■
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