fednesday • November 19, 1997
O The Battalion
PINION
iulf
-SireiV
ollow the leader
orps of Cadets’ lifestyle offers example of strong work ethic, strict discipline
AP)-
he stanuoi;|L
inton nrfWM 1 T// better is it to dare
•S. firepotJ Mmighty things, To
ruesdaypj win glorious tri-
an acceleMphs, Even though check-
:ic solutiotiP by failure, than to take
Air Force[(■^ w ‘ ! h those poor spirits
stealth fieri" neither enjoy much nor
bombers
^entagi
Len
Callaway
columnist
fermuch, because they live
'hegray twilight that knows
on wasbas 'victory nor defeat. ” —
stateofale :odore Roosevelt.
This quote adorns the door
man Kent iorps Commander Danny columnist
ither’s private quarters.
It speaks volumes about Danny Feather, the
rps of Cadets leadership and the ideals that per-
ate the Corps of Cadets.
Within a few years of A&M’s inception, it became
ddent alsi
ny Zinnia
i in the Mi)
|d0 other
•15 andl
1 irilitaiy institution and has since produced more
ftonal leaders in many fields than any other uni-
lational«ftsity in the nation,
ergersaidllhe Corps of Cadets is absolutely crucial to the
[raft, pus 1 : djferation of Aggie ideals and emotions as well as
,an 300 ini he proliferation of Texas A&M as it is now known,
recautios
1 that Clini
lilitarvcli
I (To rt to be 3
Tor anv
[ise in the
Iw'hiti II
had ate
in theft
binst/ra
As I sat on the back steps of the MSC last week I
two things that disturbed me very much,
st, two seniors in the band walked by and one
two non-reg students mumbled “faggot jar-
ad BQ’s;” the second was another male non-reg
10 iaring a button emblazoned with the words
he Corps Sucks.”
While it has been proven and accepted since the
e’60s the Corps’ regimented lifestyle is not for
ryone, their work ethic is for everyone. I re-as-
Ithe fact that if the Corps of Cadets had not been
owed to form, Texas A&M would never have had
opportunity to become the institution that it
is and is now.
Last week, Corps Commander Danny Feather
id Junior Operations Sergeant Adam Goren invit-
me to have breakfast with the Corps. As I arrived
the Corps guard room at 5:45 a.m. I expected to
ida dorm of just-waking individuals scrambling
[various uniform parts and upper classmen mak-
gunderclassmen’s lives hell. Much to my surprise
nsivew* irps headquarters was very much awake and cog-
tant at this early hour. After venturing through
esacred “HQ” hallway to Danny Feather’s room
idsaying our hellos, I was invited to take part in a
adorn morning inspection of a couple of dorms
st to see that everything was in order,
tewe entered the first dorm I was immediately
minded of the movie Full Metal Jacket. Freshmen
[rerunning for their lives and rabid sophomores
'rein hot pursuit with authoritative rebukes of
couragement and correction. All were stopping
id in their tracks to acknowledge that the highest
iking officer in the Corps was now in their pres-
te—with a guest. The freshman immediately got
lilKlV'U V
i work wth
[,rth people
/ the to*
|ial that com
; with
He annuities
|iy income
] planning,
i and profit
I'ormatioii
I
“on the wall” expecting discipline at any second but
seemed to have an added edge of trepidation be
cause they weren’t quite sure who I was and why the
hell I was in their most sacred area.
I soon learned that what appeared on the sur
face to be chaos was actually disciplined, controlled
order.
We have all seen military movies and many stu
dents can imagine what life in the Corps must be
like, but until actually confronted with that life one
cannot fully appreciate what value could be found
in that lifestyle. Nor can one develop an intelligent
opinion about the Corps of Cadets.
The most impressive aspect of it all was that all
of the young men and women that I encountered
were there of their own accord in hopes of becom
ing a better person.
In hopes of growing and becoming disciplined so
that they could one day exercise absolute control
over their own collective destiny.
It stinks of cowardice and poltroonery for people
to sit back in their comfortable apartments or walk
across our beloved campus and exhibit the the
temerity to criticize the Corps of Cadets.
I came to the realization that I personally do not
have the intestinal fortitude to intentionally live in
the manner in which the Corps lives. I like comfort
and convenience and as a result there are lessons
that I have yet to learn. Many of the Corps’ students
four years my junior learned those lessons within
the first five minutes of mom and dad’s mini-van
pulling away from the quad.
Because I realize what members of the Corps
have confronted and overcome inside themselves
they must have my respect. They also deserve the
respect and admiration of the entire Texas A&M stu
dent body.
These students are intentionally making their
lives more difficult and demanding so that they may
accomplish more.
There are approximately 2,100 students in the
Corps of Cadets and approximately 42,000 students
enrolled at Texas A&M.
Through leadership, determination and tradi
tion the Corps of Cadets often makes a more im
pressive or more powerful statement than the other
40,000 students. When was the last time that a
goose bump formed on your skin because a non-
reg sauntered by with their shirt untucked smoking
a cigarette? When was the last time that someone
spoke about the tradition and honor of Texas A&M
without mentioning or alluding to the Corps of
Cadets or the Aggie Band?
These two entities are rooted from a philosophi
cal stand point in positivity and camaraderie. There
are an infinite number of aspects, accomplish
ments, people and ideals associated with these two
organizations for all of us to be proud—yet some
are too small minded to acknowledge them.
Si mON SAJ^S
VWOOP! AfrffiES
Value of life determined not
)y money, but by memories
James
Francis
opinion editor
ife is
filled
with
any un-
ileas-
Mries
^eryone
nust face.
Here are
Hnes in
>ur lives
Men a goal
Snot at
oned, times when we let those
depend on us down and
f ven times when we all en-
fiunter death.
To a parent, the death of his
Jrher child can be the most
ragic event to encounter. There
ilways is the thought, “Parents
>hould not live to see their own
Ehildren leave the world before
them.” But, as many of us know
tod have come to realize, this al
ways is not the case. People die
Jefore “their time,” and those
they leave behind are left with
feelings of emptiness, regret and
hopelessness. When this hap-
>ens, people must realize the
% way to determine that par
ticular individual’s life value, al-
hough unfortunately cut short,
ho remember the good times
hared with them, and not make
h attempt to get back at others
f ho may have had absolutely
tothing to do with the incident.
In an Associated Press re-
iort out of Stamford, Conn., it
[as stated “St. Joseph Medical
fenter will pay $3.3 million to
fttle a lawsuit filed by a
Pring, Texas, couple who con-
end their daughter died after
Mncorrect diagnosis.”
The young woman’s name
as Beth Linnick, and on Jan. 13,
h90, she was admitted to the
nter’s critical care unit, suffer-
j'gfrom “flu-like symptoms and
[hw blood pressure.” After being
diagnosed with septic shock
from the result of an infection,
Linnick died the next day.
What her parents are suing
for is related to what later re
ports determined Linnick’s
death to have resulted from. The
AP report said, “An autopsy de
termined the woman actually
suffered from a buildup of fluid
around the heart, which im
paired its ability to pump
blood.” This proves the hospital
did not have all the correct in
formation on Linnick’s case to
admit her under the treatment
for septic shock. This, in
essence, would prove the hospi
tal was wrong.
But are Linnick’s parents right
to sue the hospital for millions of
dollars? Yes, they have endured a
terrific loss, and their daughter
will never return to them. But
will suing the hospital prove the
just actions needed to take?
What Linnick’s parents are
doing, and other people in simi
lar situations or those of less life-
altering events such as the prob
lem with divorce court cases, is
placing a monetary value on
their daughter’s life. She was not
born to them with papers stating
her net worth, or how much in
terest her parents could agree
from her over a span of 21 years.
She was born unto them for love,
a symbol of their union in mar
riage and a desire to further their
bloodline in this world.
It is sad the Linnicks had to
lose their daughter, that they
will never see her get to grow
old and experience things yet
planned out. It is even more sor
rowful Linnick’s parents have to
deal with such an unexpected
tragedy. But what will millions
of dollars bring them in the loss
of their daughter?
The settlement from the law
suit will not bring their daugh
ter back, nor will it provide a
sense of satisfaction to "get re
venge” on the doctors and the
hospital where she died. The
only thing the money will give
the Linnicks is a constant re
minder their daughter is no
longer alive, thus, they will nev
er be able to move on with their
own lives. Instead, they will
spend every day, with every dol
lar from the lawsuit settlement,
and always brood over their
daughter’s death — they will not
remember her life.
So what can help the Lin
nicks accept their daughter’s
death? The one true aspect of
living many people take for
granted: memories.
If the Linnicks choose to re
member their daughter and all
the good times they shared to
gether as a family, this process
should prove helpful in their ac
ceptance of her death. She may
not be around for them to talk
to now, but they always can
think back on better times,
times when their daughter Beth
was able to give and receive the
love a family shares.
It seems Americans have taken
on an active role in the process of
seeking revenge for actions that
are sometimes unpreventible.
Mistakes happen. It is not accept
able a young woman died due to
hospital error or miscommunica-
tion, but it also is not acceptable
for people to place dollar-value
on someone else’s life.
Life is undefinable. It is one
of those particulars of being a
human that is simply accept
ed. We cannot control every
action of life, and when un
pleasant situations come our
way, we have to deal with them
in a respectable manner.
James Francis is a junior
English major.
Vi
iHoof,
fco?
UJKOOf
Danny Feather once reminded me of the three
main personality types that are available to us all
from which to choose:
The A type: one who sits on the fence griping
and moaning with no positive input whatsoever.
The B type: one that does nothing and is too
lazy to even develop an opinion.
The C type: one that rolls up their sleeves and
attempts to accomplish something— one that is
proactive in their own life and in the determination
of their own destiny.
Each and every member of these hallowed orga
nizations has taken a proactive stance in their own
development and the lack of respect that they are
all too often shown is what “sucks.”
These organizations continually graduate ac
complished military and civilian leaders and they
deserve our respect and admiration.
Len Callaway is a junior journalism major.
Mail Call
Short speech offers
usual offensiveness
“Queer!” Tom Short screamed
in front of Sully on November
17th around 3 p.m. At this point I
could take no more of his rhetoric
and left saying some explicatives
of my own.
I attend Short's soap-box
speeches for two main reasons:
one’s selfish, the other is not.
I am selfish in that I enjoy see
ing Short, whom I take to be poor
in argumentative technique, get
tied up in his own words and
flounder in explanation.
My other reason for attending is
that I worry about those folks who
Short may actually convince to
s ^0KNl&,
v\o *•*
hate others.
Legally, I agree that Short’s hate
speech is, and should be, protect
ed under the first amendment.
While his language is offensive and
his arguments are flawed, he is
neither being coercive nor direct
ly inciting violence.
His speech is protected, but
why is it promoted?
This letter is not for Short, nor
the Battalion Editors. I am writing
to the student body at large and,
most especially, to the student
group which brings Short to cam
pus each semester.
In the past I have heard Short
cite the adage, “hate the sin and
love the sinner.”
The word ‘queer,’ however, does
not refer to a sin, but a person. It is
like saying, ‘spic,’ ‘nigger,’ ‘kike,’
‘mick,’ ‘honky,’ ‘giny,’ ‘kraut,’
‘chink,’ ‘jap’ or the like.
Again, these words do not refer
to traits, acts or sins of a person,
but instead, they refer to the per
son, him or herself.
To reply that the University
should be a place where differing
views are allowed to be aired will
not help Short or his sponsors
here.
Though it is certainly the case
that all views should be tolerated
to the exhaustion of their merits,
Short was merely engaged in hate
ful name calling.
His point could have been
served by objecting to the moral
permissibility of homosexual acts.
Again, the word ‘queer’ not only
adds nothing of merit, but it redi
rects the moral issue in question
from the actions of persons to the
persons themselves.
Finally, though I agree that usu
ally sponsors are not responsible
for everything that their speakers
say, Short’s behavior today is not
an isolated instance. In the past he
has made other anti-homosexual
remarks and anti-semitic com
ments as well.
Given this history, Short’s spon
sors can no longer claim only gen
eral support.
Reinviting him to campus with
full knowledge of his actions, in ef
fect, endorses his positions.
It is my hope that he will no
longer be invited back; if he is,
however, we will now be very sure
of the position of his hosts.
Simon Dembitzer
Graduate Student
2ooo
S'.
\.U£W P<?L£