Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 25, 1994)
Opinion The Battalion Page 11 ^ lns pectf; a intenaii : . hlenis. said nio : . 'ed ai tij ;nts, abo } buildijj; nents p:; n gs, will ed to il, ders we» 1 pipelit! Firefijbi. tan wiilii is, will;: niles au; nton at; ree 74li engines, iut aniK ‘ dayliri; imbed" lys 11 as the ger said JStry si;: anical dt- lird-patij digging Americi: PRO CON Should faculty members publicize their uni versity affiliation in connection with religion? ie person in 1961, :ks in ad' naturi )[ whirl ruptured ople and ailing n TONI GARRARD CLAY Opinion editor nee said f' ■ Ahe First Amendment of our Consti- nuld hut I tution states that “Congress shall JL make no law respecting an estab- ishment of religion, or prohibiting the fee exercise diereof.” Our forefathers, you see, felt it neces- ;ary to protect religion from government. Dver the years, however, the amendmen- ’s original intent has been warped, and he battle cry “Separation of Church and state” has led the way in an alarming novement to hush the voice of religion Dutside the place of worship. Such an incident of religious intoler- ce occurred here at Texas A&M over an bd placed in The Battalion by a group of Christian faculty members. The “Faculty : riends” ad lists the names and depart- nents of several dozen faculty members -ho are united by their, belief in. Christ and the willingness to share that belief with others. Oh, the horror. Interestingly enough, it is not only non-believers who find fault with the ad, but other-behevers as well. Objectors daim diat non-Christian students will be unable to approach a Faculty Friends member about certain personal issues. The argument that the Faculty Friends adver tisement incorporates the entire University with a particular reli gious belief is a stretch into the absurd. ?urthermore, they claim a non-Christian itudent who has a problem with a Christ- an professor may hesitate to bring die is- ;ue to the attention of someone known to 3e a member of Faculty Friends. And the tlmcher: the advertisement connects the Jniversity with a particular religious affili ation, in this case Christianity. Let us consider that whether or not a Christian faculty member places his or ter name in an ad, that individual is still Christian. They as a person are just as ap- iroachable before the ad as after it. Only now the student may have more insight to that individual than otherwise would have been possible. Knowledge is power, it not? Furthermore, this between-the- aes innuendo that Faculty Friends mem- ers will discriminate against non-Chris- ians is insulting and demeaning. Chris- ans are no more likely to discriminate ban any non-religious or other-religious erson, and an advertisement does not [hange this fact. A double standard is at work here as veil. Consider A&M’s “Allies” program de igned to support gays, lesbians and bisex- lals. Program members — which include acuity — place an “ALLY” sign on their f )ors decorated with the well-known ho- osexual icon, the pink triangle. Could )t these identifying placards (which are onstantly present as opposed to appearing me day in the paper) pose problems for ersons who are morally opposed to ho- tosexual and bisexual lifestyles? Where is ie outcry? The argument that the Faculty Friends dvertisement incorporates the entire Uni- ersity with a particular religious behef is a retch into the absurd as well. If they were Faculty Asians or Faculty Native-Ameri- Ins, would this incorporate A&M with a single ethnicity? Hardly. | The Constitutional guarantee to free eech extends to each and every citizen, even faculty members with a particular re ligious behef. It would seem that here, at an institution of higher learning and a breeding ground for ideas and philoso phies, we could be tolerant of individuals choosing to exercise dieir basic rights. JAY ROBBINS Assistant opinion editor «*£ R eligion in the classroom is a topic that makes almost everyone flinch. No one wants to argue what or how people should believe, and our Constitution guarantees our freedom of religion. Few people think that teach ers have the right to preach to their stu dents, but subtler questions — like the propriety of the recent Faculty Friends advertisement in The Battalion — often fall into an ethical “gray area” which is difficult to resolve. Considering the teacher’s role in the learning process, the faculty members and administrators of any university should not connect their personal reli gious beliefs to their positions as profes sional educators. Every teacher’s primary function and purpose is to offer students the chance to gain knowledge. Whether they’re learning about primary colors, prime numbers or prima facie evidence, stu dents depend on the teacher to bridge the gap between minds and material. In order to receive their education, stu dents must cross that bridge thousands of times. In connecting their professional iden tity to their personal religion, educators infringe on their students’ educational opportunities because they automatically signify their professional non-objectivity in regard to certain beliefs and ideals. When a person advocates a religion, it is like a huge, Las Vegas-style, neon sign proclaiming: “This is what I believe ... Religion is different from any other be lief because it encompasses “faith,” which does not require the debatable proof provided by the logic tools which society uses to evaluate ethics, politics, economics and other philosophies. When an educator says, “I, Professor X of the Pharmacopoeia department, be lieve ...,” she sets up her role of teacher The faculty members and administrators of any university should not connect their per sonal religious beliefs to their positions as profes sional educators. within her personal role as a believer. All students who face that type of behavior have to pay the toll of evaluating their ideas, consciously or unconsciously, for elements which might offend religious sensibilities or clash with articles of faith. The open exchange of knowledge and ideas slows and falters under these stress es. If a teacher’s personal religion gets in his students’ way, then the teacher isn’t doing his job — he’s cutting off knowl edge, not accessing it. Teachers have every right to espouse any beliefs they choose, religious or oth erwise. Faculty Friends has every right to organize. But to quote William Safire, “Tne right to do something does not mean doing it is right.” The place of an educator’s religious activity is separate from her professional life. A teacher should also feel an ethical compunction to keep the bias of the be liever out of the educator’s view of his students. As a point of consideration for their students and profession, faculty and ad ministrators should not endanger the learning process by complicating it with their personal religious beliefs. The resolution of the gray areas of reli gion in education should always end with the students’ best interests as the top priority. Toni Canard Clay is a senior speech Jay Robbins is a senior English and political science communication major major Wedding bells ring amid tragedy Taking vows consists of more than getting married plans to live separate lives after 2 7 years of healthy personal life, and who can blame mm* \ ROY L. CLAY Columnist I t was the perfect day. The only thing missing was the sound of church bells — and, since the small country church didn’t have any, I guess it couldn’t be helped. What was most important was the fact that my family and my soon-to-be wife’s family, which I love as my own, were there to see that unforgettable day. My mother sat in the front row while my father stood be side me as I made my wedding vows. “What could be more ironic?” I asked myself later. “The two people who survived my rebellious teen-age years and prayed for me while I wasted life on the edge of self- destruction are here to watch this moment.” Even when I rejected social norms and mocked something so traditional as mar riage, their relationship was a small beacon in the whirlwind darkness that had become my life. In a way, that day was my formal proclamation that I accepted the values and the beliefs my family had instilled in me as a young boy. It was the perfect day. But things change. Last year, my mother called to tell me that she and my father had decided to separate. Within three months they filed for divorce and began to make plans to live separate lives after 2 7 years of marriage. The beacon had been extin guished. At the time, the reasons for their decision to divorce were less important than the fact that the safe refuge I had known all my life was gone. No more Christmas Eve nights lis tening to carols while Mom made hot soup and cold eggnog in the kitchen. No more summer nights sitting on the huge front porch talking with the most influential peo ple in my life. In essence, no more family.. At age 26, the news was devastating. A cornerstone on which I had built my life and had felt so much pride on my wedding day simply disappeared. However, with the help of my wife and a lot of prayer I got through the anguish and, even though that pain still surfaces occasionally, I have come to terms with it. But during this period of adjustment, one issue kept coming back into my mind time and time again: if this experience was so hard on someone who’s 26 and has the sta bility of a loving and caring spouse to lean on, how can children cope with the destruc tion of their main source of security? Many students here went through the di vorce of their parents when they were chil dren. It’s hard to imagine what it is like to lose the security of your home at such a young age. It has to be difficult on a girl or a boy to see the ugliness involved with many broken marriages. The things said by people who are angry, scared and hurt over the de struction of such a personal relationship can be ruthless and nasty. So many kids who witness these things don’t make the necessary adjustments for a healthy personal life, and who can blame them? Divorce is a hard thing to deal with at any age. The love and respect between a mother and a father is something a child can feel safe about when everything in the world seems too “big.” And although children ul timately make their own decisions in life, the presence of loving parents who care for them and each other has a positive effect on how they develop. I can attest to that per sonally. So why bring it up? In a way, I guess this is therapeutic. But there’s another more cru cial reason. Most students at this university are just beginning life independent of their parents. A few have already made the decision to get married, while others aren’t ready to take that step yet. Either way, this is the time when most people consider what they want out of their relationships and marriage. So, think about this: when the time comes, take your choice for a spouse very seriously, because many people will depend on your marriage — far more than you could ever realize — and the ones who will depend on it most are your children. The se curity you and your spouse create in your home is crucial to the future of your chil dren. Nurture your marriage. Your children, born or unborn, rely on your efforts. We talk a lot about how important it is to love our kids these days. Perhaps that all be gins by remembering to love and cherish each other. Roy L. Clay is a senior history major Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the editorial board. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, administration, faculty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons and letters express the opinions of the authors. The Battalion encourages letters to the editor and will print as many as space allows. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author's name, class, and phone number. We reserve the right to edit letters and guest columns for length, style, and accuracy. Contact the opinion editor for information on submitting guest columns. Address letters to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald Mail stop 1111 Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 Fax: (409) 845-2647 Winder blows it with shopping stereotypes This is in response to Dave Winder’s “Shopping styles differ vastly along great gender divide” on March 22. In his column, Winder made women out to be dependent, impractical, shop-aholics. Winder also stated that women “like those little plastic cards ... That way they never translate purchase dol lars into real dollars.” This is exactly the way our very own male-dominated government has been running their budget for years. Also, “Shop till you drop” is not my national anthem, as Winder says. Last time I checked, it was the “Star Spangled Banner.” Winder perpetuated negative gender stereotypes by generalizing a few of his expe riences to be true for all people. I realize that everyone is entitled to their own opinion; I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but not in the wasting of space. I can’t believe that this unintelligent and unresearched col umn, to say the least, was actually printed. In the future, I suggest that The Battalion print college-level articles or teach Dave Winder how to write one. Aimee Llewellyn Class of ‘96 Kelly Dodd Class of ‘96 Gasoline tax would fund new technology Everyone knows that the world’s oil sup ply is quickly but surely being depleted. So what are we doing about this inevitable shortfall? Nothing. Well, I think it’s time to do something before it’s too late — if it’s not already. Congress should impose a yearly 1 0 percent increase, above inflation, on the price of gasoline. This will discourage driving cars at the present rate, and at the same time final ly provide real incentive for exploring more environment-friendly, efficient transportation alternatives. We could expand the intercity bus systems, increase carpooling and riding bikes when possible, and develop more effi cient public transportation modes. And per haps we should take another look at high speed rail, privately funded or not. This 10 percent increase in the price of gasoline would encourage all of these improvements. We must follow Europe’s lead into the 21st century — and that means mass trans portation. After all, we Americans take our gasoline for granted. It costs around $5 per gallon for gas in Europe. A 10 percent hike is nothing compared to that. The United States is supposed to be a leader to the world. So why are we not willing to do our part to avoid the future oil crisis? Something must be done. We can either make a small sacrifice now, or pay heavily later. Zach Estes Class of ‘96 ‘Gall Block’ prevents phony phone charges Please read your phone bill very careful ly Aggies! Today when I opened my phone bill I got quite a surprise. There was an ex tra page attached to my phone bill for third-party calls. These third-party calls were made during the past month to Mar shall, California, and San Bernardino, Cali fornia. The total bill for these calls was ap proximately $40. Because I don’t know anyone in California and have not made any third-party calls in the last month, I was positive these calls were not made by me. I called the AT&T number listed on my bill and they assured me that I did not have to pay for these calls and a bill would be sent to the number from which they originated. And just for grins, I called the number of the person charging these calls to my home to let them know that I was on to them and that they would be receiving a bill for their calls to California. I have contacted GTE and they are cur rently in the process of placing “Call Block” on my phone. No one will ever again be able to charge calls to my home from an other location. Call Block is a free service in Texas. Of course, the down side to Call Block is that I won’t be able to charge calls to my home if I am somewhere else either. I guess that is the price you pay when you live in a dishonest society. Debby Hall Class of ‘94 Loyal Aggie helps at vacation breakdown On Saturday, March 19, coming home from Spring Break, we were graciously re minded of the true Aggie Spirit. After a week of vacation, my fiance and I were dri ving through San Marcos on our way here when the alternator went out on our car, leaving us on the outskirts of town. Not even five minutes went by before a car with the same Aggie sticker on it as ours stopped to help us. Eric, a civil engineering major from Arlington, rearranged his luggage to make room for ours and took us back into town to call a tow-truck. But he didn’t stop there! He followed us, and the truck to a repair shop and then drove us home the two hours to College Station. On top of it all, he wouldn’t accept a dime — nothing at all for his time and trouble. So this is for you Eric, thank you very much. If it weren’t for you, it would have been quite a hitch-hike. Thanks again! DJ Schaper Class of ‘96 Hillary Schatz Class of ‘96 Parking predicament To those of you who plan to park in the Albertson’s parking lot, even for a few min utes to run on campus: You will be towed! There is a woman who sits in a pickup truck, and when you park there, she will radio the wrecker driver that is parked around the corner to come and tow your car. I have seen it happen several times. Just plan on walking a little bit further, and park down past the Cowhop along the street. Gerry Godzwon Class of ‘94