Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 23, 1996)
September 2] The Battalion )ds f PGJI time I T, N.Y. (AP) t win the B.COp > Fred Funk-l* ugh money top ay full time on fe round was sus^ tin Sunday with th hole and nev tournament wai hole event lan — the tl under-par-i rivacy put peril by enetics ove over, Psychic Friends. A new tech nique of reading the fu- may be coming your way in lyoff, won by Fin form of genetic testing, when he neaih*foat may be coming along s I K)t - it, however, is a legal right ho started theit nhers to know your future as dong with Pat for third with61 >58,000. Woods $140,19111 nents and putlu money list-oc ling enough nioi ihap- dyet. icien- are ently ap 125 and eanui king on ur card for 1992; Hu- >20,000 — and hel ic tents in which to a ome be a lock. ect, a iemic, actually.’ft 'ear at- past the 150thsp' ptto t last week—S103 )out ne in the top 15Ji T 5111 ; nlimited numb f 'P enet _‘ c options, guaranti vill get into any wants next year, i-place money! eligible to sic, the last reji'“ /ear, since he has amount won by ast year. to go through gnie: and to judge you based on hasn’t Columnist Jenni Howard Senior economics and international studies major ect of human DNA. Re- chers hope to not only dis- erthe locations of all genes, which ones cause certain ts or diseases. Discovering influence of our genetic up could result in im- ved medicine and cures to nerly incurable diseases, but future of an individual’s so means thatWfti it to privacy is becoming ierby the second. Currently, there is no estab- ledlegal protection against lershaving access to an indi- ual’s genetic information. ...the future of an individual^ right to privacy is be- I coming hazier by the second. ‘meal verages >fts. t )UpS, ^njoy dwith the current research on letically-based behavioral its, if a link were found, teotypes could be placed on ividuals before they even de- )ped the trait. Certain tests can be per iled on humans to deter- ie whether or not they carry es for some diseases, and setests could be helpful in future for preventing the ase. But for now, they only vide a sense of reluctant an- pation for what could lie ad, and possible discrimina- ifothers find out. Consider the case of a preg- Itwoman in California who [given two options from her llth Maintenance Organiza- [(HMO) after discovering it her child would have cystic bsis: get an abortion, or ethe child and forget any lical coverage for its care. The woman ended up having child, and the HMO backed m after threats of a lawsuit. Unfortunately, the occurrence tisurance companies reject- clients based on what they !ld genetically be at risk for Ibecome more common. It would only be natural to ex- thealth insurance organiza- )s to want to know how in- jable their clients are, jecially with the rising cost of Jth care. But the result would Jo deny coverage to those ti need it the most. What is bmore disturbing is how easy it pd be to access genetic infor- [ion about people without p ever knowing it. tithe Jan. 17,1994, issue ofTime lazine, George Annas, professor ealth law at Boston University, lit would be completely legal to I clippings of Bill Clinton’s hair pa barbershop, have them ana- d, and publish a list of diseases tedded in his genetic code, lisunfair that such highly per- al information about a person Id be accessed and used by one who is interested, iven if people with certain etic markers could potential- e a problem for society, 2ther it be a drain on medical Social resources, it is only fair them have a chance to (rcome these obstacles, atever genetic research lead to in the future, the le- Jframework for protecting the /acy rights of a person should et today. Page Tl Monday • September 23, 1996 Predicting the class of ’OO This is a special reprint of a column written by Stacy Feducia with an introduction by Michael Landauer, editor in chief and a senior journalism major. Feducia is a former Battalion columnist and a member of the Class of '93. With every freshman class comes an onslaught of questions. When will they stop wearing their high school rings and Project Graduation shirts? When will they take down their tassel from their rear-view mirror? But for the Class of2000, there are some unique questions. And being different can be good. Last week, we at the Batt were faced with an odd ques tion: What do we do when we’re printing a letter in Mail Call by a fish? Do we use the ’00 or go with the full 2000? Hearing that Fish Camp had dubbed the class “The Class of‘Double-O,’" we decided to go with the ’OO. As I stumbled through the staff files, I found that this and other questions were raised by a former Battalion columnist by the name of Stacy Feducia. Known for writing columns about butt-cracks and her experiences on the assembly line at a tampon factory, Feducia made a name for herself on this very page. On August 29,1991, she took leave of her normal style to ask a few questions about a class that would be entering A&M five years later. The following is the gist of that column, included mostly just for laughs. But as campaigning gets un der way this week for the leadership of this unique class, a word of advice to the fish: Aggies are watching you. Whether it is Feducia or some future Aggie, the Class of2000 will be viewed as a milestone and, with strong leadership, it will also be a proud example of what A&M has become. G iven that Fish Camp will no doubt be the first episode in an epic of endless trauma for the Class of 2000,1 decided to address it first. For those of you unfamiliar with Fish Camp, a class hump-it is composed every year to celebrate class unity and Aggie Pride. This year’s hump-it goes like this: “Fish Camp ’91, Aggie Spirit, pride and fun. All the pieces come alive. The Fightin’ Class of ’95.” Simple enough, but not when you throw in that troublesome Class of 2000. Being the responsible journalist and assuming they refer to themselves as the Class of 2000,1 posed the question to members of our esteemed English department. Know what I found? Trauma! Confusion! Dismay! “Surely there is a word that rhymes with ‘thou sand,’” pondered Dr. Robert Newman. “But I can’t think of one, and now it will torment me all day.” I asked Dr. Janet McCann, a poet. “In the Webster’s Compact Rhyming Dictionary, no word rhymes with ‘thousand,’” she said. “You could try a phrase like ‘cows and.’” So I tried it. Fish camp ’96. Aggie Spirit really kicks. Beating all those Bevo cows and ... The Fightin’ Class of 2000. Let’s face it: That sucks. Deciding those academi- ans were not close enough to the situation to be ef fective, I asked the real experts, the Fish Camp Staff. “Oh, no! I’d never thought about it. Let me get some help,” cried Cristen Van Vleet of the Class of ’92. In the background, I heard distinct sounds of anguish and trauma, not to mention a lot of hysteri cal laughter. “Well, I don’t know, but it really de- Hi THofijt QCVO a*fA C# TfiOO pends on the creativity of the people that year (the Fish Camp ’96 Staff),” Van Vleet replied. “After all, the Class of 2000 is so unbelievably unique! You could do that big 2-0 or you could do double-0. You could do anything.” But it’s not that easy when it comes to the Class of 2000 class set. Theoretically, those fish will do a set of ZERO push-ups at good bull events that mandate phys ical retribution. Of course asking them to do 2000 push-ups would be out of the question — they’d never get to turn out the lights at Midnight Yell. The Class of 2000 would still be pushing come kick-off the next day. “Maybe they’d do a hundred. I don’t know,” of fered Corps member Brandon Daugherty. Corps Commander John Sherman concurred, “It would be the prerogative for that class, but I’d suggest 100. However, they’d have f o draw a line at some point for the classes after 2000.” The Corps of Cadets seems to have it under control for now. But in five years, this could be one of the most controversial issues since women for the Corps. One big question still hovers on the horizon. HOW DO YOU PUT CLASS OF 2000 ON YOUR AG GIE RING? “I never thought about that. Let me ask a higher authority,” said Jackie Flowers, Aggie ring clerk. After a long, anguished delay, she returned with this an swer: “As far as I know, we’d go with ’00.” You heard it here first. Armed forces gives many opportunities I am a veteran of the United States Army that proudly served my country, my family and my self. I stood on our country’s walls of freedom for three years, de fending her against all enemies. Whether or not I agreed with the reasoning behind my deploy ment, I followed the orders of those above me. I did not allow my political beliefs to stand in the way of my mission — to do that would have put lives in jeopardy. Along with every other soldier, I took the same oath to defend our country, and I was prepared to die for it. There is no doubt that our gov ernment has made political state ments with our military forces that cost American servicemen their lives, but do not let their memories go forgotten and tarnish the dreams of potential recruits. I joined the military for two rea sons — to gain financial assistance for college and to mature as a man. I, too, remember my fallen brothers in arms being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu and going home in body bags from Kuwait. Do not let the government overshadow your view of American servicemen. I hope you join me in keeping our soldiers in Kuwait in your thoughts and prayers. Joining the military under parental or religious pressure would be one of the last reasons anyone should join the military, but if you would like to be all you can be, see foreign lands, serve your country and be proud... join the military. Matthew D. Bustos Class of’98 Pride overshadows service in military Regarding David Boldt’s Sept. 18 column, “ “Sheer obligation” is why many join the armed services. Sheer obligation, whether it is from your family, your pastor or your own sense of patriotism, turns into one thing when you join — pride. Pride in what you are doing: defending your country from threats, follow ing orders, upholding the Constitu tion, and a host of other things that you swear to do when you enlist. Being in the Army, I can attest to this. Most of the people killed in the military in the last ten years have been from special forces. We don’t even know about most of them. The American soldier who was dragged through the streets of Mogadishu was a Ranger. He was sent in with a small group of men to kill a mafia leader. He joined because he was a fanatic. You’ve got to be a die-hard Army go-er to be in the Rangers. Most of the men that join the army out of sheer obligation go in, serve their four years and leave, never seeing anything other than a boring military base in the states. There is nothing wrong with serving out of obligation. But it’s wrong to stereotype people who join out of obligation as having ultra-conservative parents. Peo ple join for many different rea sons: money, advancement, ex perience, leadership qualities, seeing the world, and obligation. Oh yeah, and to fly jets. Jason Ross Class of’98 . Corporal, United States Army Government keeps real marriage intact Congress takes step back in time? Bryan Goodwin suggests in his Sept. 17 column that a primary concern of the U.S. Congress in passing a bill denying the recogni tion of homosexual marriages is concern over money. The issue is not about money, privileges or benefits. The real issue is one of basic morality — uphold ing the sacred institution of mar riage. This institution is a lifelong union between a man and a woman based on unconditional love. We should not allow this for mal union to be extended to homo sexuals. Goodwin declares that this denies the right for homosexuals to declare their love. In this case, the fact is that the federal government is not denying anything to anyone. Simply put, it is preserving marriage the way God intended. There is no prejudice involved here, no “victims” as Goodwin be lieves. Homosexuals, as individuals, have basic human rights of citizen ship to live normally in our country. ! However, marriage is not a right that can be granted or extended by our federal government. Thank God our legislators are doing their jobs while representing us morally and acting freely from the pres sures of a small minority. Hank Ballinger Class of’99 7 Ignorant students don’t deserve vote ? < Marcus Goodyear is wrong. Every Aggie should not vote. The only people who deserve to vote are those who have taken the time to educate themselves. As it is, people will walk into a voting booth with out knowing this information. They usually end up either picking names at random or voting for peo- ! pie based on name recognition. Currently, incumbents win most races because they have the name recognition. So please, on election day, if you don’t know who the can didates are, don’t punch the holes. This is the first step toward bringing our government under our control. Dave Deal Class of’98 The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 300 words or fewer and include the author’s name, class, and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Let ters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mail: 111.1 Fax: (409) 845-2647 E-mail: Batt@tamvml.tamu.edu For more details on letter policy, please call 845-3313 and direct your question to the opinion editor. threatens to choose legality Abortion case A s if our national debate over abortion wasn’t complicated enough, a story unfolding in a Wisconsin court could make the issue even more treacherous. In the case, an act that all should recog nize as horribly wrong is being defended in the name of reproduc tive freedom. In March, 35-year-old Deborah Zim merman entered a bar in Racine, Wis. and went on a drinking binge. She was nine months pregnant. Later that day, she gave birth to a baby girl with a blood alcohol level of 0.199 percent. That’s twice the le gal limit for an adult. The infant was born exhibiting the symptoms of fetal alcohol syndrome, and has been showing signs of impaired mental development. Zimmerman was charged with attempted murder. The county prosecutor alleges that she tried to kill her unborn baby with alco hol. Zimmerman has pleaded not guilty. It would be believable for her to claim that her drinking binge was a symptom of alco holism; an overwhelming addiction might ex plain her actions, although it wouldn’t excuse them. But instead, a public defender named Sally Hoezel has concocted a scary — and highly political — defense. The defense asserts that Zimmerman’s ac tions were not criminal because Wisconsin law does not recognize an unborn child as a viable human being. Also, Hoezel claims that Zimmerman’s actions are actually protected by the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision. “Had she in fact killed her unborn child, she would be exempt from prose cution,” Hoezel said in an interview on CNN. “Under our abortion law, a mother can’t be prosecuted.” Joan Korb, the assistant district attor ney prosecuting the case, takes a different view in light of the late stage of the preg nancy. She argues that the Roe decision says "the state has an interest in protect ing the life of a viable fetus.” So, as the litigants await the court’s deci sion, ethicists are left to ponder the conse quences of the verdict. The wave of speculation has washed into the college community. Ethics specialist Robin Shapiro of the University of Washing ton asked where lines would be drawn in the future unless a precedent is established to punish future behavior. The true issue hidden in Shapiro’s query is whether or not we, as thinking students and participating citizens, can draw lines at all. Some worry that if Zimmerman’s actions are found to be illegal, any woman who sips any alcohol at any point in a pregnancy wifi be subject to the wrath of the law. According to this misguided line of thinking, Wisconsin should ignore Zim merman’s act. After all, there isn’t a law that specifically says, “Thou shalt not poi son a fetus with alcohol.” Instead, Wisconsin should trust that its judges can distinguish between alcohol over morality use and abuse, and hold people responsi ble for their actions. How sad it is that sometimes our moral compasses point only to “legal” or “illegal,” having totally forsaken “right” and “wrong.” ■ Deborah Zimmerman is probably both criminal and victim. Perhaps she didn’t intend to kill her unborn daughter on what became her birthday. She may be more the pitiable, reckless addict than the would-be murderer. But according to her own defense attorney, Zimmerman’s motivations don’t matter. The notion of abortion on demand allows; her to abuse herself and poison her fetus. ‘ Today, it is politically fashionable to say abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” But if a reproductive rights argument exon erates a woman who may have tried to poi son her daughter just hours before birth, what could we say to legitimize this kind of “abortion” procedure? Would it be safe? No. Would it be rare?' Maybe not. But, sadly, it would definitely! be legal. Columnist Jeremy Valdez Senior chemical engineering major