Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 25, 1995)
Tuesday • April 25, 1995 «§sia O pinion The Battalion • Page 11 Activist overreact on Earth Day A nother Earth Day has come and gone. A day of earth awareness, envi ronmental activism and hun dreds of conservation and ecolo gy projects is now a memory to millions of the participants of Elarth Day ’95. What has passed is another day of liberal, environmental indoctrination — a time when movies stars, politicians and earth activists preach about the ills of the earth and how Re publicans, corporate America and the free enterprise system are the culprits of global downfall. Many “Earth Dayers” were urged to carpool, boycott buses or bike and rollerblade to get where they needed to go. Ironi cally, these same people who were discouraged or discourag ing the use of cars and buses will undoubtedly hop in their cars or onto the bus Monday morning on their way to work or school. How quickly they will have forgotten their actions of only a few days before. Still, others may have participated in conservation pro jects such as recycling or highway trash pickups. These peo ple can probably be found any day of the week throwing away their soda cans or littering on some deserted highway. What these people have in common is not that they partic ipated in Earth Day, but that they were easily persuaded by Earth Day activist into doing something in the name of the environment. Many people, in an attempt to make them selves feel good for doing something for the earth, may have participated in Earth Day activities without actually think ing about its meaning. While I certainly believe we must conserve and be con scious of our actions with the earth, I feel that Earth Day has become a stage for environmental extremist groups to voice their lopsided views on how we and the earth relate. It’s un fortunate that many citizens blindly follow these groups without understanding what they really stand for. Granted, one purpose of Earth Day is to offer awareness of the Earth and the need to conserve its resources. However, the message being sent by many Earth Day activists is that the Earth is under a massive assault, and that we may only have a few decades left if changes are not made immediately. Environmental groups constantly bombard us with sta tistics of earthly doom. Yet these groups never show us the hundreds of statistics that show that the earth is in many cases better off than a hundred years ago. Nor do they ever tell us when their statistics are proven incorrect or over-exaggerated. Contrary to what many environmental groups would have you believe, the Earth belongs to us; we do not belong to the Earth. It is an inherent right of humans to use the Earth and its resources for our own personal benefit, but it is also our duty as humans to take care of it. Mindless uses of resources and failure to replenish what we use can cause strains on the environment. Even though these environmental groups would have us believe that the majority of corporate America abuses the Earth’s resources for their own gain, this is not the case. Businesses realize how important conservation is to their futures. We must also remember that the Earth has survived for millions of years — it is a very resilient creation. Another popular Earth Day event was that of bashing Re publican’s as perpetrators of environmental downfall, citing that Republicans are threatening 25 years of environmental legislation. What these people fail to understand is that Re publicans are not against the environment; rather they are against the excessive regulations that have been forced upon businesses and individuals. We all realize that there are businesses and individuals who do not give a damn about the environment or those who respect it and use it properly. It is this group that needs to be dealt with individually. We only hurt those businesses and individuals who are environmentally conscious by over-regu lating them ,so as to catch the group of environmental trou blemakers. It’s long overdue that we start putting humans before the environment. We must also see how our everyday actions can possibly affect the environment. If we feel strongly that things we are doing may be hazardous to the environment, then we must correct our actions or change our habits. We should not, how ever, ignore our actions or put-off change only to “take ac tion” at the urging of some activist group every April for Earth Day. More importantly, we must understand that the Earth is ours, and that it is our right and responsibility to use it and take care of it — not prevent its use at the de mands of some environmental wackos. Zach Hall is a sophomore mechanical engineering major Ranch replaces “X” in our generation I know that our generation has been given the name “Generation X,” but I would like to offer the label- geniuses perhaps a more fit ting moniker. There has been much public dissent over the label “Generation X,” because many feel that it is a nega tive stereotype. We aren’t all jobless, MTV-watching, flan nel-wearing, Nirvana/Pearl Jam-listening rebels without ambition. In fact, very few of us are — only the ones that get the most media attention. But what are these words “we” and “us?” These words imply that we share a common characteristic or pattern of behavior. And in terms of how “Generation X” has been defined, we do not all share these characteristics. But there is one pattern of behavior that bonds us — our love for a certain condiment. Contact “Time,” “Newsweek” and the rest of the media; “we” have been renamed. Let’s put the tired label “Generation X” to rest. We will now be referred to as Generation Ranch. Allow me to explain. For starters, it’s not just for salads anymore. For many. Ranch is a way of life — a life that I was quickly inducted into upon arrival to college. I was a stranger in a strange land, roaming the country-side in search of something to remind me of home. In stead I witnessed someone pouring a bowlful of this creamy white substance on his baked potato. Hearing others joke, “Would you like some potato with your “Ranch.” I saw others dipping their sandwich es in this Ranch. I saw people dunking their fried mushrooms in Ranch. F*izza rolls constituted tubs of the stuff. Some eating establishments, realizing that its customers go through Ranch at such a pace, charged S.75 for ex tra cupfuls. I’ve seen people dip apples, cookies and their fingers in Ranch. Ranch is bipartisan, non-discriminating and is good for the local economy. Some have even theorized that Ranch was created by the government in an attempt to keep the masses complacent and amiable. And by now, you are probably thinking, “This guy has to tally lost his mind.” But seriously, “Ranch,” which is basically seasoned fat, is a metaphor for all of the unhealthy things college students eat. Do I hear a few groans from the audience? Yeah, I know, “Who am I to lecture you about what you put into your body?” But one thing that I have learned from college is that eating habits are important as finals arrive. It doesn’t make sense to fill ourselves with junk food when we need to be sharp for upcoming tests. “You are what you eat,” applies to college students too. Our eating habits just aren’t too healthy. But it really isn’t our fault. College students are nocturnal creatures. I guess the A&M Administration has failed to realize this. Their solution for hun gry college students, after the Hullabaloo’s and Pie Are Squared’s are closed, is the almighty vending machine. This is why vending machines punctuate the campus. Convenience can sometimes be a great downfall for us. We know that we shouldn’t eat junk food, but as students, we don’t always have the time it takes to prepare healthy food. When the munchies strike, we find ourselves being drawn to the alluring lights of vending machines. True, students are being catered to, but this isn’t always a good thing — certainly not in terms of healthy eating habits. When you start to rationalize that peanut- butter crackers, a bag of pork rinds and an orange soda is a balanced meal, you have a problem. The all too familiar scenario: It’s late at night, and you are on cam pus studying for a test. You have ig nored the empty feeling in your stom ach for hours. But don’t worry, because you know that you can satisfy that hunger. You’ve seen the commercials; all you need is a can dy bar. Something to fill you up and give you the energy to “keep on keepin’ on.” But don’t stop there. Get you something to wash it down — your favorite cola. After the initial sugar high and caffeine shock wear off, you aren’t in any state — physical or mental — to study. All too often, instead of eating brain food such as carrots or cel ery for snacks, students will opt for having a pizza delivered. Or maybe some will run across University Drive to fast-food heaven. Burgers, fries and pizza are loaded with calories and fat, and they leave students feeling like they just ate Thanksgiving din ner. In order to digest all of this food, the blood rushes to the stomach, leaving you feeling tired. It’s just another strike against you when you are running on inferior fuel. Of course there are a few of us that would just dip the celery and carrots into ... well. Ranch. Kyle Littlefield is a senior journalism major Kyle Littlefield Columnist The Battalion Established in 1893 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. Contact the opinion editor for information on submitting guest columns. Mark Smith Editor in chief Jay Robbins Heather Winch Senior Managing Managing editor editor for Business Sterling Hayman Opinion editor Erin Hill Asst, opinion editor Editorial Judgmental Justice The court should not have focused on the parent's sexual orientation in a custody battle. A parent’s sexual orientation should not be used as a deciding factor in a custody battle. A case recently decided in the Vir ginia Supreme Court denied a lesbian custody of her son, and gave the child to his grandmother. The court found that she was a poor mother and that her live-in relationship could bring the child “social condemnation.” It has not been proven that a moth er’s homosexuality is harmful to a child. Without such proof, it cannot just be assumed that this arrangement is detrimental to a child’s well-being or development. Social condemnation — a notably vague phrase — might affect almost any child, regardless of the parents’ sexual orientation. A pervasive, negative stereotype sur rounds homosexuals. To ease that prej udice, the courts must not show prefer ence to one party over another solely on the basis of sexual orientation. On the other hand, evidence was in troduced to claim the mother in this case had a history of moving with great frequency, that she relied on others for support and that she had trouble main taining control over her temper. The truth of these allegations should have been the basis for judgement. The mother’s sexual orientation was singled out by her lawyer and ele ments of the press as the prime factor behind the court’s decision. This fact alone is very disturbing. The central issue in any custody hearing should be the welfare of the child in question. In this case, however, an element of the mother’s life is being put on trial. She could have just as easily been a het erosexual who dyed her hair purple — the resulting “social condemnation” might have caused her to lose custody. The court wrote that a situation such as this “may impose a burden on the child by reason of ‘social condemnation’ at tached to such an arrangement.” The burden of social condemnation against this child was placed on him by the Virginia Supreme Court. M A11 CA 1 - 1 - Conservatives dish it out, but can't 'take' it As I read David Taylor’s April 20 col umn, I just had one question for him. Why can conservatives dish it out but have such trouble taking it? He complains about Donna Shalala’s comments on the Vietnam police action, but this comes from a member of a group (conservatives) who has defined themselves through harsh criticism. The group who gave us “Barney Fag” “pot-smoking, draft-dodging, ...”, and“feminazis” now is complaining be cause she said that the best and bright est were not sent to Vietnam. Those who are complaining forgot one thing, she was really referring directly to two of the many conservatives who did not feel the need to go to Vietnam and risk their lives, Phil Gramm and Dan Quayle. Dale Christensen Staff, Chemistry Opinion page provides needed campus forum Imagine my surprise when I opened up The Battalion on April 20 and found not one, but two pages in the Opinion section! I was ecstatic, since the only reason I pick up the Battalion is to peruse the Opinion page. Simply put, I like to read what other people think, even when I disagree with them — and I seem to disagree with a lot of people around here. Besides, its nice to see evidence that people are thinking. Now, if you could just move the Opin ion page to its rightful place — in front of the Sports section ... <John Lane Graduate Student Battalion writers use articles to boost egos I’ve kept it to myself long enough, but after another article today, I decid ed to voice my opinions. Many of the writers on The Battalion staff are little more than hypocrites, ^pouting useless garbage to inflate their egos. Example one: The column a few days back concerning Selena and Howard Stem’s remarks. Here the author was telling us that Howard Stern should not have made the remarks he did, because no one was forcing him to listen to Selena, and that he could easily just change the channel. While I do not in any way approve of Stern’s comments, who here is being forced to listen to Howard Stem? If you don’t like Howard Stem, don’t listen. I don’t, and I don’t. Example two: The editorial a few days ago concerning how unfair it was to have on-campus residents pay for ca ble whether they want it or not. The au thor stated that almost 15 percent of the students didn’t want it. Simple math dictates that almost 85 percent of the students do. I’m sure many of you are saying that I just shouldn’t read The Batt. Well, since I paid for it, I’m going to read it, and just wade through the bla tant liberalism to get the comics, the coupons and the decent A&M sports coverage, which is much better than the Houston papers. Craig L. Bickley Class of ’98 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 for length, style, clarity and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald. A valid student I.D. is required. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call Fax: (409) 845-2647 013 Reed McDonald E-mail: Texas A&M University Batt@tamvm1.tamu.edu College Station, TX 77843-1111