Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (June 28, 1995)
ces back, ardinals^ — D ° u g Drabp w 'th list* I ome for the li: ; v| ,(1,n 8 'he Hou*« Lou 's Cardin; 15 e up five hitsar : on a balk — i n 11 hrst victory i nil strodome. in, 1 l1 B° tagged hK ' ' en earned rum- iston. (0-8) lost in J ng placed on tk r this monthb..:. stamina. He ga,. rst inning. r* I IsT IO IsT The Battalion • Page 5 Wednesday • June 28, 1995 Humans worship ‘golden calf’ of technology higuez past Angli ’) — Mickey ice and IvanUggp bits, including;’ drove in thegr-P fth, as the Tee f California Angei l be Rangers pule c with the Angelsr | and 12th home omer game offe of bis career, ob Tewksbury!(. ving up five r® >r the first thret ■d two more hit e. Dennis Cool iree inningsfo: ed with a two-® id. Frank Stanford Columnist I t is an obvious sociological fact that human beings have a ten dency to worship. And we’ll worship just about anything. God, Allah, living creatures, Je sus, wisdom and Satan are the fa vorites of those who believe and practice religions based on partic ular ancient scripture. But as the venerations of man expand toward us from history, we find that only technology has attached itself to every man and will follow wherever he goes. Whether you believe in the evolutionary histo ry of man or the Judeo-Christian version makes no difference. Undisputably, man makes sacred what he might otherwise consider ordinary, in cluding the concept of time or even disk drives. These sacred objects are almost impossible to live without when their conception becomes a commonplace item. Perhaps the most famous biblical example of this brand of worship is the story of the golden calf. A long time ago, a bunch of people got to gether, melted down their gold trinkets and made a god. There was nothing particularly special about calves to those people. Nor was there value in gold other than as a medium of exchange and its glittery appearance. But when one was fashioned out of the other, special meaning became at tached, and bad things happened to those who worshiped it. Other examples of worshiped objects and ideas throughout the history of man in clude the sun, the moon, rain, the sea, astrology, sorcery, cats, ravens, killer whales, fire, volcanoes, stat ues of anything you can imagine and even people — “special” people who, I might add, took a tinkle just like the rest of us. Everything I have mentioned and plenty of other things as well, have all, at one time or another, been bowed to by people. Men have died in battle for them, and women have been sacrificed to them. Societies have even been founded upon them. But by far the most worshiped aspect of hu manity — that no man literally bows individually, but as a species — is technology. The god of technology touches every one of us on earth. Since the invention of the simplest sun dial, chronological contraptions have ruled our very lives. It’s hard to imagine that a timepiece might have such power. However, if every clock on the face of the earth were removed and people were reduced to eye-balling the sun to estimate time, anarchy surely would follow. At one time, man survived just fine without clocks. After all, a clock is just some melted gold, fashioned into a tiny machine and then sold — a machine we’ve worshiped since its conception. An economy as complex and diverse as ours could never survive without clocks. Stock exchanges would crumble almost imme diately, as the closing of the day’s business could never be agreed upon. Banks, employment, factories, shipments, air line flights, classes and everything that uses a schedule or is affected by them would become chaotic. Clocks are not going to disappear from the earth, and it’s almost impossible to imagine life without them. However, at the rate technology is progressing, we undoubtedly are in an era before what may be the invention of the next golden calf or the next clock. The god of technology touches every one of us. Since the invention of the simplest sundial, chronological con traptions have ruled our very lives. In just the last few years, technology has surged into an era of mind-boggling possibilities. In the span of my short life, slide rules have given way to calculators. TRS-80 computers with “amazing” 4K memory have given way to giant computer systems and the Internet. Word processor programs and portable laptop computers have made the use of typewriters al most obsolete. But computers are just plastic, you know. Plas tic, glass and assorted metals — including gold. They are melted, then shaped and finally sold to worshippers. And we definitely worship them. The world’s major stock exchanges function only with the use of computers. Banks, employment, factories, shipments, air line flights, many classes, most business opera tions and all governmental operations owe their daily existence to computers. What if every computer on the face of the earth were removed? Could we survive? Of course we could. Our parents and even their recent ancestors, primitive man, survived just fine without computers ... and even clocks. We would just go back to card catalogues, type writers and slide rules. However, just like life without clocks might seem utterly unimaginable to us, life without computer technology will seem equally impossible to future generations. In this day and age, technology is much more interesting and exciting than an inanimate gold en calf. We can fly to the moon and even engineer or alter new forms of life. But the theme of the well-known biblical story, whether historically correct or not, still holds true with today’s technological golden calf. Special meaning should be given to impor tant non-material entities — whatever those are for you — not objects fashioned from plastic, glass or gold. Because bad things will eventually happen to those who worship them. Frank Stanford is a philosophy graduate student ?CH UND STUDY is seeking nfected cuts, ed wounds for ch study of an itibiotic cream, ints will receive cation, study ;dical exams id to qualified 3 enroll and lis study, earch -1417 yiatinee; efore 6 pm. —Ti nd Operated! ), ‘80, ‘91 Valley Since 1S21 >G ) 3:15 5:15 7:20 SS OREVER •P&13 5 4:15 7:25 9:45 RT ‘R 00 4:30 8:05 ? 35 3:55 7:15 9:40 - F MADISON'Pfr- >0 4:05 7:10 9:50 LBV STEREO $329 $389 $396 $478 :a$l70' $1??; Tratfe ilupe St. 78705 -2696 FAIiON I i i c. Battalion Established in 1893 Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the editorials 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. Awkward Award G. Gordon Liddy should not have received a free-speech award. Last Saturday, radio talk are neither funny nor appro- show host and convicted felon priate, and they definitely do G. Gordon Liddy received a not merit an award, free-speech award at the Na- Particularly unfortunate tional Association of Radio about Liddy’s selection is the Talk Show Hosts convention fact that in the past the asso- in Houston. ciation has given the award to Irony abounded as Liddy, deserving people. They in- who thumbed his nose at the elude former New York Gov. law during the Watergate Mario Cuomo and Salman scandal, was honored for Rushdie, who risked his life championing one of our coun- by expressing his ideas, try’s most cherished rights. Several members of the as- Liddy, whose talk show is sociation were so outraged by heard on more than 200 sta- this year’s choice that they tions nationwide, did not de- boycotted the ceremony, serve this award. Apparently, the association In choosing Liddy, the as- chose Liddy in order to bring sociation has demonstrated a attention to itself. It succeeded, lack of understanding of the but in doing so, it reduced its difference between the con- stature and the stature of the structive use of free speech award to Liddy’s low level, and the destructiveness of ir- Freedom of speech is a responsible, reckless speech. precious thing. Even today, Liddy’s talk show has cov- people around the world die ered topics such as how to fighting for this freedom, and construct a bomb, the best billions of people cannot way to shoot federal law en- speak freely without fear of forcement officers, and target punishment, practice with pictures of Pres- It is a shame that Liddy ident and Mrs. Clinton. In and the Association of Radio light of the Oklahoma City Talk Show Hosts chose to bombing and the attacks on make a mockery of free the White House, such topics speech. I Editorials Board Jay Robbins Editor in Chief Rob Clark Managing Editor Sterling Hayman Opinion Editor Kyle Littlefield Assistant Opinion Editor Mail Call PBS shows bring A&M tennis camp in much revenue enjoyed by youth This letter is in response to the I would like to extend a pro-con column on June 27. very sincere thanks to the The strongest evidence in favor of staff, coaches and camp coun- Barnett stance is Zane’s emotion- selors at the TAMU Summer al tirade. Tennis Camp. The lack of any facts or My nephew, Jamison, at- quotes and the complete begging tended last week and had a of the question by the article hard bout of home-sickness for only proves that PBS has the first couple of days of the changed for the worse over the camp. last few years. Due to the attentiveness the Both Sesame Street and Bar- group counselors, my nephew ney are commercial hits that got over his loneliness, stuck it draw large revenues that should out, improved his tennis and be applied to the show(s) rather most importantly enjoyed him- than more of the commercialism self and gained a bit more self that each uses. confidence. It is difficult to explain why Again thank you for turning shows that generate millions of what could have been an awk- dollars in sales each year need ward childhood memory into a to be on the public dole. very positive event. Ed Evans Ronald Rushing Class of’96 Graduate student Schools must educate children about sex I n a time where some doc tors are shot for perform ing abortions, thousands of teenagers are having chil dren and an incurable virus is killing people every day, the adults of the nation still are afraid of talking with their kids about sex. A few months ago, par ents and teachers debates on the adoption of a few state-recommended health textbooks con cerned parents in the College Station Inde pendent School District. Parents were concerned the books did not adequately emphasize abstinence and did not present contraceptives in an appro priate fashion. Parents seem to fear that their kids are learning too much and becoming even more curious about sex. This fear is insignificant compared to the dangers when kids don’t know enough about sex. The risk of AIDS, dis eases and unplanned pregnancies is too great to deny children the facts they deserve. It’s great to preach abstinence. Not having sex is the best and only guaranteed way of avoiding sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies. But how realistic is abstinence? Teenagers are curious. They have an overabundance of hormones raging through their bodies. And when someone tells them not to do something, they often desire to do it even more. Teenagers tend to believe they are invinci ble, that they can’t get pregnant or contract a STD. They believe it just won’t happen to them. And if parents pretend sex doesn’t exist, it will only re-enforce these myths. All parents and educators would like to be lieve their kids are not having sex. They would also like to believe things like pregnancy and STDs won’t touch their lives. Un fortunately, this isn’t true. Coming from a typical, subur ban middle-class area, I used to think that no one I knew would be affected by these situations. But having friends who have had abor tions or gone in for AIDS testing has convinced me otherwise. For years, the religious right has wanted the Constitution to serve as a list of what is and isn’t OK according to Christian beliefs. They keep telling us the nation has lost its moral standards. But whose standards are we talking about here? While it was “bad” for people to have sex before marriage in the ’50s and early ’60s, pre marital sex has now become almost accept able. And whether it’s acceptable to religious leaders or the PTA, it’s still happening. Many claim that teaching children about sex sends the message that teens are expected to have sex. This isn’t giving today’s youth enough credit. There are many who choose ab stinence and many who want to wait until they’re “in love” before they have sex. On the other hand, there are many who do have casual sex at early ages. We should arm these kids with the information that can pre vent unplanned pregnancies and STDs. While sex education used to be a responsi bility left only to the parents, many are not giving their kids the facts. Some parents prob ably feel that not telling their children about sex will prevent their kids from engaging in it. However, kids just don’t learn enough about sex from home. If the parents won’t teach them, they will look for the knowledge elsewhere. The best lessons usually are gained through experi ence, but this is no way to learn about preg nancy or STDs. Today, it is largely the responsibility of the schools to teach children about sex. They should accomplish this in the most direct and honest way possible. Dr. Joycelyn Elders, the former U.S. sur geon general, discussed sex education in a re cent Playboy interview. “We need to teach responsibility so kids can make responsible decisions,” she said. “Some will choose to abstain; we should support that choice. Some will not, and we need to support that choice, too.” Elders stirred up controversy when she spoke of masturbation as a healthy and nor mal part of sexuality. Elders approached sex education by em phasizing the teaching of responsibility. “Sometimes our children don’t understand and appreciate the consequences” of becoming sexually active. Many factors play a role in why teens be come sexually active. A typical one is curiosi ty. We can teach them that curiosity is okay, but that sex is worth waiting for. We should teach them the dangers of promiscuity, and to be responsible if they decide to experiment. Another reason for teens to have sex is to gain acceptance from a group or love from an other person. We should teach them to accept themselves and each other unconditionally and stress that sex and love are not always present at the same time. Teaching our children about sex, contracep tion and STDs won’t prevent all of them from having sex, getting pregnant or contracting a disease. It will only help reduce the numbers. Because many parents are do not ade quately teach sex education, kids are not get ting all the facts. It has become the schools’ re sponsibility and the children deserve all the information we can give them. Margaret Gordon is a junior genetics major Margaret Gordon Columnist Ti ii; I3/\ i i /\i iow Editorial Staff Jay Robbins, Editor in chief Rob Clark, Managing Editor Sterling Hayman, Opinion Editor GretCHEN PERRENOT, City Editor JODY Holley, Night News Editor STACY Stanton, Night News Editor Michael Landauer, Aggielife editor Nick Georgandis, Sports Editor Stew Milne, photo Editor News: The Battalion news department is managed by stu dents at Texas A&M University in the Division of Student Publications, a unit of the Department of Journalism. he Battalion Online: The Battalion offers photos and the day's headlines on the worldwide web. Web Site: http://128.194.30.84 Subscriptions: A part of the Student Services Fee entitles each Texas A&M student to pick up a single copy of The Battalion. Mail subscriptions are $20 per semester, $40 pier school year and $50 per full year. To charge by VISA, MasterCard, Discover or American Express, call 845-2611. The Battalion (USPS 045-360) is published daily, Monday through Friday during the fall and spring semesters and Monday through Thursday during the summer sessions (except University holidays and exam periods), at Texas A&M University. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77840. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. News offices are in 013 Reed McDonald Building. Newsroom hours: Sunday, 2 p.m. to 1 0 p.m. Monday — Thursday, 10 a.m. to 1 0 p.m. Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Newsroom phone: 845-3313; Fax: 845-2647 E-mail: Batt@tamvm1.tamu.edu