Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 23, 1992)
ber 23,1992 ILL/The Battalion wo Texas on (55) try 37-10 win I not see the y today. We for Hill and •ove is that conference their heads it. No mat- f each team Fhursday's ?ry much up Dt think that ? lightly, re of itself," s motivation fexas. "We em getting Pexas Long- e games that n, drag-out to the fourth feel honored that." >25 Pts Pvs 1,549 1 1,483 2 1,407 3 1,389 4 1,289 7 1,166 9 1,084 6 1,077 8 1,030 10 976 11 928 5 914 12 856 13 828 14 653 17 575 18 516 19 432 20 357 15 351 21 314 - 282 23 257 16 204 24 114 - ries: Hawaii Kansas 16, ississippi 5, 13, Arizona Fresno St. 1, LAI. score," Sul- ' much did ird quarter, gas." ;am lost to 5-10 earlier in the same mes. •ong, physi- play with a aid. "I def are one of he nation.' inference "It feels 11 say it Confer- ild be ir took i Floyd igh many t winner- e whole /ing or the ned up oblem as game, vl re ar. And if a na- ingling in aid be in- can trav- ; beast champi- in the glo- the best - Opinion Monday, November 23,1992 The Battalion Taking sides: Should government end the ban on homosexuals in the military? "The homos are building landing strips for gay Mar tians," says a rock song that satirical ly captures the paranoid, fascist psycho-hate di rected at homo sexuals in this country. It should come as no sur prise that the ban on homosexuals in the military springs from the McCarthy era. The Defense. De- Spartment regulation requiring dis charge of gays was officially promulgat- Sed in 1949. "Perverts Called Govern ment Peril," screamed a New York S Times headline in 1950. Today, some would have you believe that gays are the military's peril. The U.S. military threw away $500 million during the 1980s discharging 16,800 gays pursuing what Defense Sec retary Dick Cheney callk "a quaint little rule/' And recently/ the Navy R.O.T.C. began requiring midshipmen sign an af~ ifidavit saying they can be dismissed and forcedf to repay scholarships if they are found to be gay. However, previ ous attempts to recoup scholarship money in this manner nave failed in other branches of the services. The ban should be lifted because it is unfair to many qualified gays, male and female, and it deprives our military of their talents. The argument that gays risk security breaches due to blackmail isn't tenable. The ban on gays actually promotes blackmailing gays who cannot risk be ing exposed under the threat of the gov ernment cutting their careers short. AIDS is the big non-issue of this debate, as recruits and servicemen are routinely tested. There is no question that gays can perform their duties — gays can and do serve effectively in the U.S. military, several with distinction. And of the 16- nation alliance of NATO, only America and Britain maintain a strict policy of excluding gays from the military. Canada, as of October, eliminated barri ers to enlisting gays. The best criterion is conduct, not sex ual preference. Should all heterosexual males be punished for the acts of those males involved in the Tailhook scandal, or just those straight males that ha rassed and mauled helpless women? Those that committed the crimes should be punished, not all straight males. Likewise, gays that harass their col leagues should be disciplined. Current ly all gays are targets for expulsion for nothing more than sexual preference. Gays that do their job should be left alone. The fear that morale will suffer if the ban is lifted is reasonable, especially at first. Just as racists strained mightily over working with African-Americans and sexists chafed over working with women, so homophobes will agonize over working with gays. Only when straights work with ca pable gay soldiers will they lose their fear of them. The armed services should devote itself to accepting and in tegrating gays into the military. The time bomb of extreme left- wing liberalism hiding in Presi dent-elect Clin ton's political clos et is emerging from its dormant pod with the cur rent push to allow homosexuals in the military. Admiral Crowe, Colonel Hackworth, Gen eral Colin Powell and retired Gener al Norman Schwarzkopf have all given Clinton a resounding "No!" to the question of al lowing gays in the military. These es teemed military men cite declines in troop morale and fighting effectiveness as the major obstacles to this measure. Granted, in the heat of combat a sol dier's sexual orientation is irrelevant. As an example, Israel allows gays and lesbians in the military; but Israel is a tiny country the size of New Jersey, sur rounded on all sides by hostile neigh bors. The United States has no such shortage of manpower. Peacetime is where the Byzantine maze of problems rears its ugly head. Soldiers living and sleeping together in barracks might not feel comfortable showering next to a man who has an erection. Allowing homosexuals in the mili tary would no doubt prompt a mass ex odus of career military personnel. Sab otage is another concern. Fistfights and other hostilities are sure to arise as cliques form around gays and hetero sexuals. Gay soldiers who achieve rank could sexually harass heterosexuals with advances and threats —the Navy Tailhook debacle demonstrated that sexual harassment is a divisive issue. The argument that gays already are in the military is invalid as the sexual orientation of these individuals is un known. Thus, their effects on morale are empirically unknown. In battle, the soldiers of the future might well have their eyes on those around them instead of on the mission. Then there is the issue of AIDS. Con sidering the promiscuous lifestyle often associated with homosexuality and the concurring high rate of HIV infection, what risks do soldiers run on the battle fields strewn with blood? What about the medical bills for AIDS-infected sol diers? Uncle Sam will be left to foot the bill for the lifestyle decisions of homo sexual soldiers. The military is an institution which has been built over the course of cen turies of warfare. The military exists with a legal system all its own. Such an institution is ill-suited for the social ex periment of homosexual integration. In the course of this debate we would be wise to stand clear of homophobic gay bashing. Reasoned discourse suggests that gays are not inferior human beings. There is dignity to all human life. Clinton, a draft dodger with zero knowledge of military life, must face this issue head on to satisfy one of the extremist groups which helped to elect him. If his homosexual agenda is enact ed it shall prove to be the beginning of his end. ANTHONY LOBAIDO Columnist Dickerson is a sophomore economics major LoBaido is a doctoral student in educational technology Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the opinion page staff and editor in chief only, and do not represent, in any way, the opinions of reporters, staff, or editors of other sections of the newspaper. Columns, guest columns, and Maii Call items express the opinions of the authors only. The Battalion encourages letters to the editor and will print as many as space allows in the Mail Cali section. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author’s name, Social Security number, class, and phone number. We reserve the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters should be addressed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald /Campus mail stop 1111 Texas A&M University Coliege Station, TX 77843 A kinder, gentler Elephant Walk The purpose of this letter is to in form the members of the Class of '93 of the reasons behind the "Preserve the tradition — keep it clean" cam paign sponsored by the Class of '93 Council and Traditions Council. Traditions tend to change as many years go by, but there should be a limit to the discrepancies. Our feelings about Elephant Walk are deeply root ed in the fact that we have supported the Class of '93 and Texas A&M throughout our four years. As seniors this year, the thought of spending our last year on campus as members of the Twelfth Man saddens us. What sad dens us even more, however, is that to participate in one "tradition," some people will find it necessary to destroy our campus that we otherwise hold so dear. We are directing our concerns at anyone or any class in particular. The fact is that in years past the seniors have come to Elephant Walk as fully armed as the underclassmen who wish to lay them to rest. What we are ask ing is simple. If every senior who wishes to participate in the Class of '93 Elephant Walk would think about the actual purpose of Elephant Walk — to reflect on the memories we have creat ed — the solemn tradition will natu rally return. We are certain that we are not the only seniors on campus who will be sad to leave this part of our lives behind. As juniors on campus last year, the Class of '93 did work with the Class of '92 to promote a cleaner, safer Ele phant Walk. We appreciate the coop eration of the Class of '94 this year, and we feel that this year's improve ments will be just as great. It will take everyone's support to make this year a success. Elephant Walk starts this afternoon at 1:00 at the north end of Kyle Field. Gig'em, and beat the hell outta t.u.! Jennifer Cheatham President, Class of '93 Let Class of '93 walk, die in peace In the past. Elephant Walk has been a battle between the juniors and se niors causing destruction not only to our campus, but to anything that fell in its path. This battle is not part of the tradition. The Class of '94 has been asked to help preserve the "true" tradition of Elephant Walk. This means allowing the seniors to solemnly roam the cam pus without the threat of eggs, shav ing cream, syrup, etc., bombarding them. We know that the thought of "killing" a senior must be one of the greatest feelings in life. However, with increased damage to campus and the liability that E-Walk entails (e.g. broken bones, vandalism), we as se niors will want the solemn tradition. The Class of '93 has highly stressed their desire for us to cooperate and al low them to walk in peace. To achieve this goal, there will be activities going on all afternoon for us — the Fightin' Texas Aggie Class of '94 — to enjoy. We ask that all juniors meet at bon fire at 1:00 p.m. today. Here we will be taking pictures with a "large gray field mouse from Africa" and we will have a pullout yell practice. After this, we will give a list of our activities for the afternoon. We encourage all juniors to attend our activities. We promise that you will have a phenomenal time and that ou will not regret joining us and ending with fellow classmates. Please help us keep the campus safe and clean so that Elephant Walk may be enjoyed for generations to come. Lisa Rodriguez Class of'94 Council Chad King Class of'94 president Michael Crain Class of '94 vice-president PTTS policies are not unreasonable For the past two weeks, the Battal ion has received a substantial number of letters questioning the billing proce dures utilized by Parking, Transit and Traffic Services. As the Student Senate sub-chair to this department, I feel that it is my obligation to you, the student body, to eliminate any concerns that may exist over this policy. Before I proceed with this explanation, it is im portant that I preface my comments that pointing out that the following procedures are only used when a vehi cle without a parking hang tag re ceives a ticket and fails to deliver a re sponse to that ticket within the allot ted 10 days. A vehicle information sheet is ob tained through the Department of Public Safety for all vehicles fitting the aforementioned description. This in formation is then cross-referenced with the University's files on current students. A search is conducted for a matching home address. Ideally, matching last names are also obtained. In these situations, there is a very high probability that a "proper" match has been obtained. This procedure has been in effect for more than 10 years at this University and has proven to be quite effective. From the vantage point of a current student, it is important that two key points be made. First it is the respon sibility of PTTS to protect your rights as a student paying for the privilege to park in allotted spaces on this campus. The vehicles subject to the aforemen tioned billing procedure have violated that right and are using valuable spaces that you have purchased the privilege of parking in. Second, in situations where hang tags are not present, vehicles are tick eted, not individuals. Mistakes can oc cur. PTTS is run by human beings. Furthermore, it is not standard policy for PTTS to bill a student's roommate for unpaid tickets. What we as students have failed to realize is that this University provides more parking spaces to faculty and students than any other university in the nation. Furthermore, with the cre ation of three parking garages and the increase in 30-minute spaces, blue spaces and faculty spaces, this depart ment has effectively responded to the needs and desires of its constituents. Before we all choose to speak out against this so-called "evil" depart ment, please stop and examine all that has been accomplished over the course of the past four years. Parking has definitely improved, and it is time that we as students stand up and take no tice. Jeffery R. Erler Class of'93 Attack on liberal arts students unnecessary This letter is in response to Brian Beckcom's guest column, "Aggie tra ditions are worthwhile despite what the cynics tell you." (Mon. Nov. 16.) I must commend him on his very elo quent defense of the many time-hon ored traditions here at Texas A&M. At the same time, I must also make you aware of the asinine remark you made concerning all liberal arts majors. "I hope that you remain at A&M, and while 40,180 students —that's 98 per cent of the student body for you liber al arts majors — take part in all the glorious traditions of Aggieland ..." Beckom, I am not sure if you think all liberal arts majors are as bad in math as you are at getting your point across without offending one of the largest colleges in this prestigious Uni versity, or if you just wanted to contra dict yourself. You wrote, in response to the stu dent who believed the reason we are so traditional is because we as a whole are insecure, that he was buying into an extremely derogatory stereotype. Yet not two sentences later, you reply by stereotyping the entire College of Liberal Arts. That would be like me assuming that because you are a computer sci ence major, you are a 100-pound geek with acne-prone skin being illuminat ed by his own personal computer on a Saturday afternoon instead of being at Kyle Field cheering on the Fightin' Texas Aggie footbqll team. I will save my assumptions about you, and in the future, I hope you will do the same for me and the rest of the Liberal Arts College. Jennifer Mathews Class of'95 Saving virginity until marriage wise After reading and re-reading Toni Garrard's column about sexual morali ty ("Morality suffers in sexual sell out," Nov. 12), I was compelled to write. I'm proud to say that I wholeheart edly support her view that sex has be come a selling product in today's mar ket, virginity is looked down upon, and sex is quickly losing its sacred in tent. I know that our views are in the mi nority — I'm sure there are stacks of rebuttals not only to Garrard's col umn, but also to my letter. I, like Garrard, don't wish to con demn or to judge; I just believe that it is necessary to stop and wonder why we've taken sex off the pedestal it should be on. I don't want to play any self-righteous games, either, because then I'd be a hypocrite. I just want to say to the rest of us who are waiting for marriage: "hip-hip-hooray!" It will be worth it. Melissa Miller Class of '96