Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 23, 1998)
lOionday ■ February 23, 1998 Opinion ENDERSCOPE toe v. Roe r cCorvey speech proves an exercise in rhetoric, not informative debate ast Friday evening I at tended a speech m by Norma Mc- /ey, who was Jane in the famous v. Wade case that Jized abortion in United States, many of us, I 1 about her visit |impus in Friday’s ‘alion. he article made Im: rshe had radically changed her ice from pro-choice to pro-life in 5 last few years. C0II *ii the article, McCorvey’s spokesper- said, “[McCorvey] is now 100 percent life, even in cases of rape and incest.” use McCorvey’s well-known abor- case is of utmost legal, moral and tical significance in this country, I ex- ed a packed house and an intelli- , insightful speech on the reversal of position. I was half right. udderTheater was indeed packed. I hoped for a cross-cultural group (a tall or der in Aggieland) with differing opinions and religions posing interesting questions about McCorvey’s transformation. In stead, I found myself in the midst of a rally, an overwhelmingly charismatic Christian audience whose members all held the same opinions — as evidenced by the pe riodic group cheering. McCorvey was “preaching to the choir,” a most ineffective method of spreading knowledge. I learned nothing of abortion. And it was preaching. The speech was largely, if not entirely anecdotal and based on her being saved by Jesus. Although I was turned-off by the rhetoric of her speech, there is certain ly nothing wrong with her choosing a religious format. The Constitution provides us all with freedom of speech and 1 freely chose to attend her sermon. Ironically, however, I was most disturbed by the manner in which she, and the audience as a whole, represented this brand of American fundamentalism so often referred to as true Christianity. Ever since I attended a Church of Christ elementary school where I had Bible class every day for four years, I have been under the impression the message of Christiani ty was one of pacifism and tolerance. I well remember stories of Jesus teaching us to turn the other cheek, love our neigh bors, be fair and treat others as we would like to be treated. But these ideas were not displayed in McCorvey’s discourse or the audience’s general reactions. Several times during her speech, “Planned Parenthood,” a legal, nation wide organization designed solely for the puipose of educating and helping women from an entirely objective stand point, was referred to as “Planned Death.” Most of the audience laughed and clapped, clearly amused at a misrepre sented jab directed at an organization which has helped millions of women not only in time of crisis, but in preven tion of unwanted pregnancy and trans mission of diseases as well. McCorvey also implied women who answer phones at abortion clinics are “tele phone executioners.” When the speech was over and Mc Corvey began to take questions, a young woman stood up and announced she was very much a Christian. She also re minded the audience we live in Ameri ca, a free society, and we should be able to make our own choices about abor tion, that freedom of choice is what America is all about. McCorvey essen tially ignored the woman and fielded someone else’s question. Another young man made a state ment regarding the question of life start ing at conception and zygote develop ment. Apparently unable to answer, McCorvey paused and then retorted in a sarcastic tone, “Are you going to medical school?” to which the audience ap plauded and howled with laughter. I regard myself as one receptive to a frighteningly wide range of humor, but I failed to find funny what cracked up al most the entire 800 to 900 member au dience. Perhaps “zygote” is too scientific a term for a statement about abortion. Perhaps this was a classic case of people mocking that which they don’t under stand. Or don’t want to understand. I didn’t really intend for this column to promote the pro-choice movement, de bate the abortion issue or bash Christiani ty. I respect the right all Americans have to freely, openly believe and practice their re ligion in the manner they wish. But I left Rudder Theater last Friday with a feeling of fear that there is a large and vocal group of individuals who not only think they have the meaning and definition of life all fig ured out, but wish to impose their beliefs upon tlie rest of us through legislation. Even though I am not a believer, I have found numerous passages and themes in the bible that I consider to be brilliant, beautiful or at the very least livable. But there is one particular verse I think to be most applicable to not only McCor vey’s speech and the audience’s reaction, but to all the times I’ve been told I’ll be spending eternity in a veiy hot climate. Matthew 7:1 Frank Stanford is a philosophy graduate student. TATE OF THE UNION le i I Id i p:.. ha; F^ivst nil6nfiJIiiMii8stt face off Idi^ | I ilencing protesters stands iqual to dictatorship, Saddam iiia Caleb McDaniel columnist ast week, ’(ifJthrce officials tithe iton ad- i.fj3.^ist ration med the :omfort- e truth )ut the itiffst Amend- nt from a up of an- college students at Ohio State versity. They discovered the it to free speech entails the re- insibility to listen. Secretary of State Madeleine Al- , ght, Defense Secretary William hen and the National Security riser, Sandy Berger, might have ended the televised “interna- eal town meeting” held in lumbus to be a pep rally for the isident’s policy toward Iraq. But y found a veiy different audi- ce awaiting them — atr audience it included a raucous bunch of tiers who interrupted the panel h antiwar chants and shouts. After the meeting, as the tired ee crawled back to Washington lick their wounds, White House icials immediately began as king blame for the divisive ent. The meeting was called a blic relations disaster, and the Hesters were called unpatriotic dradical because they made country look irresolute about litary strikes. Both points deserve a resound- Phooey.” Above the clamor in the capi- one senior Clinton adviser, hm Emanuel, could be heard ely rebuking his colleagues, his is about public education, t about public relations,” he d the Washington Post. “It’s a od sign that the First Amend- nt is being fully exercised.” Amen. Whatever our opinions out the Clinton policy may be, d however misguided the meet- was in the first place, history ould record the gathering at OSU good sign that the first amend- ftt is being fully exercised,” not a public relations bust. Albright, Cohen and Berger fried free expression not only otects their rights to state their 'frions; it also protects the rights frde dissenters who interrupt, dor, yell and boo. As political tiyst Noam Chomskey said on a talk show in 1992, “If we don’t be lieve in freedom of expression for die people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” In a very real sense, this country has succeeded because even those “we despise” are permitted to state their views. Free speech is the touchstone of political liberty for Americans. Thanks to the Constitu tion, disagreement is not stamped out in favor of an artificial consen sus. Instead, dissent is encouraged as a necessary prerequisite for healthy debate and democratic dia logue. So those who believe tire pro testers were out of line, or speech is only free until it is irreverent, must contend with a rather formidable opponent — the Bill of Rights. Of course, even those of us who are skeptical about military action in the Gulf are not entirely proud of our Ohio representatives. There was lit tle method to their madness. Inter rupting top government officials is rude; profane T-shirts are obscene; and labeling air strikes against Bagh dad as a “racist war” is admit tedly extreme. Ultimately, these protest ers are a disappointment to their cause, because their tactics have not endeared them to the people who call tire shots in Washington. But the hecklers were not disgraceful or unpatri otic just because they heckled, unless exercising the First Amendment can be called treasonous or criminal. Not all speech is persua sive or polite, but neverthe less, all speech is protected. Free dom of expression cannot discriminate on the basis of the form or content of expres sion. Some things are definitely not the right things to say, but Americans still have the right to say all things. If this is not what the First Amendment means, then it does not mean much. If we do not pro tect political dissent even in all of its ugli ness, we admit the unacceptable dan ger the people in power will decide what speech is permissible and what speech is not. And the willful suppression of dissenting views would be a tyranny on par with the reign of Saddam Hussein himself. If we wish to avoid the same evils that Saddam perpetrates on his own people, we must protect the first principles of our great democracy. That means all political dissent must be heard, no matter how ob noxious or annoying it may be. Before America grumbles about those pesky peace-lovers at OSU, careful reflection on the founda tions of our freedoms would be wise. And those who detest the chanting troublemakers should first pause to consider a virtuous vow once made by Voltaire. “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Town hall symbolizes turmoil of Clinton's administration « ne, two, three, r 'h I 1 four, we don’t want your racist ne, two, three, | four, we don’t want your racist war,” was the chant heard around the world last Wednesday night, as the Clinton administration at tempted to explain its plans for Iraq. In case you missed the ex citement, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Defense Secretary William Cohen and National John Lemons columnist Caleb McDaniel is a freshman history major. Security Adviser Sandy Berger held an internationally televised town hall meeting at Ohio State University. The meeting was signifi cant not for its content, but for the behavior of the throngs of hecklers and protesters who disrupted it at every turn. The media event, in tended to justify the ad ministration’s threat of force against Iraq, quick ly degraded into a major embarrassment for the Clinton administra tion and the United States, itself. Worse, though, is that the debacle is the defining moment of the Clinton presi dency. Wednes day’s town hall perfectly cap tures the presi dency ofWilliam Jefferson Clinton. First, just like the Clinton ad ministration, the town hall never should have happened. United States foreign poli cy cannot be run like a talk show. Last time I checked, Jer ry Springer was not the Secre tary of State, nor was Montel Williams the Defense Secretary. “Oprahdizing” the United States armed forces is not an effective way to run a military force. Our military forces work un der a strict chain of command. Soldiers take orders from their superior officers. They do not sit around and debate those or der’s merits. Likewise, it is not the job of the Defense Secretary to mull over United States’ poli cy and strategies for the media. It is his job to make our fighting forces as effective as possible. The military needs well defined policies for this conflict with Iraq, not talk-show type debates. It was the talk-show quality of the event that is so disturbing. By all appearances, the meeting was a cheap attempt at getting the public’s approval for attacking Iraq. This desperate need for approval has been a constant problem for Clinton. No administration has ever used polls quite so much as the Clinton administration to set goals and policy. Unfortunately for President Clinton, wars cannot be run by polls. Part of real leadership is being able to do what is right, even when it is not popular. The Clinton administration has yet to learn this lesson. Wednesday’s “Oprah Show” in Ohio had other tilings in common with the Clinton presidency be sides the administration’s constant need for ap proval. The event was characteristic of Clinton’s ten dency to waffle on issues. If sensitivity has been the administration’s strength, waffling has been its crux. If anything, this media circus showed how un sure of itself the administration is in handling the Iraq crisis. The reason for the administration’s uncertainty in handling Iraq, is that this president is not pre pared for handling foreign policy. Likewise, the ad ministration was completely unprepared for the chaos of last Wednesday night. Americans elected the president in 1992 on the virtues of his domestic policies, not his skills in handling foreign affairs. Un fortunately, Arkansas gave Clinton little preparation for dealing with dictators and terrorist states. Clinton has shown himself woefully untalented at persuading the world it is a poor idea to allow Saddam to stockpile biological and chemical weapons. Heck, he cannot even convince Ameri cans of this fact. Furthermore, the administration needs to use foreign policy to serve the United States’ interests, not the world’s interests. By the way, for those of clamoring against the president’s “racist war,” allow ing terrorist states to have biological and chemical weapons is not in the United States’ best interests. Finally, the town hall gone bad showed exactly how much respect Americans hold for Clinton and his administration. The president has endured so many scandals Americans no longer respect or ad mire him. Sadly, this disrespect for the president carries over to those around him. The heckler’s behavior at the event was inexcus able. Whether you like them or not, the positions of Secretary of State, Defense Secretary and National Security Advisor should commandeer some re spect. Chanting “Bullsh—t, Bullsh—t, Bullsh—t” at the defense secretary shows a terrible disregard for authority. It is sad Clinton’s lack of leadership would allow people to feel free to act in such a way. Ironically, Clinton was not present at the defin ing moment of his presidency. However, last Wednesday evening captured perfectly the defin ing characteristics of Clinton’s time in office. Last week’s town hall at Ohio State University is an em barrassment for the United States. Sadly, so is the Clinton administration. John Lemons is an electrical engineering graduate student.
