Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 18, 2000)
Page 7B Wednesday, October 18, 2000 THE BATTALION td). This rate applies 5t an additional 5 id to end to qualifyfoi Of children and cocaine Drug testing of pregnant women justified, can save the lives of at-risk children 3 WANTED is looking tor volunteer base 39 for more info. row accepting applications! A friendly and outgoings oosition. Computer knowfeij ng to accommodate the a student. Please apply h[ fax your resume to 776-42S lurant he U.S. Supreme Court is lurrently delib- rating on a |outh Carolina ase in which (tate and local were ted Tue i-$7.00/h i.SThurs. 9 Call 779-7586. 3RCYCLE lUSIC ner to intermediate. ler to Intermediate. First Ryan at 694-1195 EEDED K-state game 10/28. Cal 179. Will pay! 3 ETS Jued after hospitals reported to po lice test results of pregnant women ftsting positive for cocaine use. LLANEOUS I'hese women were subsequently "hnstmas 1 Halfpnces*.::l ITeste ^ an( J prosecuted for distrib- ny. caii Paul 7i3wi:^ting illegal narcotics to a minor. Women appealed the decisions the use of urine samples instituted an unlawful search, herefore, the hospitals’ actions ere unconstitutional. This de- Ber sifense, however, has been shot Jown in both trial and appeals " "'Courts due to the belief children |l any age should not be given il legal drugs and that those respon- fible should be punished. It is commendable that the Supreme ICourt has decided to take this jase and finally set a precedent I.I' snikes^bbitsT’ 011 P r0teCt ' 0n °i [ h e Ullbom. | The case, Ferguson v. wc. $250 with snots ^Charleston, could alter views on :1 reserve Nicole 693-45 s t a t US 0 f unbOITl children. The [act that the Supreme Court took lie case indicates that it has an in- ppies- akc registered, ™4 res t in adding to the debate over 00 Call 936-825-7311 ot;ir . , f ° , ... [ute rights ot the unborn. Whatever w/shots. very friendly. cTj Objection mothers have, the issue _iin question is whether broad pro- ^r e $ i“3isions can be made for the pro- ispiration.com tection of their unborn children. cue Aadoption shelter toffl’he tests ill dispute WCl'C per- ~ 11 —- ages for ado(« i . i • , id. vaccinated termed solely on women with a history of cocaine abuse, therefore \/lMATES establishing a lawful reason for hare 2bdrm1cth aparime' the SeizUre and disclosure of ill- osit. $26o/mo. +M2btits.£ formation to police. —— —P The U.S. 4lh Circuit Court of ^ ^ Appeals rejected the appellants’ pring semester. 4bdm, objection that the drug tests vio- 95-104B - pllated their Fourth Amendment ripus" d $225/mo.^?/2biisi n ^ ts because the law does not irequirean absolute need to (VICES learch, but it must be “important i well, very tame, slines of all rmed, de-flead 825-8610, enough to justify the par ticular search at hand, in light of other factors that show the search to be relatively in trusive upon a genuine expec tation of privacy.” The court ruled the search in this case was justified and proper. “Here, there can be • little doubt that testing the urine of maternity patients when certain indicia of possible co caine use were pre sent was an effective way to identify and treat maternal co caine use while conserving the limited resources of a public hospi tal,” wrote Jus tice William W. Wilkins in the court’s majority opinion. “Indeed, pre natal testing was the only ef fective means available to accomplish the primary policy goal of per suading women to stop using co caine during their pregnancies in order to reduce health effects on children exposed to cocaine in utero.” Doctors were given ample reason to suspect certain mothers of drug abuse when pregnant, and subjecting these women.to drug tests is surely a reasonable search based on their history. These invasions of a person’s privacy were made with the sole interest of protecting children from the debilitating effects of drugs and to prevent these chil dren from being born with an ad diction or deformity. Acting in protection of mi nors, born or not, is sufficient in warranting search based on an historical probability. The defense has also analo gized their position to that of doctors who report gunshot wounds and signs of child abuse. If there is a situation of overt en- dangerment of a child, then a doctor is compelled to report the situation to law enforcement of ficials. In much the same way, drug abuse forces law enforce ment intervention. However, the appellants reject these arguments because the sys tem of testing and arrest is over ly intrusive on women’s privacy and that the tests are unfairly bi ased toward particular races and levels of socioeconomic status. The women claim blacks and lower class women are tested and prosecuted and that, because the entire operation is actually a law enforcement act, it is unfair that they were subjected to the tests under the guise of prenatal care. So far, lower courts have ruled on the assumption that a person cannot give an unborn child cocaine because they are minors. This assumption neces sitates a new view of whether Or not unborn children have a right to life and good health. However the court rules, it is about time it decided to look at an issue on which there are al ready heavy assumptions about the rights of the unborn and the responsibilities and rights of pregnant Women. Matt Loftis is a sophomore journalism and french major. ving. Lots-of-fun, Laugh- :e discount. M-T(6pm-i it.- Fri(6pm-8pm) &Sat(1l tti). Inside Bankoli :ash. Lowest price all a.217. 846-6117. 245. Classes start fr a course is the best and i for the GRE. Contacli asterycourse.com o Slacking American society’s mindset not as horrible as some seem to think NTED kets. Call 1-800-7 lus! New Lower Prices 1 :ash, Checks, Credit® )-lbs. in 30-days. DocW ,s auary 8-18,. ti/B/Q or 7#“ )0«SUNCH^ Daniel MCMAHAN hy are Americans often so restless live? www.housingtoiif • mi in the midst ol heir prosperity? That is ; he question Alexis de ® focqueville, 19thcentu- y French writer and so- - |ial commentator, sought Cansas State game Calf* | 0 answer in h j s book " Jemocracy in America. , ,u Zch d ' Tbcqueville could not comprehend the pri- (509)925-9003. )rities of Americans at that time and ques- oking to rent furnished ioned their values. Tocqueville endorsed a aets, non-smokers, ter lifestyle of tranquility and a sense of self-sat- ( faction with the pleasures of everyday life. IT LOSS i f° unc ( n odd that, despite the success of he American people, they were never satis- ied and were continually driven to pursue iven greater accomplishments. focqueville’s interpretations of the emerg- ng American entrepreneurial spirit are under- J tandable. In his time, Tocqueville witnessed oamhnafCSi ^ mer ‘ ca ’ s westward expansion and the Cali- eampoai^ j orn j a gold rush. To European onlookers like Tocqueville, the fever with which Americans vere pursuing wealth and prosperity would :ertainly have seemed bizarre, especially giv- itripusaxojl, -n European standards of prosperity at the ime depended upon more than the girth of >ne’s wallet. Tocqueville’s piece is a classic that pro vides much insight into the contrasting val ues between the respective continents at the time. Although his observations and conclu sions — given the time period — are ar guably accurate, they are, of course, bogus when applied today. Why then did an article from Tocqueville’s book, Democracy in America, appear in the “49ers” are being put on trial here. The en dorsement of Tocqueville’s work with refer ence current era of American prosperity is a condescending gesture. Today’s movers and shakers are being accused of being culturally deficient as if participation in the rat race di minishes today’s business afficionado. When all the fine print is sorted through and the contents of Tocqueville’s work is de- Human nature is a term that knows no discrete definition. The drive and hunger with which some citizens of the world pursue success is just a micro cosm of the human spirit. Houston Chronicle’s Outlook section on Oct. 8? The Chronicle is a well-respected newspa per and obviously not a collection of literary works. Being so, one can only make the as sumption that the intention of the respective editors is to imply that Tocqueville’s work has relevance in today’s American society. The notion is dreamy and romantic, but rather ab surd as well. The Chronicle’s implication doubles as an accusation toward the American people who are responsible for today’s prosperity. Today’s ciphered, the core argument is that the pur suit of wealth and prosperity is a less noble and fulfilling cause than is the enjoyment of the pleasures at hand. While this attitude was probably very popular in the 1960s, it is are rather perplexing today. Had the attitudes of Americans over the past century been molded to support this argu ment, it is highly unlikely that many of the major accomplishments that can be credited to the hard work of Americans would have occurred. The Internet still would be a daydream, Wall Street would be a dirt road hosting sa loons and brothels, transportation would still be in the form of a four legged animal — certainly not an airplane — and polio would have been a deadly illness for decades more. Phrases like “all work and no play make a bore of a day,” give Tocqueville’s argument relevance in today’s world. Human nature is a term that knows no discrete definition. The drive and hunger with which some citizens of the world pursue success is just a micro cosm of the human spirit. It should in no way be criticized, especially when it is re sponsible for so many of the technological advances that benefit all in today’s world. And what would Tocqueville say to those people who define success by different stan dards than wealth? Is the artist who labors for days on end in quest of the perfect masterpiece also guilty in the eyes of Tocqueville of “living for all the wrong reasons”? Promoting a lackadaisical existence and scolding ambition is a recipe for mediocrity, and mediocrity is...well, nothing special. Daniel McMahan is a senior industrial engineering major. Mail Call , n^Rights are universal, ujpuo not require testing [jjgji in response to Jason Bennyhoff’s Oct. uth column. Bennyhoff’s article about idiots abus ing the right to free speech was right on rack. He did miss a few points, though. He should have included writers and edi- ors who publish articles without proof- eading them for accuracy and coherency. It is a tragedy that “criminals continu- risly abuse the right to bear arms and -vangelists steal from their congratula tions,” but I am tired of reading opinions hat are not researched or presented in ri organized, educated way. If Bennyhoff wants someone to see his J oint of view, it is important to express is ideas in a way that others can under stand. The Battalion should not be a fo- 'Um for the pseudo-intellectual rambling of someone who believes he is more in telligent and more deserving of constitu tional rights than others. Erica Redden Class of ’02 Bennyhoff could have been a little more tactful when insulting a good deal of America. What bothered me was his lack of knowledge of the law. If he is going to insult the Constitution, he should know what he is insulting. The right to bear arms is reserved to defend ourselves against governments, both foreign and domestic. If our govern ment, without our permission, starts en forcing laws that infringe upon our person al freedoms, we have the Constitutional right to defend those freedoms. Nobody can walk into a gun store and buy a gun. In Texas and in many other states, a buyer must undergo a back ground check to make sure they are not a convicted felon or mentally unstable. If the buyer passes that and still wants a handgun, they must then take a course that teaches proper handgun safety and knowledge of firearm laws. The course is followed by a written exam and a field test. These two tests prove that someone can operate the weapon as well as under stand the laws that pertain to it. Both tests are difficult and require com petence. Our gun laws, like so many of our laws, weed out those who cannot cut it. Please do the student body a favor and research the topics you write about. When a columnist from the school paper gets the facts wrong due to laziness, it makes the paper and the University look bad. Joshua Thomas Class of '02 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 letters for length, style and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 014 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 014 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University 1111TAMU College Station, Texas 77843 Campus Mail: 1111 Fax: (979) 845-2647 E-mail: battletters@hotmail.com Columns and letters appearing in The Battalion express the opinion of the au thors only. They do not necessarily reflect the opin ion of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, admin istrators, faculty or staff. BAD CHECKING McSorley punishment takes away from NHL’s authority over players L ast season the National Hockey League (NHL) ex perienced an un heard-of event, and no, it was not the defeat of the Dallas Stars. It was vio lence in a hockey rink. That is what hockey is all about, right? On Oct. 6, a Vancouver court responded to that question with a resounding “No” after finding Boston Bruin Marty McSor ley guilty of assault with a weapon. McSorley was charged after hitting Donald Brashear in the back of the head with his stick. According to the Vancouver court, McSorley not only crossed, but leaped over the line separating violence that is part of the game with potentially dangerous behavior with his hit on Brashear. Hockey players step on the rink with a certain implied level of ex pectancy for rough and hazardous play. In that respect, what might be considered assault on a public street is common in an NHL game. The Van couver court made a mistake by charg ing McSorley, and future disciplinary action should be left to on-ice conse quences. The NHL has long encouraged physical play within the confines of a game. In doing so, the NHL has drawn a fine line between good play and unnecessary roughness. Often, players cross that line and find them selves in the penalty box or facing game suspensions. As for McSorley’s hit, there is no question whether he crossed the line. McSorley was pun ished with a 23-game suspension, the harshest penalty ever handed down by an NHL commissioner. In this partic ular case, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman did an exceptional job of us ing his authority as commissioner to send a message that McSorley’s play would not be tolerated. Offenses during the game should be handled by the league. The law officials in Vancouver, however, had a different opinion. Mc Sorley was arrested, charged with as sault and eventually convicted. While McSorley does not face any jail time for his offense, he was placed on 18 months of probation and cannot play hockey against or come into contact in any way with Brashear during that time. McSorley’s 17-year NHL career is likely over as a result of this ruling. Offenses during the game should be handled by the league. Each and every one of these athletes are well aware of the implied consent he gives when he decides to enter professional sports. These athletes, hockey or oth erwise, are paid well for the risks they take every game. It is not the job of any outside agency to police a particular profes sional sport. Will major league pitch ers in now be charged with assault when they hit a batter with a pitch? Should law enforcement officials pun ish NFL players for late hits? Most anyone would say no, reasoning that these are all things that happen in the course of a regular game. McSorley was out of line when he hit Brashear. Certainly, he deserved to be suspended, and the NHL made it clear it did not endorse that kind of physical play during hockey games. It should have been left at that. Hockey is one of the more violent professional sports. From time to time, tempers will flare, and the heat of the action will take hold of the players; fights will occur, and cross-checks will be made. Players will be injured as a result of such violent behavior. While it is important to impress upon these athletes the need to respect their oppo nents, the enforcement of that respect should not take place off of the ice. The Vancouver court made a mis take by charging and convicting Mc Sorley with assault. NHL fans can only hope that this ruling does not af fect the intensity of the game. Hockey is not the same sport without the crushing blows and the dropping of the gloves. Marcus White is a sophomore general studies major.