The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, April 15, 1994, Image 11

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Opinion
Friday, April 15, 1994
The Battalion
Page 11
•rclioni Mnu
sor of Enjliii
' about tit
tion of tli f
otectionof
lent to tlie
ent, the at-
197411,1,
to Univer-
would ap.
; al truth to
iition." He
)n were all
sical trutli,
by Friends
opose thai
ut theaca-
I was one
^ from an
t Stanford
restricted
rents, Pro-
w listed in
wed from
A. Mclntyrt
or of Physio
nve heen ad-
n
feminist
re.
abortion
organiza-
;e people
Anthony;
Margaret
abortion,
hat abor-
oves and
Id not be
d by the
and en-
ony with
m, presi-
aril 18 at
ora Grasso
'ass of '98
;ion
money
Africa?
large of
iving so
e earth.
> add to
aope of
? Abor-
n is ac-
cannot
out tak-
; about
: closer
o drool
en to a
rol. Or
have a
ircb Este
ss of ‘98
ed'
Week"
id in a
totally
rost of
he au-
HZerhy
;of‘98
PRO ■gf CON
Should employees have the right to
mandate drug testing?
MICHAEL
LANDAUER
Columnist
M y friend exercised his right to
privacy in a big way. No one
knew how much pot he
smoked, but he could afford to be so
private. He had no job and didn’t go
to school. Pot was all he did — for a
while, anyway.
I talked to him the other day and
found out he had quit the habit that
had taken over his life. The reason: the
company he was going to work for
had mandatory drug testing.
I’ve never breathed a bigger sigh of
relief. I can’t help being in favor of
giving companies the right to test em
ployees for drugs. Some company’s
drug policy gave me my friend back.
When someone gets a job, it means
they are taking responsibility for their
life. Certain things are expected of
them. If a company expects its em
ployees to be drug-free, that is just
one more responsibility for that em
ployee and one less fear for friends
and family members of drug addicts.
Employers also have every right to
expect their employees to remain drug
free. It is reasonable for an employer
to say that a drug user may not be as
responsible as a person who does not
use illegal drugs. And what employer
does not look for responsible employ
ees? It is a core requirement for any
job and being chosen for a job is a
privilege, not a right.
The government must let compa
nies keep this selection process. Is the
government going to say that drugs
are illegal, but companies can’t dis
criminate against criminals? That’s
hypocritical, absurd and, fortunately,
very unlikely. ‘ ,
) Employers have every
right to expect employees
to remain drug free. It is
reasonable for an em
ployer to say a drug user
may not be as responsi
ble as a person who does
not use illegal drugs.
The government asks us to give up
certain privileges in order to gain pro
tections. For example, letting cars dri
ve 75 mph on the freeways caused
more accidents in America than a 5 5
mph speed limit did. So the govern
ment made drivers give up the conve
nience of excessive speed in order to
make driving a little more safe.
Drugs are illegal for the same rea
son. Drugs can destroy people like
they were starting to destroy my
friend. There are very good reasons
why we teach children to “Just say
no’ to drugs, and standing against
drugs requires a consistent message.
When we tell kids they shouldn’t do
drugs, they should also be told if they
do, they may not find jobs.
Privacy is just an abstract right, but
jobs and responsibility are what make
people productive members of society.
If someone’s philosophical right is so
important to them that it keeps them
from getting a job, I guess I offer my
compliments to their resolve - and I’ll
be sure to drop an extra dollar in their
cup when I see them begging on the
streets.
Michael Londauer is a freshman journalism
major
FRANK
STANFORD
Columnist
T here are many arguments for le
galizing “drugs” in America,
some I agree with and some I
don’t. But since many drugs are illegal
at this time, we all have to decide how
to deal with them.
If we are big-time junkies, our main
problem is finding more drugs. If we
are anti-drug activists or teetotalers, our
main concern is to either stay away
from all drug activity or users, or hunt
them down and see that justice is done.
If employers had only these two types
of individuals to hire, the choice for
employment would be quite easy. But
it’s not.
Just as there is such a
thing as responsible
drinking, responsible
drug use exists as well.
Allowing an employee to
be tested not only violates
his privacy, but also is
not relevant to his work.
In addition to these two extremes,
millions of Americans — a large number
of whom are college students — engage
in what could be called “occasional
drug use.” These are people who use
marijuana, cocaine, LSD and a number
of other “designer drugs” in a purely
recreational capacity, and in a frequency
similar or identical to those who just
drink beer. These people are in the work
force as well — and just like alcohol
drinkers — must monitor their con
sumption such that it doesn’t affect their
working lives adversely. Just as there is
such a thing as responsible drinking, re
sponsible drug use exists as well.
If a university official drinks alcohol
strictly on personal time with friends
and gets tipsy or drunk, it is no one
else’s business. We would all expect that
on Monday there would be no problem
with alcohol at work, and if there was,
the person would be fired or sent to AA
or both. If the University could test for
alcohol usage (merely a legal drug),
would it be in their interest to know of
a beer and barbecue binge? No.
The primary issue regarding manda
tory drug testing is that of privacy and
relevance. Allowing an employee to be
tested not only violates his privacy, but
also is not relevant to his work. What if
die drug at the barbecue had been mari
juana instead of beer? Would die testing
be any more relevant given the individ
ual still did a good job? Would it matter
that pot is illegal? If the company is in
terested in an employee’s moral or legal
leanings away from employment, then
shouldn’t workers be tested for wife or
child abusing, infidelity, sexual promis
cuity and religious practices as well?
I completely understand the factory
owner who wants to insure his workers
don’t cut their turns off, or someone
else’s, but a simple skills check by a
foreman would be adequate. If someone
is legitimately suspect, a drug test
and/or a dismissal might be in order,
but only at this point.
Although mandatory drug testing is
currendy legal and is likely to remain so,
it is a violation of personal privacy and
is based on prejudicial attitudes towards
certain drugs.
Frank Stanford is a graduate philosophy major
A/o^> bt-f<=re.X^t s1
tit SOOLC.W
iould ge-'b a
jborirQ.fyi, bfa ■
The Little comedian that couldn’t
Stand-up’s overly abusive humor fails to get laughs
Last weekend I visited my home town of
Austin in order to run the Capitol 1 0,000, a
ten kilometer race that is routed through
some of the main streets in town. Although
the race started at 8 o’clock Sunday morning,
I decided, as any good college student would,
to go out Saturday night. This led me to Sixth
Street, and eventually to one of its comedy
clubs. My friends and I haggled with the
bouncers to let us in at a lower rate. Later we
realized that it wasn’t low enough.
The first couple of comedians were
pretty funny. One guy explained that his
father was convinced that by leaving the
front door open during the summer, he
was effectively air conditioning the state. It
wasn’t that funny until he imitated a
weather man forecasting that “a cold front
covering the entire state of Texas is coming
in from Bob’s house.”
My friends and I sat patiently through
several acts, waiting for the “phenomenal”
(according to the bouncers) headliner,
Dave Little.
When he finally came on, several people
had left already, probably thinking the co
median before him was the main act. Little
entered the stage with an attitude. And it
wasn’t an especially positive one. His act
was nothing really unusual until about
halfway through. That’s when an elderly
woman walked into the small club.
She was wearing a strange hat and was
carrying a large shoulder bag and what
looked Tike a cross between a ukelele and a
guitar. Her appearance was so unusual it
seemed perfectly normal for Little to com
ment on it. Unfortunately, he went too far.
It all started with an innocent question
about why she was carrying the instru-
LVNN
BOOMER
Columnist
ment. She said she was a yodeler from a
small town outside of Austin who had
come for the evening, presumably to per
form — barring the unlikely event that he
had hired her to be ridiculed. So Dave
asked for a demonstration. Her yodeling
was good, and my sister said she had actu
ally heard of this woman.
This apparently didn’t matter to Little,
however. He proceeded to make obnoxious
“yodeling” sounds at various intervals for
the next 20 minutes. The woman tried to
laugh and play along even as she was being
ridiculed. She told him her name was Lucky
Jewel, and he had a heyday with it.
“We’d be lucky if you left!” he an
nounced.
Only the drunk people thought he was
funny, and I wasn’t lucky enough to bg one
of them.
Mr. Little-laughter then proceeded to
bring down the house with his “nice tits”
comment as a young lady passed by on her
way back from the restroom. If that wasn’t
enough, he insulted the waitress more times
than I could keep track.
Poor Lucky faired the worst. Little spent
more than 1 5 consecutive minutes making
fun of her — I know; I timed it. When he
couldn’t get any more drunken laughs from
comments about her dress or by sarcastically
yodeling, he switched to questioning her
sanity. He started singing a song about be
ing schizophrenic and inserted a little com
mentary about her into it.
When people started being less respon
sive, he changed to blaming Lucky Jewel for
“ruining” his act. The only person I saw
messing up his act was the comedian him
self. Even when Jewel moved into the back
of the room to avoid the limelight, Little
continued his harassment. It wasn’t until af
ter she left that he finally let off.
Meanwhile, those around me were
wondering what had happened to his pre
pared material. Once the old lady was
gone, the headlining act deteriorated more
to using material from previous acts. When
that didn’t work, he actually called to an
other comedian to help him on stage.
The funniest part of his entire routine
came when Little looked at the audience
and announced, “These are my people!”
and my friend Maureen responded, “Let
your people go!”
When we finally escaped from the hell of
his comedic inability, everyone in my group
was flabbergasted. Is it acceptable to have to
pay money to listen to someone insult
women and the elderly? I realize that a lot
of modern “comedians” use sexual or other
potentially offensive jokes as part of their
acts, but I hadn’t heard of the new trend of
actually insulting the people who have paid
to listen to you. Maybe next time I’ll just
skip the comedy scene and listen to some
music instead.
Lynn Booher is a sophomore English and psychology major
%mi mrs wenD...
NSS;
VKKMb..., MH.
Editorials appearing in The Battal
ion reflect the views of the editorial
board and are not necessarily the
opinions of other Battalion staff
members, the A&M student body,
regents, administration, faculty or
staff.
Columns, guest columns, car
toons and letters express the opin
ions 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 au
thor's name, class, and phone num
ber.
We reserve the right to edit letters
and guest columns for length, style,
and accuracy.
Contact the opinion editor for in
formation 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
What ‘Kiss-Off’ means
The “Kiss-Off at Kyle” is an event planned to
raise money for the United Way by trying to set
a record for the “Most People Kissing at the
same time.” It could either be a passionate kiss
or just a kiss to show your affection. As the fly
er states, all Ags are welcome to bring their
honey, their parents, their children or their pets
to kiss.
All proceeds go to the United Way, which
supports community organizations like the
Boys and Girls club, etc. As more than 40,000
Ags make the B-CS community their home, it
would be a good way of giving back to the
community.
A note about The Battalion’s story on the
Kiss-Off: student organizations spend a lot of
time preparing for their events. They contact
the Batt to get some good/positive publicity
out of it. It is disturbing to see the main focus
of a story/event missed and the views of a few
highlighted, to make it controversial.
Ranjan Natarajan
Class of ‘94
Chair Texas A&M United Way Campaign for Students
Fish Gamp, T-Gamp
far from brainwashing
Brainwashing?! How dare Frank Stanford ac
cuse Fish Camp and T-camp counselors of
brainwashing incoming students into the “Ag
gie” way of hfe! Some people are not like Stan
ford, who obviously came to this university to
get a degree; some people (like myself) came
to this great university because we wanted to
be Aggies, experience the numerous and won
derful traditions, and honestly feel proud about
saying where we attended college. Is it not nat
ural to want to feel your school is better than
others? Is it wrong to have friendly rivalries
with other schools? There is no greater student
body in this country than the one here. Of
course there are some people who give this
university a bad name (those few “over-Corps-
ed” Corps members, people who steal, a few
members of the Board of Regents, the Battalion
“editorial” board), but that is no reason to
condemn us all as thieves and bars. Excuse me
if I hold onto the Aggie Code of Honor. I feel it
is a good code to live by. I guess that makes me
“mindless” in your blurred eyes, but at least I
can say I have morals and, more importantly,
honor.
Michael S. Mason
Class of ‘94
Columnist off mark on
prison budget criticism
This letter is in response to Jenny Magee’s
column titled, “State budget ranks criminals
over law-abiding citizens.”
My father is one of the “senior managers
living in free housing maintained by the white
coated inmate servants who cook, clean, and
babysit.” It’s not quite that glamorous. Our
house is no doubt one of the oldest in
Huntsville. It probably isn’t relevant to most
taxpayers unless they were paying taxes in the
1920s when it was built. Are you jealous yet?
If Magee is so concerned about inmates sit
ting around all day watching soap operas, why
does it bother her so much that a few of them
clean the executives’ houses five days a week?
All they cue doing is maintaining the state’s in
vestments so that people won’t complain when
new houses must be built. And yes, free hous
ing is necessary. My father doesn’t earn as
much as he could in the private sector; there
fore, if we want anyone with any experience,
we have two options: let them live in old hous
es for free, or pay them more money!
I firmly believe they should all get raises for
the work they do. My father, for instance, trav
els to Austin weekly for meetings. (That’s what
all those vehicles are for! Imagine that! Maybe
the reason they sit around unused most of the
time is that they don’t want people using them
for personal trips.) Another part of his job is to
give the orders for every execution in Texas. If
that’s not a high-pressure job, I don’t know
what is. And it should be noted that not every
prison official agrees with the Ruiz judgment —
I sure wouldn’t agree to something that bene
fits criminals and makes my job three times as
hard.
So how do you explain tins to a little kid,
Magee asks in her column. Well, perhaps my
ten-year old sister could explain it to her.
Mika Scott Spears
Class of ‘94
Vote and show student
voice in community
This letter is concerning some recent events
within our community that students need to be
aware of. I am running for College Station City
Council. However, this letter is not a political
advertisement. I wanted to spread the news
about how some of our citizens view a student
being involved in their community.
First, one of my opponents called me and
told me I should drop out of the race because
“I really don’t have a chance to win.” He con
tinued by explaining to me that students
“aren’t organized and don’t really care about
city government.” At this time I was somewhat
livid, and I began to patronize him and thank
him for his political insight. He sang the same
song about our apathy.
It gets better! A lady wanted to confirm that
I was the one that was running for city council.
She then proceeded with an editorial about
how this was “her city and the students only
live here for a short time.” She said, “you need
to be involved in your hometown and let us be
involved in ours.” I was mad for obvious rea
sons. I was amused because a strong majority
of citizens in “her city” are under 25 and be
cause she doesn’t realize the impact we have.
For the most part, citizens have been re
ceptive to the idea of a student running for
local office. However, there are many more
people that think that it’s none of our busi
ness. It is definitely our business, and we
need to show that we care. Last year only 60
students voted on campus. Hiss! The elec
tion is on May 7. If you live on campus you
can vote in the MSC. If you live off-campus
give me a call and find out where to vote.
Early voting is from April 18 until May 3.
During this time, you can only vote at City
Hall, next to Chili’s on Texas Avenue. Re
gardless of who you vote for, please vote.
We need to send a message that we care.
Jimmy Stathatos
Class of ‘94