ily 12,1995
thanks
ince
IT^IOIST
The Battalion • Page 5
Wednesday • July 12, 1995
; over a month
''ver, Mickey
'as thankful for
his life,
m getting a It*
t'm not really
s conference at
a I Center,
ited liver saved
iber coming in
they had like
n me. I was in
t know it," he
»to vote
iium
I housands of
/ing to forces
i whether the
of a $22 mil.
■ball stadium,
ready decided
r the stadium
>ut 5,000 ares
a petitions
oters.
e Austin Frorr
is leading the
collect about
s by Sept. I to
to issue bond:
iction. A vole
irly as Nov.7
) sign the pet
1 city shouidnly-
a baseball sts
. are telling ti
;nd it on some
Ith and hums -
arson, a SAFS
on the Austr
3 to 1993.
stion was
/hen polios
ot just one,
olice Sgt
tid Monday
jntered 31
blades’ heat
d continued
him. Police
ullet lodgeo
; room the
[possible in
nation for
>ff twice,
t brings oc
_ised to tali
g two schec
/ith invest!
se his agent
too upset.
*nt, Dre«
said Mon’
rer still wa;
“I don’t
3 any differ
or two acci-
scident is a 11
aus said,
tfirmed thai
un belong^
the pl a y er
the former
ian Blades
r
???
ON
S FOR
Have you ever wondered why men
D uring the last few days an
important question has
been raised — a question
that hits close to home for many
people — a question with no
seemingly logical answer ...
“Why, why, oh why would
young, wealthy, handsome
movie star Hugh Grant screw
up his eight-year relationship
with cover girl Elizabeth Hurley by soliciting a „
prostitute?”
If you are a man, your answer will almost as
suredly be, “Shoot, I don’t know, he could have any
woman he wanted, and with a girlfriend like Hur
ley why would he stray?”
If you are a woman, your answer is likely, “Men
are just pigs.” Which, I’m told, can be a blanket re
sponse for almost any of the world’s ills.
Actually, whether you’re familiar with Hugh
Grant, Elizabeth Hurley or hookers isn’t even im
portant. Aside from a few glamorous characteris
tics, he’s just a guy, she’s just a girl, and a hooker
is merely an extremely arbitrary “other woman.”
Maybe Grant was bored. Maybe he was uncom
fortably “tense” at the moment and mistakenly
looked to an illegal prostitute to “relax” him. Nei
ther us, nor Grant may ever be able to uncover all
the reasons. But we know one thing for sure; he
had a powerful urge.
An urge powerful enough to cause
even an intelligent, law-abiding man to
forsake the trust and feelings of a
woman he loves, risk a successful ca
reer, personal reputation, arrest and
even disease.
Unfortunately, this scenario of ro
mantic betrayal sadly transcends time,
all socioeconomic levels and every cul
ture. In fact, it’s safe to say that “cheating”
whether it is with a prostitute or not, is a perma
nent part of the human condition.
Now, before everyone gets their panties in a
wad, this is not to say that infidelity should be so
cially acceptable. All cultures and all individuals
have “rules” and even laws for love and/or mar
riage. In our culture, engaging in behavior that
would hurt a loved one’s feelings of trust and self-
worth is clearly against the rules of love.
However, it is also important to understand
that while Hugh Grant’s behavior was against the
rules of love and the current prostitution laws of
California, he was not breaking the laws of nature.
Man may embrace monogamy.
He may socially condemn and punish infrac
tions of monogamy.
He may even preach the practice of monogamy.
But regardless of whatever personal or moral
convictions a person may have, there is no denying
the fact that man is not a monogamous animal.
The same instinctual laws that govern birds
and baboons, warthogs and walruses, promote
man — as a whole — to go against his arbitrary will
and spread his seed.
This law of nature overwhelmingly has main
tained its integration with human cultures. It is the
same law of nature that allows for what is called
“natural selection,” one of the tenets of evolution.
By having the innate urge to mate with as
many females as possible, males strive to domi
nate the gene pool. In animal societies, only the
most powerful males will mate with a number of
females. Strong males overpower weaker ones, and
females are most attracted to powerful males.
In the recently published book “The Moral Ani
mal: Evolutionary Psychology and Everyday Life,”
Robert Wright says that of the 1,154 past and pre
sent societies of humans that have been subjects of
anthropological studies, almost 1,000 allow
polygamy. In most of these cases, the higher a
man’s social status the more wives or sexual part
ners he will have.
Most “civilized” societies legally regulate the
practice of single spouse marriages. However, the
inclination for males to have more than one wife or
partner, and for women to desire a powerful, pro
viding man prevails nonetheless.
Frank
Stanford
Columnist
are pigs?
Wright notes that this tendency is quite evident
in the higher divorce and infidelity rates of
wealthy and powerful men. From an anthropologi
cal point of view, divorce and remarriage is just a >
legal way to have multiple wives.
This evolutionary trend is equally evident in
studies showing the tendency of women to “marry
up” from their current social statuses.
So, what we may call “cheating” or the “men are
pigs” syndrome is really just a natural drive. It
will always happen.
Of course, all of this evolutionary social science Zd*
won’t make Elizabeth Hurley, or any other victim Z £
of infidelity, feel any better. Even if the laws of na- I
ture count as some form of biological “excuse,” the
rules of love and the laws of the land won’t accept ,>
it, nor should they.
Although we share similar genetic drives and
the basic physical structure of many animals, hu- -
mans have an important difference. You and I are ' * '
distinguished from other animals in that we have
thoughts, emotions and the ability to convey them. ;
Because of that distinction, we can make
covenants.
We can break covenants. •
And we can be sorry. |
I’d like to see some warthog or walrus pull that off.
Frank Stanford is a graduate philosophy student -“
Ending one’s own life should be legalized
L ast week,
George
Delury was
charged with sec
ond degree
manslaughter for
the death of his
wife Myrna Lebov.
Though this is not
uncommon in a
large city like New York, where
the couple lived, this event was
unusual because she asked her
husband to help her end her life.
Lebov had suffered from Mul
tiple Sclerosis since 1973, and
the couple often talked about
how to end her suffering.
In an Internet article at the
Euthanasia Research and Guid
ance Organization, ERGO, web
site, Delury was quoted as say
ing, “The last six years had been
hell for her. She felt the disease
was affecting both her body and
her brain.”
Lebov decided it was time for
her to die and “made a very clear
request to me,” Delury said.
Lebov wrote a note indicating
she was voluntarily ingesting
the drugs her husband prepared.
Delury mixed an overdose of
an antidepressant that Lebov
had been taking on prescription
with honey and water and
helped her to drink it since her
hands were deformed from her
disease.
After his wife died, Delury
called the police.
He was then
taken into cus
tody, and may
now serve up to
15 years in prison
if convicted.
People rejoice
in their rights to
free speech, to
own guns and to have abortions.
But what about the right to die?
Should people have the legal
right to choose when and how to
end their lives?
If recent bills in state legisla
tures across the country are any
indication of common opinion,
the idea of a person’s right to die
is becoming more accepted.
In Maine, a physician-assist
ed suicide bill was introduced in
early June.
Though the bill was defeated
in a 2-1 vote, this was the first
bill of this type to reach the floor
of a state legislature. Similar
bills were introduced in 14 other
states this year, but never
passed the first committees.
Because of advances in medi
cine and science, people are liv
ing longer than ever before.
Many diseases have no cures but
the goal of medicine to stretch
life out as long as possible re
mains, no matter how artificial
the means
The struggle to lengthen life
often overshadows the impor
tance of the quality of life. Liv
ing another day does not always
bring joy to those who only face
another day of pain.
Euthanasia literally means a
good death. There are two basic
definitions of how a person’s life
ends under the concept of eu
thanasia.
Passive euthanasia describes
the right of a family to authorize
removing a patient from life-sup
port systems in the event of veg
etative or comatose states so
that natural death is allowed to
occur. This is legal in most
states now, including Texas.
The term active euthanasia
covers a broad spectrum of situa
tions, but simply translates as
the active taking of life to pre
vent suffering.
ERGO and other organiza
tions are working toward legaliz
ing one type of active euthana
sia, physician-assisted suicide.
That is where problems begin.
Most religions oppose suicide
and consider assisted suicide
synonymous with murder.
The Pope recently reinforced
the Catholic Church’s stance
that life is a gift and that
death should be determined
only by God.
The state of Texas has a prob
lem with suicide, as do many
other states.
It is a misdemeanor in
Texas to assist a suicide at
tempt and becomes a felony if
the suicide results in death or
serious injury.
Some believe that the legaliza
tion of physician-assisted suicide
will result in the elderly “sacrific
ing” themselves to prevent finan
cial distress on their families.
Some fear that patients will
be coerced into requesting death,
or won’t be competent enough to
make such a decision. With care
ful regulation, these situations
could be avoided.
Physician-assisted suicide
should be legal. Mentally compe
tent adults suffering from incur
able, terminal or unbearable dis
eases should be able to decide if
the quality of their lives justifies
further existence.
When a person courageously
has fought a disease but is worn
from the battle of everyday sur
vival, they should have the right
to choose a peaceful, easy death.
And if they are unable to
bring death upon themselves, a
physician should be allowed to
help them without fear of legal
ramifications.
In the days where a natural
death often means wasting away
in a hospital bed hooked to a ma
chine, euthanasia provides a
comfortable alternative to those
who are suffering.
Margaret Gordon is a senior
genetics major
TThE LIC3 N
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.
Editorials Board
Jay Robbins
Editor in Chief
Rob Clark
Managing Editor
Sterling Hayman
Opinion Editor
Kyle Littlefield
Assistant Opinion Editor
Branching out
The United States steps forward by
extending recognition to Vietnam.
After more than 20 years,
U.S. ties with Vietnam are be
ing normalized.
Despite much criticism from
some members of Congress and
families of POWs, the United
States yesterday extended
diplomatic recognition to the
country for the first time since
the Vietnam War.
The move is overdue.
Until February 1994, the
U.S. had a trade embargo
against Vietnam. After Presi
dent Clinton lifted the embargo
last year, American corpora
tions have poured $520 million
into the country. Now, the
United States has the eighth
largest share of the Vietnam in
vestment market.
Although Vietnam still is
ruled by only one party and en
joys few democratic practices,
the development of the coun
try’s economy toward capital
ism has created great opportu
nities for the United States.
The move has not only eco
nomic significance, but also
symbolic meaning.
The main reason that the
United States, has refused to
recognize the 20-year-old gov
ernment of Vietnam up to this
point is the fact that more than
2,000 American soldiers still
are listed as missing in action
in Southeast Asia.
However, since the trade
embargo was lifted, Vietnam
has been much more helpful in
discovering the fates of these
men. Sen. John McCain, who
spent six years as a prisoner of
war in Vietnam, said, “The co
operation they have shown in
the MIA-POW issue has been
significant.”
Many opponents of the move
claim that the president, who
avoided military service during
the Vietnam War, should not
have the right to renew rela
tions with the country. Others
claim that Vietnam has not
done enough to provide ac
counts for the Americans still
listed as missing in Vietnam.
The United States cannot
operate in the world by ignor
ing governments it doesn’t like.
The establishment of formal re
lations will aid both in locating
remains of MIAs and in the de
velopment of economic opportu
nity in Vietnam.
Most importantly, the Unit
ed States will be moving be
yond American society’s at
tempt to deal with the past
tragedy of Vietnam by ignoring
it in the present.
Recognizing the Vietnamese
government makes no judg
ment or acceptance of commu
nism and does not reject the
sacrifices so many Americans
made in that conflict.
Recognizing Vietnam does
take America a closer to
putting the past to rest.
/\AP&5UU£$
)
NOW.
APPLY.
ESTIONS.
TEhe B/v r i vs, l i on
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 GeORCANDIS, Sports Editor
Stew Milne, Photo Editor
Staff Members
City Desk - Assistant Editor: Eleanor Colvin; Re
porters: Katherine Arnold, lavier Hinojosa,
Jill Saunders, Michael Simmons, Wes Swift
& Tara Wilkinson
Aggielife Desk - Assistant Editor: Amy Collier Fea
ture Writers: Elizabeth Garrett, Amy Collier
& Libe Goad; Columnist: Amy Uptmor
Sportswriters - David Winder and Lee Wright
Opinion Desk - Assistant Editor: Kyle Littlefield;
Columnists: Elizabeth Preston, Frank Stan
ford & David Taylor; Contributing Colum
nists: Justin Barnett, Margaret Gordon, Alex
Miller, Chris Stidvent & Mark Zane; Editori
al Writers: Jason Brown & Alex Walters;
Editorial Cartoonists: Brad Graeber &
George Nasr
Photographers — Mike Friend, Roger Hsieh, Nick
Rodnicki & Eddy Wylie
Page Designers - News: Kristin DeLuca; Sports:
Robin Greathouse; Aggielife: Stew Milne
Copy Editors - Rob Clark & Sterling Hayman
Graphic Artists — Toon Boonyavanich & Melissa
Oldham
Strip Cartoonists — Valerie Myers & Quatro Oakley
Office Staff - Office Manager: Julie Thomas;
Clerks: Wendy Crockett & Heather Harris
News: The Battalion news department is managed by
students at Texas A&M University in the Divi
sion of Student Publications, a unit of the De
partment of Journalism.
News offices are in 013 Reed McDonald Building.
Newsroom hours:
Sunday, 2 p.m. to 10 p.m.
Monday — Thursday, 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Newsroom phone: 845-3313; Fax: 845-2647
The Battalion Online: The Battalion offers photos
and the day's headlines on the worldwide
web. Web Site: http://128.194.30.84
Advertising: Publication of advertising does not im
ply sponsorship or endorsement by The Bat
talion. For campus, local and national dis
play advertising, call 845-2696. For classi
fied advertising, call 845-0569. Advertising
offices are in 015 Reed McDonald and of
fice hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday
through Friday. Fax: 845-2678.
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 per school year and $50
per full year. To charge by VISA, MasterCard,
Discoverer 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.