texas A&M University will come to know the truth of God's one and only Son, Jesus Christ. Will truth be your best friend? Erik Swindlehurst Class ‘92 Have an opinion? Express it. The Battalion is interested in hearing from its readers. All letters to the editor are welcome. Letters must be signed and must include classification, address and a daytime phone number for verification purposes. Anonymous letters will not be published. The Battalion reserves the right to edit all letters for length, style and accuracy. There is no guarantee that letters will appear. Letters may be brought to 013 Reed McDonald, sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111 or can be faxed to 845-2647.