Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (June 21, 1993)
■ m * Opinion j U; : an last 3 pent as hingti ^ year, ^ oints. 'iroiie tLP( off defer «han on Rod, stroke, •par 70 i, r cry fret urday, total of : tory an ?ck. dies 1 round / a half ?rnoon. Monday, June 21,1993 *tBT TWl^ e>TKAUiMT < P^....X'H 'loOK. 6ALARW 'XO SOLICIT CoHPANie^ TO v t>oMAT6' PP^Jt<ST& FoP He TO £0MPL£Te , VnMTH Slo COHPtM^ATIOM OTWRR TUAM A HgA^LT ^RAC>e... AMP ivit*? WMOL6 ^?P£RATlC3Kl l* CL&VERLV A-«» A'^PNMOR- COUR^fcVP* The Battalion Editorial Board Jason Loughman, editor in chief Mark Evans, managing editor Stephanie Pattillo, city editor Kyle Burnett, sports editor Dave Thomas, night news editor Anas Ben-Musa, Aggielife editor Mack Harrison, morning news editor Billy Moran, photo editor The Battalion TOO years at Texas A&M Editorial No excuses Lyrics don't kill; people do As the trial of Houston teen-ager Ronald Ray Howard enters the pun ishment phase, jurors should pay no ■■#heed to the defense's claims that rap music compelled Howard to kill State trooper Bill Davidson. Dfthefl:| Howard said that at the time t of the ind im uld onl' Davidson pulled him over he was istening to Tupac Amaru Shakur's '2Pacalypse Now," a tape with n mate yrics that glbrify^gt^ns-and drugs, ellastli: md portray polled 1 ^ the enemy. The following lyrics were taken Tom Shakur's song "Trapped." "... Bang, Bang count another ca- ualty. But it's a cop who is shot for his smtality Who do you blame, it's a shame tie f° r |because the man's slain He got shot in the chain's of his own game." Howard's attorney said such lyrics "brainwashed" him and taught him to hate police. However, this latest ploy by the defense is nothing but a smoke screen designed to draw the jurors' attentions away from the real issue at hand while they decide the teen ager's fate. The real issue being that ry crad^Howard shot and killed a state ocracv : trooper at point-blank range. The claim that rap music precipi tated his action is utter nonsense. It would be easy for society to peg the responsibility for its problems on a es of Ni en's sec; orth $2 rnings with a Watsor ft on th >ar on iff ition of: vorld. iid has jeauseo y Chins lent, of the f i Xitonf he time ■ackdo"' ■utivet type of music, but it's just not that simple. The music only serves as a scapegoat. Perhaps Shakur's attorney put it best when he said, "It's truly wrong in the world when we try to excuse people's behavior, or at least explain it away on the basis that they listen to the wrong kind of music, when they are cold-blooded murderers." Howard's attorney has conve niently forgotten that his client ad mitted to being a car thief, a crach cocaine dealer, and a member of the Five Deuce Hoover Crips, a Hous ton gang that requires members to commit a murder as part of their initiation. Howard has even confessed to killing Davidson. During the trial, a former friend of Howard's testified that he hated police long before the night of Davidson's shooting. "He (Howard) said he would bump one (police officer) off in a minute," she said. "He always just felt that they messed with him." The tape playing in Howard's truck before he was pulled over did not provoke him to shoot Davidson. Music, even at its most vulgar and socially offensive worst, cannot make anyone do anything. Howard made the decision to kill Davidson. He alone must pay the price for his actions. The Battalion Page 5 At last, recognition for minorities Mandatory courses serve to remedy misinformation Dr. Reynolds' column in The Battalion (June 15) con demning A&M's new multicultural requirement is an emo tional polemic that lacks any real substantive arguments against the new mandate. What is especially irritating to Reynolds is the fact that the new liberal arts curriculum re quires that "at least three hours must deal with racial, ethnic or gender is sues in the United States," i.e., issues that are essentially American. America is a diverse country, but this diversity has not always been re flected in its academic institutions or in the work force, although there is a lot of progress to be made in both of these areas, the work force is inte grated now more than ever. Courses that expose students to other people and cultures that they a "e bound to come in contact with should be seen as an asset, not as an infringement. Reynolds, however, feels that issues such as these are simply "touchy-feely pish-posh;" hardly an argument consisting of the "scholarship and sound pedagogy" that he so admirably extols. Reynolds and other opponents of the multicultural man date also argue that the class will provide a pulpit from which the instructors will preach their (left-wing) ideolo gies. This is ironic. Reynolds has never been remiss in ex pressing his right-wing opinion and ideology in his cours es. Is this bad? No; exposure to different ideas stimulates critical thought and allows students to compare and con trast differing points of view. This is the whole purpose of an education; if students are exposed to only one point of view, they are not being educated, they are being indoctrinated. The main issue of multiculturalism is one of recognition — recognition of those contributions from other races and cultures that have helped to forge this country's identity. The dominant culture in this country is that of Western Europe, and the present curriculum has focused on this cul ture. It should. The Western Europeans were indeed the dominant force both intellectually and physically, in build ing this country. The issue at hand is, however, have the contributions of others been accurately reflected in the pre sent curriculum. Reynolds thinks it has. But according to him, this "touchy-feely pish-posh" shouldn't be part of the curriculum in the first place. The contributions of these Americans are somehow discounted by Reynolds. Given that the contributions of non-Europeans are re flected in our present curriculum, however marginally, a fundamental question must be asked. Can the historians of a culture that practiced genocide against the indigenous population, enslaved an entire race of people based on skin color, restricted the rights of women and usurped the land of many title-holding Mexi can-Americans be counted on to accurately record the many contributions that individuals belonging to these cul tures have made? The purpose of the multicultural mandate is to provide a more accurate and truthful curriculum. If the present cur riculum does not accurately reflect the contributions of some groups, then it should be corrected. Will courses in multiculturalism make people appreciate people of other races and cultures? Does a course in calcu lus make someone appreciate math? Most likely, if some one hates math before taking calculus, they will hate math after taking calculus. But they will have been exposed to it and maybe it will help them in their critical thinking and decision making down the road. This is all that can be asked of a course dealing with multicultural issues. Reynolds looks back longingly to when, "Once upon a time, universities were about the best that had been thought and written, the open pursuit of the truth, the criti cal sifting out of error and non-political scholarship and teaching." Can one honestly talk of this "open pursuit of the truth" when all the while during this pursuit only certain groups, privileged by skin color, were allowed to attend these bas tions of free thinking? Those screaming the loudest at the possibility of inte grating their exclusive academic country clubs are not fear ful that the standards of academic excellence are being low ered, but rather that their precious dynasty of historical misinformation is being diluted. Cuellar is a graduate student in economics GUEST COLUMN STEVEN CUELLAR finally seeingf eye to eye on Bosnia usarmt' ozen istratio: ainst tli' jrganiz' ssociat lemned ' the p 3 gulatifl; aasure 1 -ay ce# Id, not’ to be t ; ngck second' - Paxsofl' in that? throw* a the SJ .nee W rst qa Jlt ?nt Tii^ ids rei* 1 eight--- 1 nal [ordan ; 3.6 period'; its on ^ ind Iftime. Multicultural classes aren't nonsense The hysteria of Dr. Reynolds' attack last Tuesday on multicultural educa tion was amusing. But then, hysteria is a tool that serves his conservative plan well. It's a clever trick to present the most ridiculous example as the inevitable outcome of change, as Reynolds does by asking if "feminist physics" can be far behind multicultural requirements. Despite whatever political agenda Reynolds may see lurking in the Liber al Arts Council, the major issues here are whether students should be re quired to study American cultural his tory, and what that curriculum should be. The fact that our culture is not ho mogeneous is a good enough reason for courses of study to be diverse. Reynolds implies that no great thoughts have come of ethnic or gender studies. His "best that has been thought" ar gument is nothing more than a ruse to convince the feeble minded that diver gent viewpoints are dangerous and ought not to be studied. The quote of Thomas Jefferson was good too. In this discourse of exclusion the "Founding Fathers" always assume mythic stature as the yardstick by which we measure greatness. Yet, though they espoused concepts such as freedom and equality, it was only through the actions of a diverse peo ple — African slaves demanding liberty, Jews escaping persecution, Chinese im migrants seeking economic hope —that the ideals of our founders attain their greatest realization and present truth. These are not ideas exclusive to one ethnic group, something "invented" hundreds of years ago by "dead white men." They take on new meaning every time someone says, "this applies to me also." Americans are among the most eth nically varied people on earth, but our diversity need not lead to divergence. Studying the variety of cultural contri butions to America will, if anything, unify us. It is certainly not "pish posh." Steven R. Harris Reference Librarian Evans Library For a good time, don't call 911 I'm writing to tell you about a great time you can have in College Station. It's real easy. All you have to do is dri ve down Highway Six with no light on your license plate. (No Ags, we weren't speeding.) That opens a whole world of fun. You will be pulled over. Your car will be inspected, and here's the best part! Your car will also be searched. Yes, searched for absolutely no reason. Doesn't that sound like fun? But wait — there's more! You also will be frisked like a common criminal. Now, how long do you think this goes on? Ten, twenty minutes? Guess again... It's forty-five minutes of total fun with your local police de partment. Thanks guys, for a barrel of fun. Troy Brenner Class of '95 Don't exaggerate breast cancer risks I was most happy to read in the June 8 issue of The Battalion the story re garding the program developed by Eta Sigma Gamma to teach women about breast health and self-responsibility. This coverage will increase the de mand for the program and may en courage more women to learn more about their bodies and take more re sponsibility for protecting their health. I was disturbed, however, by a quote which was attributed to me. The writer quoted me as saying that "Women are not considered to be in a high risk group (for breast cancer) until they reach their late 20s and early 30s." In fact, women are not considered "high risk" at any age without other as sociated risk factors. It is a fact that being over age 40 is a risk factor for breast cancer, but so is the early age of first menarche (onset of menstruation), never having children or having the first live birth over age 30. There is still an argument regard ing the contribution of diet and obesity to breast cancer risk. I believe it is inappropriate to lead women to believe that they are a high risk in their late 20s and early 30s. While it is the intent of the members of Eta Sigma Gamma to educate women regarding the need for taking responsibility for their own health, it does not help anyone to exaggerate the risks. Brian Colwell, Ph.D., CHES Assistant Professor and Sponsor Eta Sigma Gamma
