1*1
SfOlli,
:B *n%
Opinion
The Battalion
Working for a good cause
All greeks should not be judged for actions of a few
A • THE BAlTi.
ih western Si
II said. "Iii
our girls tiaii
ompeie."
by fresk
d nine goals.?
into the tea
ri said. 1
n Northwest
that will he
is prepan,;;
be succesr.
ink
i
ves us a dm
ents to Ini l
fash said N
swimmers a
;r so we at:
iff.”
ill beloofe
sw immers it'
ing into tee
i the homo:
ire loofe
d in a wavs
Tien’s,
tition k:
i. at tbei
m.
xash’
6 th
LENTI SMITH
he Texas A&M Corps of
Cadets and A&M fraterni
ties and sororities make up
la large percent of the student
population, and both are a large
part of life in Aggieland.
! Texas A&M is made up of
45,000 students. Some of these
students are hard workers, some
are not. Some come from big
[towns while others come from
towns with two traffic lights.
And some students do not fol
low rules, even though the
majority do. If one looks hard
enough, one will find flaws in
any organization — but larger
organizations seem to stand out.
A&M greeks encounter
problems every now and then,
as do the Corps of Cadets, but
in no way does that mean these
organizations give A&M a bad
reputation.
Critics of student organiza
tions should consider the bene
fits the groups bring to the
community instead of simply
focusing on bad press.
There are 4,000 students
involved with fraternities and
sororities on this campus, and
one person's actions do not
reflect the lifestyle of all 4,000
people, and certainly do not
reflect the actions of all 45,000
I A&M students.
When negative incidents
I occur in Greek organizations,
| they do not go ignored.
Leaders take action to see that
o proper punishments are handed
I out. Fraternities and sororities
I not only have an obligation to
the University to conduct them
selves properly, but they also
have to answer to their national
! headquarters.
The office of Greek Life
works continuously to cut
down on the negative outlook
on Greeks by promoting a
more unified front with events
such as Greek Week.
“The fraternity and sorority
community is working toward a
common goal ... to become the
best Greek community in the
nation. Our Greeks can’t earn
the best’ status without the
support of our fellow Aggies, “
said BrianTenclinger, Director
of Greek Life.
Unfortunately, Greeks do
not have this support. For
example, people constantly
reinforce how “No Greeks” has
been a tradition at A&M by
wearing anti-sorority and fra
ternity T-shirts with phrases
such as “Rent a friend, join a
frat” and “No Frats” embla
zoned on them.
But although A&M is not a
“Greek school” as some other
schools in Texas may be cate
gorized, the Greek system is an
intricate part of the Aggie com
munity. March 31 will mark
the 30th anniversary of the
Aggie Greek community.
“While the Greeks are not the
oldest Texas A&M tradition,
they are certainly part of the
Aggie traditions.” said
Tenclinger.
Greeks are automatically
connected with all-night parties
and wild keg parties, but this is
a misconception that has con
tinued for too long. The Greek
community is filled with men
and women who hold the same
goals of law school, medical
school and family life as other
college students. The Greek
system provides an opportunity
for service, leadership experi
ence and connections for career
opportunities later in life.
Greek organizations also
give back to the community.
“Aggie Greeks provide the
Brazos Valley with thousands
of community service and vol
unteer hours, as well as thou
sands of dollars to both the
local community and national
charities,” said Patrick Keegan,
a junior Economics major, and
member of Sigma Alpha
Epsilon Fraternity.
During the 2001-2002 aca
demic year, the Aggie Greeks
raised an estimated $50,000 for
various charities and philan
thropies. Not only does each
chapter participate in its own
philanthropic event, but many
chapters take part in several
other Greek philanthropy
RUBEN DELUNA •THE BATTALION
events as well.
“To criticize a part of the
Aggie family as large as the
Greek community doesn’t align
well with A&M’s long-range
goals and objectives, such as
Vision 2020 in terms of out
reach and community develop
ment,” Keegan said.
To become the university
Vision 2020 aims for, A&M
needs to be the best in every
thing.
One organization cannot sin
gle-handedly be at fault for
giving a university the size of
Texas A&M a bad name. As
long as proper actions are taken
in any situation no matter what
the incident or who was
involved, the university’s good
name will still be intact.
Isolated incidents are just that.
Lenti Smith is a junior
political science and
journalism major.
Death penalty advocates must not use Malvo
to encourage capital punishment for minors
(U-WIRE) LOS ANGELES — Alleged
Washington area snipers John Lee Malvo
and John Muhammad may have unwitting
ly claimed yet another victim: the move
ment against juvenile execution.
The archaic practice of putting juveniles
to death was falling out of fashion prior to
the shooting spree but has unfortunately
been revitalized following the apprehen
sion of 17-year-old Malvo.
Death-penalty advocates, seizing the
sensational nature of the killings, have
made Malvo the new poster-boy for juve
nile execution.
They argue that any juvenile “adult
enough” to help perpetrate the beltway
killings is “adult enough” to face capital
Punishment. Malvo — currently the most
loathed juvenile in America — is held up
ns proof of this principle.
It is a line of thinking embraced by the
U.S. Justice Department, made evident
^hen it gave first crack at prosecution to
Virginia, a state with a rich history of exe-
cuting juveniles, rather than Maryland, a
state which forbids adolescent executions,
t is in a Virginia courtroom that Malvo’s
status will be upgraded from juvenile to
a dult, largely because a segment of society
misinterprets overtly heinous juvenile
c nrne as evidence of maturity.
Malvo is a callous killer well-past reha-
ilitation. He deserves a life behind bars,
an d probably more — but execution is a
u
While teen offenders like
Malvo should pay a heavy
price, decency should
preclude them from pacing
the ultimate price.
step too far. Malvo has a cruel heart but
not an adult mind. He was an impression
able foot-soldier in John Muhammad’s
command, a disciple in crime rather than a
partner.
The New York Times reports that
Muhammad functioned as Malvo’s surro
gate father, controlling every aspect of
Malvo’s existence, including “...what to
eat, when to speak, and investigators
believe, how to shoot a gun.”
Sharon Douglas, a receptionist at the
Maryland YMCA frequented by the
alleged killers, was quoted by the Times as
stating, “It was like he (Muhammad) was
ruling him (Malvo). ... If that man told him
to stop breathing, the boy would have
stopped breathing.”
Though Malvo could and should have
extricated himself from Muhammad, his
juvenile status only antagonized a dire sit
uation.
As Supreme Court Justice John Paul
Stevens has pointed out, neurological stud
ies confirm that juveniles, when compared
with adults, have a less refined ability to
comprehend the ramifications of their
actions..
This is not to exculpate adolescent
killers, but rather differentiate their liabili
ty with that of adults like John
Muhammad.
It is a distinction our government has
been more than willing to make in matters
resting outside of the criminal arena. There
is a good reason individuals under 18 are
not allowed to serve on juries, vote or
marry without parental permission — they
lack the foresight and maturity of adults.
The logic is seldom questioned.
However, when adolescents commit per
nicious crimes, there is an inexplicable
rush to try them as adults, and in many
cases pursue the death penalty.
Justice Stevens argues that this pursuit is
“a relic of the past, inconsistent with the
evolving standards of decency in a civilized
society.”
And indeed, Stevens is right. The exe
cution of juvenile offenders is a throwback
to a more primitive, less estimable brand
of justice. While teen offenders like Malvo
should pay a heavy price, decency should
preclude them from paying the ultimate
price.
Ian Eisner is a columnist at the
University of California at Los Angeles
Page 9 • Friday, November 15, 2002
MAIL CALL
Recent article presents inaccurate
picture of study on coaches' ethics
The recent article published in The Battalion related to my
dissertation research, (Study Claims Coaches' High Salaries
Unethical, Oct. 31) was vastly inaccurate. As the individual
responsible for the research, I am not interested in assigning
blame for the article as published; rather I would like to
make clear the focus and results of the research.
My dissertation, entitled Ethical Values and Behavioral
Intentions of Head Coaches in NCAA Division I and Division
III Collegiate Athletic Departments examined the effects of
three variables on the ethical values and behavioral inten
tions of collegiate head coaches. These three variables were;
gender, occupational tenure and NCAA divisional status. This
research effort in no way addressed the salaries of coaches.
Although the study did find differences in ethical values
between Division I and Division III Head Coaches, the
results neither indicated that Division I coaches are unethi
cal, nor did the study indicate that their salaries were in any
way antecedent to their ethical values. Briefly, it was found
that coaches in Division I begin and end their careers at
approximately the same levels in terms of ethical values,
while the ethical values of Division 111 coaches seem to
increase during their time in the profession. This in no way
an indictment of Division I coaches, rather these results
indicate that some factor or variable within the culture or
environment of Division III athletics may cause an increase
in ethical values. Again, this does not mean that Division I
coaches are unethical.
After an extensive interview with the Battalion reporter, I
was asked why I thought these results were found. I stated
that although this study did not address this aspect of the
issue, there were various hypotheses related to the issue. I
mentioned several differences between the NCAA divisions
in question such as; increased media coverage, pressure to
win and recruit, and greater monetary stakes in Division I. In
addition, I stated that the difference could be due to an incli
nation for individuals to gravitate towards environments
which are in congruence with their values.
It is my sincere hope that the above statements make clear
the intent and results of my research at Texas A&M. I thank
the Battalion staff for allowing me to respond to criticism I
have received as a result of the article. I also offer my per
sonal apologies to anyone offended by the article.
Brian J. Wigley
Shenandoah University
Winchester, Virginia
NOW represents needs of modern
women better than other groups
In response to Matthew Maddox's Nov. 14 column:
The implication that IWF represents the interests of women
more accurately than NOW is a misinformed argument at
best. In fact, it's suspect that the two would even be com
pared, since IWF will admit itself that it is an anti-feminist
organization and actually advocates many anti-woman poli
cies. IWF also downplays statistics on domestic violence and
rape, pay inequity between the sexes, and sexual harass
ment in order to push its agenda.
Maddox poorly researched his piece, made glaringly clear
by his misunderstanding of the UNFPA and why Bush with
held $34 million from it.
The money was withheld because of claims from the
Population Research Institute, which is headed by anti-fami
ly planning Steven Mosher, and was continued to be with
held after Bush's own team of investigators concluded that
there was no evidence to support such claims. The UNFPA
estimates these lost monies may translate to 800,000 more
abortions, 4,700 more dead mothers and 77,000 deaths of
children under five.
Maddox also took a potshot at NOW for supporting Andrea
Yates, a woman who suffered from severe postpartum psy
chosis when she took the lives of her children. He didn't
even mention her condition, or why NOW would support
such a person, which would lead one to believe this was
simply a smear piece on feminism, intent on spreading prop
aganda instead of educating TAMU students. In fact, Maddox
doesn't bother with the many other facets of the NOW Web
site, choosing to only include the pieces that would look rad
ical out of context. He also includes many arguments that are
not even included in NOW agenda, but are simply conjec
ture.
Maddox also seemed to overlook the fact that the A&M
version of NOW isn't the laudable Women's Center, but the
TAMU Chapter of NOW. It appears that Maddox did not pay
much attention to fairness, fact or research in his piece and
should put more time into his conjecture in the future.
Katherine Harder
Class of 2006
I find it ironic that it is a man who is vouching for what
women are interested in. It is not surprising though because
men still think they know what is best for women. This is
evidently shown through their control over what jobs
women can get to the amount of money they make. Men
still view themselves as the ones who decide what is appro
priate for women to do.
Second, NOW is inclusive for all women. And yes some
women are lesbians, some do have abortions, some do sup
port the right for a women to control her body, some refuse
to be the subservient housewife, and of course not all
women are of the same denomination. This shows that the
Women's Center does indeed need to be at A&M if people
still perceive feminists as being all lesbians, pro-abortion,
anti-family etc. If Maddox actually went to the Women's
Center maybe such an ignorant statement would not have
been made. The Women's Center is here to raise awareness
about issues that not only affect women but men as well.
We should all take the advantage of the immense amount of
resources the Women's Center provides. Last of all, Maddox
should try to contact NOW to see why they are raising fund
for a campaign instead of using a male's reason not to. To
get to the truth you have to represent both sides of the issue
even if one is opposed to its ideal.
Shannon Strieker
Class of 2004