The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, April 24, 1998, Image 7

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    iday • April 24, 1998
The Battalion
\MPUS CONNECTION
)irty dancing
kheduling Kyle Field Concert to coincide with Ring Dance shows lack of consideration
Mickey
Saloma
columnist
Jmething stinks
Aggieland. It
■ the lack of
isideration of
ers of the
adminis-
ition that stinks,
fese members are
iponsible for a
ip in the face to
jstlidents of the
sssof'98.
first ever
ncert at Kyle Field
Jen scheduled the same night as Se-
Jing Dance with no consideration
Ito either the concert-goers or those
;eBing the dance.
■mst be admitted that the proceeds
the concert will benefit the Boys & Girls
J of Brazos Valley, the Harvey Little
e and the Still Creek Boys & Girls
lies. The concert is supporting a no-
■use, and helping the area commu-
fsless fortunate is important, however
,gan excellent Ring Dance is also
Important,
to disrespect to the charities, but this
lilcert could have been scheduled at an-
Itime. In order to maximize the pro-
1 for these organizations, it makes
■ to have this concert before summer
I, but not on this weekend.
is concert should have been sched-
on the Friday of Parent’s Weekend.
could have had the concert followed
dnight Yell. It would have bolstered
the attendance for Yell and made A&M
look that much better to the parents.
Maybe it should have been scheduled
on the Saturday before the last three days
of finals.
There is no better way to blow off some
stream than to listen to three obscure
country stars play their lame, “I am not
quite George, Garth or Reba” songs.
Believe it or not, I am a fan of country
music, but I am not a fan of anybody ruin
ing an event that I have been looking for
ward to for four years.
One of the concerns of the two events
scheduled at the same time is that the
loud music coming from Kyle may inter
fere with the Ring Dance.
Athletic Director Wally Groff said that
he “couldn’t imagine [the noise] being a
problem.”
However, those of us in touch with real
ity know that concerts tend to be on the
loud side.
I have heard the sounds of concerts
from Wolf Pen Creek on campus. Does
Groff really think that music from across
the street will not be heard? Will the these
three so-called country superstars be
playing an acoustic set?
Ring Dance is a great Aggie tradition.
Aggies take serious pride in earning their
rings. It is an all-star day when an Aggie
receives his or her ring and after receiving
it, most people look forward to attending
their Ring Dance.
I am not all too enthused about Ring
Dance itself, but I am never really enthused
about spending 60 bucks in one day.
All I want is the picture. I want a picture
of me in my senior boots with a ring on
my finger with a beautiful woman inside
the giant Aggie ring. Again, that has been
something that I have looked forward to
four years.
I do not want to spend all that time in
line to get this picture taken listening to
people complain about the loud music.
Furthermore, I don’t want to listen to any
unwanted noise from a miserable concert
taking place across the street.
This is no way to spend a Ring Dance,
especially when you have paid an arm and
a leg to get in.
The biggest concern of the scheduling
conflict is the parking. There is no place
for everyone to park except West Campus.
I can just picture hundreds of women in
expensive dresses trotting half a mile over
train tracks to get to the dance.
This problem could have been avoided if
people would have just been more consid
erate. Why couldn’t this concert be held at
the new Reed Arena? Let’s get our money’s
worth on that big, over-priced gymnasium.
The fact remains that at a university as
large as ours, scheduling conflicts occur
all the time; however events as large as
those occurring the night of Ring Dance
should be spread out. This University is
for the students and the officials should
be a little more considerate to us.
Mickey Saloma is a senior
journalism major.
ERSPECTIVES
1
olor-blindness” stands as a euphemism for allowing racism
rsthe quintessential gray
:ea— race and its correla-
ion to achievement. As a na-
, we struggle with sweeping
[eralizations and predeter-
led judgments every day. Ide-
| we should achieve a level of
ir-blindness, where skin
Ides and heavy accents
lildn’t matter in the least.
I. AmatfBvever, those utopian condi-
Jr fortes do not exist, and it seems
|gfasite®btful that they ever will.
i\host of laws have been en-
Iteamcoi frtd to resolve the differences people see when only
Iciniei Bicing the color of skin. Affirmative action came
aa, shf lout in this way; it was something that was sup-
leeker L et i to bring forth the end of lily-white school envi-
canuiii'Bments and boardrooms.
psaid-Wutas the nation’s mentality changed, affirmative
Itensin »on became the scapegoat of politicians and radio
fgressis 5 ]
Beverly
Mireles
columnist
talk-show hosts. And although criticism abounds still,
no solution has been reached.
Affirmative action is being denounced in many states,
rulings against it have already been handed down in
Texas and California. A new case against it is taking place
in Michigan, where two students have filed a federal dis
crimination suit against the University of Michigan.
Judicially speaking, it all comes down to this: what
is worse — denying a student access to a school be
cause of color, or denying a school’s community of
color because of test scores?
This question, in broad terms, is what Hopwood v.
The State of Texas attempted to answer. There are no
easy answers when it comes to race, but the final rul
ing in 1996 declared that “The University of Texas...
and its officers... are hereby enjoined from taking into
consideration racial preferences in the selection of
those individuals to be admitted as students at the
University of Texas School of Law.”
TWo years later, the ruling is still being protested. Only
two weeks ago, students in Austin protested outside of
Attorney General Dan Morales’s office, demanding an
appeal of the anti-affirmative action ruling.
This is because since Hopwood, the number of mi
nority students accepted has dropped noticeably in
only a short period of time. And though the state of
Texas has enacted the “ 10 Percent” legislation, where
the top ten percent of students at Texas public schools
automatically gain entrance into state colleges and
universities, minority figures are still dropping.
It seems doubtful that the students will get their appeal.
A judge threw out a bid by black and Hispanic groups to in
tervene in the case just last week.
And the injunction that the judge issued will probably
not be pursued by AG Morales, although UT requested
that he use the injunction to start a new appeal of the
case. This is because Morales does not support the prefer
ences that affirmative action sets forth, and neither does
the Supreme Court.
It’s an optimistic view he holds of the nation if he
thinks that diversity will still prevail, even without af
firmative action. He may say that he supports color
blindness, but realistically, there is no such thing in
this nation, no matter what laws are on the books.
Terrible as it is, color has almost always been a fac
tor. Saying that affirmative action isn’t right because it
involves racial preferences is denying the fact that
racial preferences for whites have flourished for years.
And while Cheryl Hopwood and her fellow plaintiffs
may celebrate the ruling, and pat each other on the
backs for fighting for justice and equality, all they really
did was start the regression of race relations in many
facets of education and the nation.
Racism isn’t only shown in lynchings and angry
mobs. It is more practical, and effective, when it is
shown in the absence of minorities.
By supporting the end of affirmative action, many
people are only allowing racism, in all its insidious
ness, back into our lives, under the pleasing title of
“color-blindness.”
Beverly Mireles is a freshman
microbiology major.
AfWPUS CONNECTION
|ey\vil] 1! j
-3tocc
kment.
l&M offers students many religious choices
John
Lemons
columnist
ranee
m.
O inner,
^^sin-
C/ner,
f,” was the
eard
ss campus
veekas the
thatch of
pus
chersvisit-
tmpus.
group of
men and
women
d in front of the Lawrence Sulli-
Ross statue and attempted to
uade students to repent from
an idea many Aggies support.
Jnfortunately, the manner in
Ar the preaching was done
not well received. Several
anting matches erupted he
rn students and the preachers,
a fact, any time an Aggie dis
ced with these evangelists, it
tlted in the student being
d adulterers, fornicators and
i masturbators.
Aggies do not need to be
sed by ill-mannered campus
iches. Moreover, Aggies should
irepared to act effectively the
time angry, abusive speakers
ie to insult students.
'tudent response to these
achers was not particularly ef-
ive. While trading insults with
preachers may have been
little was accomplished.
Part of being prepared for the
next time these preachers come,
is understanding what they were
preaching.
The ideas being preached out
by the Academic building last
week are not new. In fact, they are
nearly 1,600 years old.
They are known as Pelagian-
ism, which is based on the teach
ings of Pelagius, an early fifth cen
tury priest. Pelagius claimed that
there is no such thing as original
sin and that man can live a com
pletely sinless life by his own self-
determination.
The Catholic church declared
this theology heresy. Further
more, these are ideas that no
mainline Christian denomina
tion endorse.
So, in reality, these preachers
spoke a message that few have
taken seriously over the last 16
centuries.
It is interesting that these old
and little-held ideas could rear
their head on campus to upset so
many people.
Indeed, although the crowds
around these speakers contained
many vocal atheists and Chris
tians, nobody seemed particularly
pleased with the message.
Regardless of the content of
these preachers’ messages,
their very appearance begs the
question: Does A&M need reg
ular visits from itinerate cam
pus preachers?
Probably not.
A&M is one of the most over
churched places on earth. If one
wants to be religious, A&M is the
place to be. Aggies have their
choice of numerous Bible studies
on any day of the week.
There are nearly as many
Christian organizations and min
istries on this campus as there
are students.
Aggies can join Aggie Sisters
for Christ, Brothers Under Christ,
Campus Crusade for Christ or
Intervarsity Christian Fellowship.
If they want a group affiliated
with a denomination, they can go
to Baptist Student Ministries, the
Catholic Students Association, the
Wesley Foundation or United
Campus Ministries.
If a student wants to speak
with somebody who really knows
their religion, there is a campus
pastor, priest or rabbi available
at All Faiths Chapel every Mon
day through Thursday between 1
and 4 p.m.
Now, this column is not meant
to criticize A&M’s numerous min
istries but to point out how many
there are. A&M needs another
campus ministry like it needs an
other fee increase. It is already
blanketed by both.
So, if A&M already has an active
and effective campus ministry in
existence, what do these vagabond
campus preachers want?
Most likely, what they want is at
tention. In the case of last weeks
preachers, this motivation ex
plains a lot.
It explains why these preach
ers were so quick to resort to ugly
name calling. Ugly scenes always
draw a crowd.
If attention is what these
preachers want, it is the one
thing students cannot afford to
give them.
Next time these ill-mannered
preachers appear, students
should just ignore them.
From their last visit, it appar
ent that these speakers have
nothing to contribute but spite
and strife. Aggies should not al
low them the opportunity to ac
complish even that much.
Aggies do not need to pay at
tention to angry and abusive
campus preachers.
There are plenty of legitimate
ministries at Aggies disposal.
Student should support these
ministries who give to A&M year
after year, rather than gratifying
the rantings of come-and-go
campus preachers.
Now, if Aggies had as many
choices in parking spaces as they
do ministries, then perhaps A&M
really would be heaven on earth.
John Lemons is an electrical
engineering graduate student.
MAIL CALL
Abiding laws of traffic
is necessary for all
Manisha Parekh might just
want to travel to Los Angeles to
see what life is like without
pedestrians and bicyclists.
As a transportation engi
neering major, I have heard the
stories about the California
commute, two hours each way
by car because the congestion
is just that bad.
In the case of Los Angeles,
walking, cycling and transit
were not priorities for the resi
dents and thus they have built
freeways up to a point such that
they are unable to drive without
sitting in lines of traffic.
It is important to note that the
pedestrians and cyclists that
Manisha calls “unnecessary traf
fic dangers” are important be
cause they are not spewing pol
lution or causing traffic
congestion like people in their
vehicles are.
I do agree with her plea to
pedestrians and bicyclists to use
facilities where they are provid
ed, i.e. the crosswalk for pedes
trians and bike lanes (on the cor
rect side of the street) for cyclists.
But the statement that “paved
streets were actually created for
cars” is not only shortsighted but
also incorrect as described by
Texas laws.
With or without bike lanes on
the street, cyclists are allowed to
use streets as vehicles and have
their own set of rules to abide by.
I will agree that many cyclists on
campus do not obey the rules,
but that does not mean that
those who do obey the rules
should be asked to get into our
cars for our commute to school
or work.
With the Bike to Work Day on
May 1st coming up, I would sug
gest that all Aggies revisit the
mode of transportation they use
to get to work or school and
should one choose to bike or
walk, to obey the traffic rules as a
bicyclist and pedestrian so we
can all coexist equally.
Peter J. V. Koonce
Graduate Student
Class of’98
The Battalion encourages letters to the ed
itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and in
clude 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 Mc
Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also
be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111.
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu
For more details on letter policy, p/ease call 845-3313
and direct your question to the opinion editor.