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