The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, July 10, 2003, Image 5

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

    Thursday, July 10,20(13
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 5 • Thursday, July 10, 2003
or less (price must
ring personal possessions
e. If item doesn’t sell,
d to qualify for the 5
cancelled early.
PETS
Is: Dogs, Cats, Puppies, ft
y purebreds. Brazos Awj
5-5755, www.shelterpels/;:
ROOMMATES
lew house, $350/mo., 1/3li
n. 713-724-7072.
$462/mo., all bills paid iii;
us route. Kim 774-5168.
d new 3/3Z/2 brick h«
5375/deposit. 832-6420CS:
nmates needed. 3/2 house j
no pets, $320/mo, +1/3utite
'dew 3bdrm/2ba/2gar how
i TAMU. W/D. $400/mo. «
27; 281-388-0519,
as needed. Own bdimte
IMbillS. 680-8747.
oking roommates needed h
a starting 8/15/03. Nice,sp-
old home close to camps
ly furnished, except bedrotrs
indy® 694-7647; 469*
8/1 or earlier, non-smotr:
(or 4/3 new home, 904 Bo.
i!6, $400/mo. +1/4utilities.Ci!
-396-0766.
t needed in 4bd/2ba house:
. $277/mo+1/4bills, no(«S
43-6521.
e needed, 3bdrm/2bth »
ns 8/15/03, $400/mo.,ol«
utile. Call Nikki at 281*
mmate needed, S475 all hi
10-215-6072.
mmate needed. 3bdm2;
l/3utilities. Very nice, /sit
g. 5. Brittany 220-5166.
mmate needed. For Auj*
nobile home. $275/mo.*IJ
696-2119.
nt wanted. Share 4MM
ither Grad. Own bd/ba.te
jttle, $400/mo. 779-3434
1-2 female roommates:
Bbdrm house in Bryan. K
4.
me M/F roommate. VerjN*
arge rooms. 5min IromMI!
10/mo. Please call Catlii?*
nates for a house in fif
tub, pool table, on bus#
7.
wanted, $216/mo. +1/3#
-9823.
SERVICES
Defensive Driving. Lotsc 1
-loti! Ticket dismissal'
mt. M-T(6pm-9pm), *■
i, Fri.&Sat.- Fri(6pni-8r
:30pm), SatfSam-iJOpr
ofAmerica. Walk-ins
ash. Lowest price allowedr
iv. Dr., Ste.2 1 7. 846-611'
nin. early.
ieland Depot 4
;ieland'depot,coi
1 pepper Plaza j
695-1422 J
te Something To Sell,
Remember:
>ifieds Can Do It
3// 845-0569
Battalion
Spa
1ST ONLY
skin with a
ing Wrap for s 60
‘S, blemishes,
ties for s 99
des facial
ent 695-0327
tation
xt to Lacks)
693-1300
lpH s'.!
elivery
10®
purchase
Abortion funding under fire
Planned Parenthood should save its health services, funding over abortions
P lanned Parenthood will con
tinue to provide abortion
services for now, but it will
soon be forced to clearly define
which of the services it provides
holds higher importance — is it
the various health care services
such as Pap smears, cancer testing, sexually
transmitted disease testing and birth control? Or
is it the single service that its name is synony
mous with: abortion. In either case, it is abortion,
which approximately 2 percent of visits to
Planned Parenthood result in, that could cause
the Texas branches of the organiza
tion to lose $13 million in federal
funding, according to The Houston
Chronicle. Faced with this possibil
ity, Planned Parenthood should no
longer provide abortions, thereby
saving its other important services
and vital federal funding.
Under Rider 8 in House Bill 1 of the 2004
state budget, which takes effect in September,
federal funds are denied to any organization that
provides or contracts out other services to pro
vide abortions. This concept is not new, as a
1995 law also prevents public funding from
financing abortions. However, the law is difficult
to follow and enforce.
Although Planned Parenthood finances abor
tions through privately raised funds, it can be
difficult to prove where funding is generated. It
is more difficult to draw lines between what can
be seen as an indirect cost of abortion and
what can not. For example, counseling
that may result in an abortion could be
considered an aid toward it and an
indirect cost of the procedure. The
- morning-after pill could be considered
a late form of birth control but also an
t; abortion at the earliest stage. The hazy
T' boundaries surrounding these issues
forced legislatures to deny funding for
clinics that provide abortions to ensure
that the law is followed.
Planned Parenthood filed suit against
Texas Public Health Commissioner Eduardo
Sanchez on June 26, claiming that the restraining
of these federal funds is unconstitutional, accord
ing to the Austin American-Statesman. Similar
cases in Michigan and Minnesota ruled against
Planned Parenthood and in favor of the state,
however, proving that although Planned
Parenthood might be inconvenienced, it must
change its business practices or deal with
reduced funding.
If the funding is lost, Planned Parenthood
may be forced to close down some clinics
SARA FOLEY
statewide or eliminate the various other services
it provides in the ones that do stay open. But this
is not the best option, as a reduction in non-abor
tion services would be a simple declaration of
what Planned Parenthood feels is most impor
tant: the other 2 percent. If the organization
chooses to remove abortion from its services and
allow hospitals and clinics to administer them, its
funds would not be affected.
The lawsuit is pointless and a waste of
money. Planned Parenthood is faced with a sim
ple decision, backed by an 8-year-old law that
needs to be strictly enforced. Although the
organization may be reluctant to give up its
throne as the abortion king, it should not expect
taxpayers to fund an act that they might view as
deeply, morally and religiously wrong. The only
way to guarantee that public funds are not
used for abortions is to separate the public
money from anything affiliated with abor
tion. A clear division is necessary, and the
legal pleas of Planned Parenthood
will do no good.
The lawsuit does nothing
but stretch the length of time
until the inevitable decision
must be made. While Planned
Parenthood is biding for time,
a court ruled July 1 that abor
tions may continue until a sepa
rate hearing, scheduled for the end
of July, which will determine if
abortions can continue until the conclusion of
the lawsuit, according to the Austin American-
Statesman. Planned Parenthood cannot expect to
receive federal money without regulations, and
the continuation of this action during this interim
period should be the last time it receives this
biased treatment. The Battalion contacted the
Bryan chapter of Planned Parenthood, which
had no comment on the issue.
Planned Parenthood has released victimized
claims that the government is trying to rid the
state of abortion, but in actuality, the state is try
ing to prevent citizens from paying for someone
else’s mistakes or regrets. The controversial
cloud that surrounds abortion may not clear up
because of this legislation, but it will shift abor
tion completely into the private sector. Pro-
choice activists claim abortion is a personal
issue. To preserve the privacy of this choice, the
public should not fund it.
Sara Foley is a junior
journalism major.
Graphic by Gracie Arenas
Affirmative action and the multi-ethnic elite
'Assumed experiences y based on skin color silently fuel affirmative action
L ast month, the Supreme Court gave another
stamp of approval to affirmative action in
American academia. This erroneously con
ceived and executed system is a product of a
diversity-conscious culture. And while diversity is
a beneficial ideal that, in the words of Justice
Sandra Day O’Connor, makes for “livelier...
enlightening and interesting” discussion, diversity for diversi
ty's sake is not the real goal. At least in the academic environ
ment, the goal of diversity through affirmative action is deci
sively elitist.
Perry Bacon Jr., writing for TIME magazine last week, pro
filed his experience with affirmative action. He readily admits
that, as a minority, his career as a writer has been marked and
propelled forward by affirmative action. But affirmative action
has not allowed Bacon simply an education or job. Instead,
being black allowed Bacon access to the best education and
career path. Bacon, a graduate of Yale University, states that,
while he could have grown up on a farm in Arizona, being
black “leapfrogged” him over similarly qualified applicants.
But why Yale? Why TIME? The answers to these questions lay
alongside the quiet goal of affirmative action, which Bacon
writes, is “the creation of a multi-ethnic elite.”
It should surprise few that the battle for affirmative action has
been waged within the halls of prestigious institutions in
America. The call for diversity rings loudest at schools like
University of Michigan, not the University of Idaho, and the
New York Times, not The Daily Texan. If affirmative action has
not always been focused on getting minorities into
the top universities and jobs in America, then cer
tainly the goal has morphed to reflect that. Thus,
one finds that affirmative action is less about diver
sity as a means of enriching a learning environment
and more about the surgically precise diversifica
tion of selected preeminent “white” institutions.
If diversity is so necessary for a quality education, as the
Supreme Court suggests, how does one explain the preemi
nence of the Ivy League colleges? The average age of these
institutions is 250 years, and for a large part of that time —
while they were establishing themselves as superior institutions
— they were home to only the sons of wealthy white men. One
is left to believe that, without diversity, these institutions still
rose to their lofty state. Now, diversity through affirmative
action is not about any educational value.
Contrary to the ideas of Justice O’Connor, the presence of
minorities does not necessarily “break down stereotypes” or
“enable (students) to better understand persons of different
races.” As Bacon writes, “...a Michigan Law School student
would learn a lot more about the ‘unique experience’ of blacks
in America if he spent a day in an inner-city school in Detroit
than he would sitting in a torts class with me.” Yet, as institu
tions increasingly use race as an admissions tool, one will tind
classes filled with white students sitting next to minority stu
dents. While the image of diversity may be there, hearing about
the experience won’t trump living the experience. Affirmative
action is a sham, a “glass menagerie” for modern academia. As
Bacon writes about this multi-ethnic, “rainbow” elite, “I want
to join that elite and be expected to deliver the ‘unique experi
ence’ of my whole life rather than an assumed experience based
on the color of my skin.” But it is this assumed experience that
fuels the silent goal of affirmative action.
For years, Ivy League schools catered to their aforemen
tioned select group, and those outside its ranks were left to find
an education elsewhere. Affirmative action and its sidekick
diversity seek to reduce the number of white students enrolled
at America’s top institutions while increasing the number of
minorities. If one is white then he had a relatively easy life; if
one is black then he had a tough life. Misguided and fueled by
grotesque stereotypes, affirmative action reduces each person to
a skin color with the ultimate goal of making sure those with
more melanin go to top schools.
Last month’s Supreme Court decision reflects the political
climate of the nation. O’Connor admitted as much in her sepa
rate dissent by giving affirmative action a 25-year grace peri
od. But, diversity driven by affirmative action only promotes a
fragile collection of minority elites within this nation. Granted,
they will be well-educated leaders in society, but they will
have been given the chance to be so under false pretenses and
merely because of the color of their skin - nothing more, noth
ing less.
Michael Ward is a senior
history major.
MICHAEL WARD
MAIL CALL
Administrators aren't
welcoming others' views
In response to Dr. David Prior's July 8
mail call:
Dr. Prior has now joined Dr. Kibler in
attacking The Battalion for running a
cartoon that depicts affirmative action
as a discriminatory program that only a
racist organization like the KKK would
embrace. Make no mistake, the car
toon deplores both the KKK and dis
crimination by college administrators.
This, of course, offends Prior since he
is one of those administrators that
prefers using race in the admissions
process.
He states, "This cartoon is yet anoth
er of its kind, published in The
Battalion, that is supremely insensitive
and highly offensive to those of us in
our academic community who care
deeply about diversity." Ironically, a
fondness for affirmative action by
administrators such as Prior is
supremely insensitive and highly offen
sive to those students who believe that
Texas A&M should not care what color
their skin is.
Had the cartoon depicted the judging
of people based on the color of their
skin, in order to achieve "diversity,"
Prior and other administrators would
likely be applauding The Battalion for
taking a "progressive" stance on a con
troversial issue.
Most disturbing about Prior's mail call
is that University administrators are
using their positions of power to
attempt to coerce The Battalion to
adopt their own politically correct
agendas.
While Prior states that we must wel
come the expression of differing views,
the rest of his letter leads me to
believe this only applies so long as the
"differing views" do not conflict with
his own.
Kristin Foulk
Class of 2005
Teachers should embrace
homosexuality in schools
In response to Lindsye Parson's July 8
column:
In her July 8 column, Lindsye Forson
asks "why single out one class of peo
ple for protection when myriads of
other classes and sub-classes also face
similar teasing?" But earlier in her same
column, she quotes the new language
from the Maryland State Board of
Education that bars discrimination
based on "sex, ethnicity, region, reli
gion, gender, sexual orientation, lan
guage, socioeconomic status, age or
disability."
It seems clear to me that the Board is
definitely not "singling out" homosexu
als for protection from discrimination,
but rather, including them in the pro
tections afforded other groups who
often face discrimination.
She also states that "educating chil
dren about an issue such as homosex
uality oversteps the bounds of a pub
lic school's function." 1 couldn't dis
agree more.
If we want to send children out into
the world prepared to embrace diversity
and respect people from all religions,
genders, ethnicities and so on, then we
can't afford to pretend these issues
don't exist just because of their volatility.
I also would suggest that perhaps we
shouldn't just shrug off statements
such as "you’re gay" as kids being kids.
If it's hurtful, it shouldn't be condoned.
Robert Powell
Class of 2001