Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 6, 1998)
i : -’t'v'• v, MfuHMMHwarn , ■■■■ ■■■■■■I ■■■■■■■■■■■■ The Battalion si )0l day • February 6, 1998 p ei rEniwnwn ATIE)! \‘ff m exas. Pmar > r in i bson. and llinic attacks trow militance nd cowardice A **'' Mandy Cater opinion editor as! week, two inno cent employees at the I JNew Woman All id lii nen Health Care clinic, ihi ibortion clinic in Birm- |vfor lam, Ala., became vic- s of an all-too-familiar | of violence. Tne of the injured was a 1: se whose serious condi- r 11 i included the loss of an ' Th( ■ other person, a se- 1 e ity officer named Robert derson, lost his life. Tiese incidents were not accidents. They 1 e the result of militant violence that hits our b ntry far too often. Whether the targets are : kers in an abortion clinic or federal employ- " , innocent people are falling prey to unmerci- y ignorant killers. [he Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported it ' sived a letter from the “Army of God,” claim- responsibility for the heinous act. The letters, postmarked from Birmingham ; hours after the bombing, proclaim “those o work in the murder mills around the nation” ibe “targeted without quarter — you are not | nune from retaliation — your commissar’s in shington can’t protect you!” f the name Army of God sounds familiar, it r\ ,u ld. This is the same organization that claimed nie ponsibility for a similar bombing in an At- omf ta gay nightclub last year. They also perpe- [hirded attacks on two Florida clinics in 1982, in- inn: ding the kidnapping of one of the doctors 1 his wife from their Virginia home. iL The FBI is currently investigating the letter, .and, if the group is found responsible, it would earn no surprise. tine Army of God is a group of anti-abortion activists for ose maneuvers include “circulating a manual o t contains information on how to make mbs,” said the Journal-Constitution article. Unfortunately, though, the group is not alone tUts militance. Many groups such as “the Army” chjl it is their right to use violent means to of hieve their political agendas. This kind of behavior is not only frightening, ^ t is completely unacceptable. Violence against e( ' locent victims is not anyone’s right, no matter at one’s beliefs may be. 1 However, organizations such as Planned Par- hood take threats from groups such as the ny of God very seriously. Susan Nenney of Planned Parenthood in uston said it is difficult to count all the tactics :se groups use. C“We get everything from protesters scream- L ; at clients to bomb threats to arson attacks,” nney said. Planned Parenthood makes numerous con us preventative actions against anti-abortion ions. They equip their facilities with special ,ks and sometimes even bulletproof glass, ijley train their employees to beware of suspi- , us events and packages, and keep up ongoing fflllogues with law enforcement officials. Nenney finds the ploys of radical activists ironic. e ,, “They hide behind this ‘we want to stop abor- n blanket.’ But, our main service is birth con- i 0 1. By scaring people away, they are preventing t Dple from getting birth control that would pre- pt fit the need for abortions. They also prevent j : ngs like Pap smears, which keep mothers ia t!f:althy,” Nenney said. jWhether anyone likes it or not, laws are laws, y d since 1973’s Roe v. Wade, abortion has been le- |i So, abortion clinics, their workers and patients !nd ft not acting outside the guidelines of the law. elfiiether one agrees with abortion is a null issue nd iases such as this one. The real issue is legality, ai The United States is a democracy; a government ble' and by the people. There are governmental :er scks and balances which are in place to ensure it laws are representative of the populus. There ! also mechanisms embedded into the system awing for laws to be amended if the need arises. In the case of abortion, for example, if one feels S i laws granting freedom of choice are somehow ntrary to the greater good of American society, i logical step is not to create a nail bomb that J kill anyone affiliated with the practice. The correct progression would be for peo- i to associate with others who share their liefs. Lobby for those interests. Contact lo- and state representatives. In essence, people should campaign for g^ir beliefs; do something to bring about ange. Even participation in nonviolent ^ atests is viable. It is when those protests I'TDve from assembly to endangering others’ es that a group becomes problematic. e Instead of admirably championing their caus- I e gr< )ups such as the Army of God act as cow- f Is. They advocate the murders of people who I ? simply trying to make a living. They use Chris- nity as a crutch to promote hate and insurrec- n, not only defiling their government, but also i very religion they claim to be upholding. , These dangerous, fringe groups do nothing to 3mote their causes; if anything, the opposite is le.They are the real criminals, not the doctors, tients, nurses or security guards they massacre. PERSPECTIVES Alternative sentencing benefits society Jennifer Jones columnist I t was a shotgun wedding of sorts on January 17, when Darrell Meadows and Angela Whaley said their “I do’s” in a Kentucky chapel. It wasn’t, however, the barrel of a father’s gun, but rather, the strong arm of the law forcing the un planned nuptials. Meadows married Wlia- ley, the girlfriend he had threatened to kill during a dispute while vacationing in Georgia, as part of a sen tence handed down by State Court Judge Clyde Gob- er for misdemeanor disorderly conduct charges. Gober rationalized his disturbing sentence, which not surprisingly drew heavy criticism from both civil liberties and domestic violence activists, by claiming that marriage would obligate Meadows to support the child he and Whaley had out of wedlock. Gober’s ruling is an unfortunate example of a judge abusing the flexibility of the judicial system and using the bench as a pulpit for his moral agen da. By pushing his morals onto a couple, who were obviously unprepared for the commitment of mar riage, he has compromised the safety of both Wha ley and the child he was claiming to protect. Fortunately for the American justice system, Gober is the exception rather than the rule when it comes to unusual sentencing. Some judges have come to realize that fines and jail time are not al ways the answer and have started using more cre ative measures to ensure justice. More and more, judges are taking advantage of their judicial free dom and punishing criminals in ways that are any thing but standard. Sometimes a bit of creativity by judges can ac complish what regular sentencing cannot. For ex ample, Florence Nyemitei, a 71-year-old landlady, did not feel obligated to pay the electric bill for the apartment building she rented in New York, nor did she feel it her responsibility to see to repairs for the heating and hot water system that failed in early January. When ordered by the court to pay hefty fines for building violations and building repairs, she apparently did not feel obligated to pay those bills either. In response to Nyemitei’s lack of con cern for her tenants’ well-being, Judge JoAnn Friia sentenced the landlady to spend four days a week in the building she had refused to repair. According to an Associated Press report, Nyemitei said she feels like she is living in a “prison,” something her tenants have probably felt for quite some time. Friia hopes that Nyemitei will “get a taste of her own medicine” and by doing so will be more apt to see to the re pairs if forced to live in the same substandard con ditions as that of her tenants. Creative sentencing can also provide a more ap propriate punishment than typical sentencing. Community panels are springing up across the country as an alternative to regular sentencing by the courts. Members of the community are left to create a meaningful punishment after a person has gone before a judge and been convicted. In Vermont, a woman convicted of misde meanor retail theft was ordered by a community panel to attend a course on decision-making, apol ogize to the manager of the store that she stole from, visit the state women’s prison and do 35 hours of community service. While some have accused this system of letting criminals off the hook, it is more effective when one considers that part of the reason society punishes criminals is to make them aware of the conse quences of their actions. If a person convicted of stealing merchandise is ordered to pay a fine, the only time they ever have to consider their actions is when they write the check. If, however, a person is required to attend workshops, perform community service and apologize to their victims, he or she is forced on several occasions to think about the repercussions of the crime. Sometimes unusual sentencing can provide a so lution to a problem that normal sentencing cannot. A man convicted 18 times on drunken driving charges was sentenced to live within walking dis tance of a liquor store. This seemingly questionable sentence was handed down by Judge James Hapner who has watched the man, Dennis Cayse, come through his courtroom several times. Running out of ideas to keep Cayse from driving drunk, Hapner hopes that by ordering the man to move close to a liquor store, he will walk rather than drive. In an AP story, Hapner said that it is his “hope that he’ll (Cayse) walk to get his beer and wine rather than drive. Whether it will work or not, I don’t know.” Ob viously the courts have not been able to keep Cayse off the streets, so perhaps Hapner’s sentence, while not changing Cayse’s drinking habits, will keep him from injuring other drivers. Creative sentencing can also give victims of crimes a feeling of satisfaction and justice that can not always be accomplished by fines or jail sentenc ing. By sentencing a drunken driver who has injured a person to serve as an attendant for or a witness to physical therapy sessions with the person whom they injured, they are forced to constantly witness the effects of their carelessness. In one case where a drunken driver killed a person, conditions for his probation included carrying a photograph in his wallet of the deceased individual to remind him of the consequences of his recklessness. The victim’s family was allowed input into the sentencing and approved of the judge’s decision. The family was pleased to know that a day would not go by when the man would not remember what he had done. Sentencing today often falls short of justice. Too many people fall through the system’s cracks and re peat their crimes with no sense of remorse. A few weeks of jail time or a fine hardly seem compen satory to crimes like manslaughter. Judges should employ creative sentencing more often to ensure that justice is served. Jennifer Jones is a senior psychology major. VOICE FROM THE CROWD Yearbooks serve as forum for debating issues Amber Benson guest columnist T hey were good sto ries. The is sues were timely, relevant and well-written. One dealt with teenage pregnancy, the other concerned the effects of di vorce on students. They were a far cry from most high school news paper stories. These student journal ists went beyond complaining about the atrocities of cafeteria food and re ported intelligently about real-world subjects that affected their readership. They were good stories. But they never ran in Hazelwood East High School’s newspaper. Hazelwood East’s principal pulled the articles citing that their “frank talk” was too intense for the school’s freshmen. The stories saw print later in the St. Louis Dispatch, where they ran verba tim, but only after the Supreme Court decided five to three that the principal did indeed have the right to censor the stories. That decision, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, essentially killed high school journalism. School boards. and administrations across the country began to pull stories from papers under the guise of “pedagogical concern.” University publications, who had al ways been afforded a liberal amount of First Amendment protection, began to watch their back. The dagger fell on November 17, 1997, when a federal judge in Ken tucky ruled that, in some cases, prior review is allowable in the university setting. In Kincaid v. Gibson, students at Kentucky State University filed suit after the administration refused to dis tribute the yearbook because they did not like the content of the book or the color of its cover. Citing Hazelwood, the judge said that he could not conclude that the yearbook was a public forum or even a limited public forum, thus removing it from the protection of the First Amendment. In his summation, the judge reiterat ed the statement made in a previous case that a yearbook was no more than “a compilation of photographs.” He went on to state that “ [Yearbooks] are not usually vehicles for the expression of views, or for robust debate about so cietal issues and they have never been.” Tell that to the journalists at Indiana University who in their yearbook, the Arbutus, tackled the increase of drug abuse on their campus, or the students at Kansas State who reported on the re lationship between their growing ho mosexual community and the rest of their campus, or even the 1995 Ag- gieland, whose controversial opening pages explored the problems of alcohol abuse and racism on our own campus. University yearbooks have a long histo ry of reporting, not just recording, the stories that happen on their campuses. And as the products of student journal ists, that is their job. Just as it is important for a student newspaper to report the news of the year, so is it with the yearbook. But un like a newspaper that is simply thrown away, a yearbook remains and can reignite debate of the issues found be tween its covers every time someone pulls it off the shelf. Those who support prior review would say that the purpose of a year book is to record only the good hap penings at the school, or at least to put the university in the best light possible. But that isn’t journalism, it’s public rela tions. Imagine recording the year 1963 without mentioning the assassination of JFK, or claiming that World War II was only a skirmish. It may make for a better memory, but it leaves history in complete and prevents people from learning from their pasts. Already, A&M’s counterparts in the University of Texas System have been threatened by censorship. Defending the system’s prior review policy in a let ter to the College Media Advisors, Chancellor William Cunningham stat ed that the policy did not constitute il legal censorship, neither did it violate First Amendment rights. This blatant censorship only crip ples student publications, causing them to censor themselves. A frighten ing proposition for students, as the uni versity newspaper and yearbook are of ten the only outlets for issues specifically concerning them. That is why it is imperative that stu dents continue to support the First Amendment rights of student publica tions. Although the students may not always agree with what they print, as students they have that right, as well as the right to write that Mail Call or rip out the pages of their yearbooks and leave them on the editors’ desks. But when people allow the voices of their fellow students to be censored, the loss is their own. People will benefit much more by the “robust debate of societal issues” than looking through just a “compilation of photographs.” Amber Benson is a junior journalism major and editor of the Aggieland. Mandy Cater is a senior psychology major. MAIL CALL Hypocrisy often result of wearing bracelets While I applaud those who wear What Would Jesus Do bracelets in their attempts to truly not “fall short of the mark,” I find it morally repre hensible that many of these people who wear W.W.J.D. bracelets are peo ple who do not live by moderation, who drink excessively,and often, who blatantly exploit women and condemn other Christians (of any denomination) in their hypocrisy. In an accident I recently saw caused by a drunk driver, a W.W.J.D. bracelet adorned the drunken male’s wrist. At Texas A&M, we seem to have a breeding ground for these type of people; like a marriage ring, the bracelet comes off when the weekend begins, whether literally or figuratively. While their wrists sing of goodness, moderation, and praise, their hearts are rotten-to-the-core. Lucas Wagner Class of’99 Emphasis on exercise appropriate in America With regards to Michelle Voss’ Feb. 5 column, all I can say is: Whew! She must be feeling really guilty about the extra few pounds she put on over the holidays. She’s got it completely backwards. Before criticizing the people in the gym as being “holier-than-thou” and “obsessed with superficiality,” remember that Americans in general, and our gen eration in particular, have rather un healthy habits. We eat too much, party too much, sleep to little, and get nowhere near enough ex ercise. Sure, a few of the people in the gym are there just to show off their bods or scope out the babes — so what? Most of us, myself included, are there because we’re trying to lead a healthier life. Come and join us! Alex Cray Class of‘99 Chivalry, politeness prove important for people skills In response to Mickey Saloma’s Feb. 3 column: I just wanted to write to voice my total agreement with Saloma on the topic of manners and politeness in every day living. Like Saloma, I grew up in a family that stressed treating people at least as well as you would like to be treated. This “training” has allowed me certain advantages that people who do not employ good manners and politeness will never have. The primary advantage being one that Sa loma touched very lightly on: likeableness (if there is such a word). I have found that being polite to people results in them, if not liking you, then at least treating you civilly. In my job and as a student, I have found a huge array of people and personalities to deal with, some very pleasant and some not so pleasant. Being polite to them all and treating them all well has garnered many friends, has helped to avoid some verbally hostile situations and has even helped me to land a job. In closing, I’d like to thank Saloma for once again reminding us of one of the most basic allowances that we owe to our fellow people: common courtesy. Ross W. Jarvis Class of’95 Virginia Military cadet commends Silver Taps As a senior at the Virginia Military Institute, I have witnessed my share of emotional experiences. However, this Tuesday night, I was both proud and honored to take part in Silver Taps, a truly inspiring moment. Although I am graduating from an Institute soaked to the bone in tradi tion, I will always remember the Silver Taps and hold this memory dearly close to me. I salute all Aggies on your fine tradition where many gather to show respect for fellow Aggies and to share in their loved ones’ grief. Thank you for allowing me to experience this wonderful tradition. Ralph E. Ohland Class of’98 Virginia Military Institute The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author's name, class, and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit let ters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 01.3 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-13.11 E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu