ELP WANTED
;store is now hiring lor Fa I
ixible hours and discard»|
Application in store.
needed. No expenera
Great money, flexible homs
ailable at all locations,
at Imperial Valley,
at Briing Drive, South- Hi
Road. Apply in person,
Opinion
Gallere
The Battalion
fagifi Tuesday, July 8, 2003
:
;CELLANEOUS
mpty, first time used txa
nk cartridges. Will pay
sh or check. Call 779-2757,w |
oartridge and pay you,
OTORCYCLE
y Davidson FXRT.
rstom paint. S7500/obo. 9^ I
PETS
s: Dogs, Cats, Puppel
ry purebreds. Brazos Awe I
•5755, www.shelterpets.oit
OOMMATES
new house, $350/ino., 1,31
yan. 713-724-7072.
462/mo., all bills paid inl'|
s route. Kim 774-5168.
new 3/3/72 brick tw,s;|
175/deposit. 832-642-0091
nates needed, 3/2 house r
> pets, S320/mo. +1/3utilte I
rw 3bdrm/2ba/2gar IxxkI
'AMU. W/D. S400/mo. C:
r \ 281-388-0519.
Prejudicial practices
Maryland wrong in creating student safety standards applying only to gays
ig female roommates ware:
aw 3bdrm/2bth townlxr: I
e-in. year lease, $375r< I
jtes from campus. (36Ilf-:-1
needed. Own bdmvte"
4bills. 680-8747.
ring roommates needed In
starling 8/15/03. fixe I
. old home close to campii I
furnished, except bedroor; I
r@ 694-7647; 469-441®'
3/2 duplex, w/d. yard, te|
ice, $300 +1futilities.
01.
needed, 3bdrm/2b!h ne» I
is 8/15/03, $400/(110..#
shuttle. Call Nikki at 2!i- f
: wanted. Share dtxt&l
other Grad. Own bdt* [
I, shuttle, $400/mo. 7791
1-2 female roommates !:|
idrm house in Biyan.
e M/F roommate. Veiyffi
ge rooms. 5min from Aif
/mo. Please call Cathy 57/ J
anted. 4bd/3ba., $400*
a house, close to campii
979-696-7817.
ERVICES
efensive Driving. Lols-ol-
jh-a-lotl! W |
ance discount. M-T(6pt
h(6pm-9pm), Fri.&Ssl-
&Sat(1Oam-2:30pu)
m). Inside BankoMnwa I
ame. $25/cash. Lowes: j
by law. 111-Univ. Df ,
-6117. Show-up 30/W
T he Maryland State Board of Education voted last
Tuesday to include in its student-safety standards
provisions that protect homosexuals from “verbal
or physical assaults,” according to The Washington
Times.
The old wording guaranteed all public school students
the right to a learning environment, “free from any form
of harassment.” It was a blanket statement intended to afford every
student the same amount of protection.
But for many, this wasn’t enough. After a four-year
battle over the issue, the board concluded that
homosexual students need special protection.
The new language bars discrimination based
on “race, ethnicity, region, religion, gender,
sexual orientation, language, socioeconom
ic status, age or disability,” according to
The Times. While most of these provisions
j§\ are fairly standard, the hot button is “sexu
al orientation.”
But the new provision doesn’t specify
^ what constitutes verbal harassment.
N ""' s N5v Nearly everyone who has attended
jV V- ✓ high school in America knows that
the epithet “you're gay” is said
teasingly and isn’t meant to
insinuate something about a per
son’s sexuality. But in the
absence of any specifications, it
could be considered sexual ori
entation harassment. So is it
sexual orientation harassment,
or isn’t it? According to The
Times, individual county school
boards have been delegated the
task of seeing through the semantics
and will ultimately have to decide what
is sexual orientation harassment on a
case-by-case basis.
Philip Benzil, the MSBE member who
introduced the idea of adding language
protecting homosexuals, told The Times
that unacceptable behavior against
homosexuals included “mocking, isola-
_ , tion and exclusion from social groups.”
|| j| This is absurd. Surely the MSBE could
not have intended the new provision’s
jurisdiction to cover who one chooses
I: V to be friends with, as this would be a
civil rights violation, and an impossible
rule to enforce. It does, however, shed
light on the intention of the provision:
to pander to the homosexual communi-
LINDSYE FORSON
a
m
ty more than to protect an at-risk class.
And just what is an at-risk class? The Times quotes
MSBE Board President Marilyn Maultsby as saying,
“Harassment because of their sexual orientation is more
egregious than for an issue such as acne.” Says who? In
an age where one can be discriminated against based on
his appearance, weight, height, intelligence and virtually
every other distinguishable trait, what makes discrimination for sexual
orientation so particularly “egregious?” Why single out one class of
people for protection when myriads of other classes and sub-classes
also face similar teasing?
Clarence A. Hawkins, one of the MSBE members, said, “If we
want safety in all schools for all children, then it should mean all,
and I don’t think you need to separate them out by category.” The
number of potentially disadvantaged groups is virtually endless,
and to start naming which groups deserve protection and, by omis
sion, suggesting that others do not may be like opening the Pandora's
box of political correctness.
Proponents of the new language argue it’s a necessity based on
the idea that students may not understand the implications of their
words and actions toward
homosexuals. Which
begs the question, who
should tell them? The exis
tence of this provision necessi
tates that schools discuss homosexuality with students. After all,
how is a child going to know what language is offensive to homo
sexuals if they don’t understand the concept of homosexuality?
Because this provision applies to all public school students, even
elementary school children will have to endure these non-aca
demic forms of education.
Educating children about an issue such as homosexuality over
steps the bounds of a public school’s function. Because homo
sexuality is laced with questions of ethics and values, there is
no way for a school to teach it without some sort of bias, and
therefore, it should not be taught. The mantra “separation of
church and state” is spoken tirelessly in respect to Christian val
ues infiltrating public schools, and the same standard should
apply to other issues of morality.
Carroll County School Board President Susan Holt said,
“Trying to get into political correctness isn’t where we should
be.” All students should be guaranteed a safe educational
environment, but the MSBE has gone too far. The state has
put itself in an unenviable place where it must address a
moral issue in a classroom. All this for the sake of being per
ceived by special interest groups as “politically correct.” The
phrase sounds nice and certainly creates a pleasant ideal, but
in cases like this, it’s just not worth it.
Lindsye Forson is a junior
journalism major.
Graphic by Ivan Flores.
; FREE
USE?
D TESTING
& men
eling
ces
i & Saturdays
it
Fed up with fundraising
Bush should focus on Iraq, not re-election
MAIL CALL
LY 11
;hry
>BBY
- THURS
I - 4:00PM
ENTER
BBY
- WED
- 8:00PM
P resident George W. Bush made a
flamboyant entrance onto the
USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1
to announce that the United States’
mission in Iraq was accomplished.
What he should have said is, “My mis
sion is accomplished.”
Since his presumptuous declaration, the United
States has lost 70 soldiers in combat. Faced with
these mounting casualties in a mission that is sup
posedly “accomplished,” Bush has failed America
again, shifting his priorities away from the lives of
U.S. soldiers to take up selfish political ventures.
Instead of taking a principled stand backing the war
and fulfilling his promise of peace and stability for
Iraq, Bush has been busy touring the country and
raising money for his 2004 presidential bid.
For the past six weeks, Bush, Vice
President Dick Cheney and first lady
Laura Bush have toured cities from
New York to San Francisco, attending
high-priced dinners raising roughly
$34 million for Bush’s re-election.
At the same time, American soldiers
have been experiencing, on average,
13 ambushes per day, according to
TheStar.com.
And while the Constitution makes
no mention of fundraising as a presi
dential duty, it does list the first duty
of the president as that of commander
in chief.
The fighting in Iraq was not for
oil, but what was it for? If the mis
sion is accomplished, why are soldiers still dying,
and where are the weapons of mass destruction and
Saddam Hussein? Right now, all the United States
has to show are many lost American lives. Bush
needs to focus more attention on the soldiers who he
sent halfway around the world to wage a war.
American soldiers are working from dusk to dawn in
temperatures exceeding 100 degrees thousands of
miles from home. The terrain is unforgiving and the
people are unpredictable.
With a population so hostile toward the American
presence and stability that is shaky at best, the presi
dent should be working to secure the region and pro
tect the lives of Americans already in Iraq. Instead,
Bush has chosen arrogance and rhetoric over tem
pered and meaningful action. On July 2, Bush
addressed the problem of Iraqi combatants and their
threat to American soldiers by saying, “Bring them
JUSTIN HILL
a
American
soldiers are fighting
and dying for the
United States
of America and
their commander
in chief is
daring attacks,
on.” American soldiers are fighting and
dying for the United States of America
and their commander in chief is daring
attacks. This is outrageous.
Former President Bill Clinton was
rightfully blasted by conservatives in
1996 for spending too much taxpayer
money and time traversing the country raising
money for his re-election. That alone is reprehensi
ble. Now, Americans have a president who has
pledged to restore honor and dignity to the presiden
cy, but is actually following in the Clinton legacy
while inviting more attacks on American soldiers.
The U.S. military is the backbone of this coun
try, but money alone will not solve the military’s
problems. Bush has passed massive increases in
military spending, but this money does nothing for
soldiers dying in Iraq. The office of
the president was not set up to stage
a reelection campaign, but that is
what it is being used for. History
will record and people will remember
the president who broke fundraising
records while waging war, cutting
taxes and overseeing a recession.
People are tired of hearing news of
military casualties and political
fundraising in the same breath.
People are tired of knowing their
president would rather trust business
es and the wealthy to provide them
opportunities than the Constitution.
People want democracy back.
The political landscape is digress
ing beyond anything resembling a commitment to
the American people. It is disheartening to believe in
a system and love a country so much while looking
to leaders to protect your brethren at war — leaders
who are busy fundraising or touting a new tax cut.
Unemployment is up, homelessness is up, crime is
up and U.S. soldiers are dying in a foreign land.
Bush is only attempting to raise money to ensure
reelection.
Presidents can and do more than one thing at a
time, but they must prioritize. Bush can raise
money, push legislation and make photo-ops all
around the country, but he cannot forsake the reason
he is in office and his commitment to the military.
Letter used cartoon to talk
around affirmative action
In response to Bill Kibler's July 7 mail call:
By using political correctness as a bully
pulpit, Vice President for Student Affairs Bill
Kibler was able to avoid discussing the
issue at the heart of his letter: affirmative
action. The July 2 editorial cartoon made
the point that a group that every person
should find disgusting (the KKK) would like
an admissions program based on race. The
cartoon helps the reader make the connec
tion that racism toward minorities (as per
sonified by the KKK) is no less revolting
when it is used on whites and Asians (as
personified by affirmative action). It is a
strong message of disgust against both
forms of racism.
It is sad that Kibler disagrees with this
notion, and rather than explaining why he
supports affirmative action, instead brow
beats the very outlet that facilitates campus
debate. Kibler states "Dr. Cates clearly artic
ulated A&M's position regarding affirmative
action and the Supreme Court's recent deci
sion." This is false; as I doubt that even VP
Kibler could tell us to what extent race will
be used in next year's admissions process.
The "clearly articulated" position that Dr.
Gates has taken on affirmative action is
nothing more than a vague pro-diversity
statement that does not explain what meth
ods will be employed to achieve whatever
Dr. Cates defines as "diversity."
Instead of writing to stifle campus debate
on the subject of affirmative action, it would
be more helpful if Dr. Kibler could inform
Battalion readers as to why institutionalized
discrimination against students of any race,
even through affirmative action, is not
morally repugnant. It is Kibler's advocation
of racial preferences, not free speech, that
"is in direct opposition to the values and
principles of Texas A&M."
Mark McCaig, Class of 2005
Vice Chairman, Young Conservatives
Cartoon was insensitive
to A&M's diversity needs
In response to the July 2 political cartoon:
Last Wednesday, July 2, a cartoon was
published in The Battalion depicting two
members of the Ku Klux Klan providing their
perspective on the recent Supreme Court
findings on Affirmative Action. This cartoon
is yet another of its kind, published in The
Battalion, that is supremely insensitive and
highly offensive to those of us in our aca
demic community who care deeply about
diversity. While there are many who may
wish to claim freedom of the press and the
right to publish various views on important
subjects, the choice of such imagery is, in my
view, totally unacceptable and despicable.
Our University community deserves a
newspaper that is progressive and looks
ahead to be on the forefront of important
issues, not one that dredges up painful
memories of the past and features an organ
ization that has its roots in hate and intoler
ance. As we all work together to create an
intellectual environment at our University
that embraces diversity, in all its forms, we
must welcome the expression of differing
views. But the expression of such views
should at once respect those of others.
The Battalion can play an important role
in our community, but only if those involved
in its production use the highest standards
of integrity and editorial judgment - things
that were notably and regrettably absent
last week.
David B. Prior
Executive Vice President and Provost
PROPOSED IRAQ WAR MEMORIAL
Justin Hill is a junior
management major.
>NORS!!!