Opinion
ptember 5.2d |
The Battalion
Page 5B • Friday, September 5, 2003
ige Taking responsibility
students and siui
n and comment a
n appropriate ste
ou nave ideas on*
ain or be frustrate:
ir’s students ch®
• right avenues. If
is not a rcfercfc-;
.’lass, we will be.
i way that result!!
t bogged downtr
asibilities, we have,
the global issue*
campus can be e
■nr Man
id money
ass in high school'
ve should be nxw:
i would we pay afr
Classical LanguaK
its took Spanish r
in A.
nember more thar
Jon't have an extra;
spend staring a! a
of the tests are oft
ne and money? I ft
Loren 0
Class of%
Students partly to blame for loss of college programs as the result of budget cuts
(ENELLE
WILSON
;ap was imple
ill feeling the
W hen Texas A&M got strapped
with a $20.5 million reduction in
state funding, the University was
forced to make some changes. Thirty-nine
people were laid off in July and the journalism
department is potentially getting the axe, as is
the Dairy Center. The colleges of business,
architecture, engineering and liberal arts all
have enrollment caps, according to The Eagle,
and the agricultural education department had
a scare earlier in the week when an enrollment
j mented, then reversed. Academic programs are
pinch as the University tries to reduce costs.
As A&M students come to grips with the changes proposed by
| the University, they should be happy to know they are not the only
I ones getting programs stripped out from below them. College stu-
j dents across the nation are facing the same problems as states
! attempt to offset budget shortfalls by cutting education funding.
And students are partly to blame.
Students are not to blame for the existence of the budgetary
shortfalls; that blame certainly rests elsewhere. What should be
blamed on them, however, is how easy they have made it for
state legislatures to cut post-secondary education funding.
College-age Americans have the lowest voter turnout of all
groups. During the 2000 elections, only 32 percent of all 18-to
24-year-olds voted. While, according to a poll conducted by the
Harvard University Institute of Politics, 59 percent of college stu
dents say they will be voting in the 2004 presidential election,
voter participation in state and local elections is usually small.
The state and local governments decide policies that directly
affect students. It was the state of Texas that, instead of using
creativity to design more fund-raisers, simply cut funding and
offered public college administrators deregulation as a way to
make up the difference.
Students let the Legislature do it by not being more
involved, by not making it clear that
they would not stand for politicians
putting their education on the chop
ping block.
The United States is a republic, which
means the populace elects representa
tives to government to protect its
interests. It students do not vote, do
not determine who is in office and do
not follow state and local government
activities, it should be no surprise when
they get the short end of the stick.
Government officials would not dare to
propose cuts to funding for elderly popula
tions, because they know the elderly will show
their displeasure in the voting booth. An excellent
example of this is the prescription drug benefit
being reconciled in
Congress,
which, accord
ing to The New
York Times,
will cost an
estimated $4(X)
billion. Both houses of Congress
have passed this bill at the same
time the federal government is
facing large defecits — an estimated $5 trillion
over the next 10 years, according to the
Congressional Budget Office — because they
know that if they don’t, older Americans will
kick them to the curb during the next election.
College students need to follow the
example older citizens have set.
Students must tak,e responsibility
WILL UufX
OnDESUiRAI
fftOdJWfe
for issues that affect them, including their education; they can
not expect others to do it for them. If they disagree with situa
tions being forced onto universities by states, they need to stand
up and do something about it.
According to The Times, this year the University of Illinois
canceled 1.000 classes on hundreds of subjects. The
University of Colorado eliminated academic programs in busi
ness, engineering and journalism. The University of Michigan
cut its teacher training program by half and reduced the number
of class time slots across the university. The University of
Ttxas has had to trim $14.2 million off its academic budget,
which resulted in the elimination of 500 jobs. According to The
Daily Texan, staffers were laid off in the cojleges of natural sci
ence, engineering, education and the nursing school.
This budgetary cutting only makes it harder for college
students to graduate. When the loss of programs is com
bined with the rising cost of tuition and reductions in fed
eral aid, such as the Department of Education’s Pell Grant
funding getting slashed by $270 million, for many, gradu
ating will become nothing more than a pipe dream.
And this slashing of budgets will not stop until col
lege students force state legislatures to find solutions, be
it trimming budgets elsewhere, pushing the federal gov
ernment for more money or. yes, even raising taxes.
Legislators have to know that students are willing take
responsibility and fight for their education. The surest way to
et them know that is by getting out and joining political
organizations, signing petitions, writing representatives and,
when the time comes, punching that ballot.
Jenelle Wilson is a senior
political science major.
Graphic by Josh Darwin
Stoning of Nigerian woman must be stopped
O
n March 23, 2002,
Amina Lawal, a
30-year-old
I Nigerian woman, was con-
| demned to die for allegedly
1 committing adultery. If her
I sentence is carried out, she
1 will die by being buried up
I to her neck in sand and then
9 pummeled with stones the
I size of tennis balls until her
I skull finally collapses or her head becomes
I completely severed. Her case necessitates such
| punishment under a strict Islamic legal code
1 called Shariah because she became pregnant
I and gave birth to a child outside of marriage.
America and the rest of the world must not
I tolerate this outrageous and direct assault on
j human rights with quiet sympathy or deaf ears.
While births out of wedlock are no longer
:| punitive in America as they were in Nathaniel
I Hawthorne’s day, such an offense in Nigeria is
I currently grounds for death. The 2000 return
I of Shariah brings with it the reinstitution of
I capital punishment for sex outside of marriage
I that, in most cases, only applies to the female
1 partner because she is the one left with definite
1 proof of the encounter — a child.
The United States must do more to stop the
enforcement of this inhumane punishment.
America rushed to the aid of Michael Fay in
1994 when a Singaporean court sentenced him
to caning for vandalism. Because the Eighth
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects
against “cruel and unusual punishment," then-
President Clinton issued a plea that resulted in
a reduced sentence for the
teenager.
Other than a House of ^
Representatives resolution
condemning stoning as a
punishment, little else has
been done for Lawal by
American government offi
cials. Apparently, corporal
punishment for an act of van
dalism appalls Americans,
but capital punishment for
supposed adultery elicits
shockingly little response
from national leaders.
The United States— a
celebrated champion of the
voice and worth of people — hypocritically
watches this atrocity continue.
Because she is only the second woman con
victed — the first was acquitted on a technical
ity — Lawal’s case takes on immense signifi
cance for the future of women’s and human
rights. If she loses her appeal, she will set
precedent by becoming the first person to die
by stoning in Nigeria, a human rights violation
that the United States and the world communi
ty must not allow.
The Katsina States Shariah Appeal Court is
now hearing the case and a decision is expected
later this month. If it grants Lawal her life, there
is a chance this case will qui-
etly fade from the spotlight.
leaving an uncertain future
for others condemned to
stoning. In order to accom
plish the preservation of
human dignity beyond
Lawal’s case, something
Apparently, corporal
punishment for an act of
vandalism appalls Ameri
cans, but capital punishment more drastic must be done.
for supposed adultery elicits
shockingly little response
from national leaders.
The Supreme Court of
Nigeria must overturn her
sentence, but more impor
tantly, declare Shariah
unconstitutional. The world
community must put pres
sure on Nigeria to ensure
this happens.
The Nigerian Constitution of 1999 directly
opposes Shariah by asserting “the sanctity of
the human person shall be recognized and
human dignity shall be maintained and
enhanced." Nigeria’s national government, ,
according to the British Broadcasting
Corporation, concurs and has demanded
Lawal’s release. This demand has not been
met.
Lawal’s lawyers, whose funding has been
provided by various human rights organiza
tions, believe that the appeals court decision
expected on Sept. 25 will be in her favor.
If the Katsina State’s Shariah Appeal Court
upholds the March 2002 stoning sentence issued
by a lower court, then Lawal’s only hope is to
take her case to the Supreme Court. This battle
in the state court needs to be lost in order to win
the battle and accomplish a lasting change.
Only through a ruling by the Supreme Court
will the federal government have leverage to
enforce federal laws in the northern Muslim
states, saving not only Lawal’s life, but also
the lives of others accused in the future.
It is imperative that this case reach the
Supreme Court, and that may require intervention
on the part of a world power with the economic
pull and military backing of the United States.
The judiciary of the federal government
must utilize this situation as an opportunity for
exercising its power. Otherwise, Nigeria’s
image will be irrevocably damaged as a coun
try whose federal government lacks sovereign
ty over its states, a place where human life
lacks sanctity and women only dream of equal
ity before the law. For Lawal and daughter
Wasila, the stakes are even higher.
Lindsay Orman is a senior
English major.
Homosexuality not respectable culture
In response to Chris Lively’s Sept. 4 column:
As with most news coming out of the “gay and lesbian” division of
the country, I find this latest move to incorporate homosexuality as
a branch of intellectual study into one of America’s foremost uni
versities very disturbing. Contrary to Lively’s article, homosexuality
is not a culture to be celebrated or a mindset that one is born with.
It is a choice that one consciously makes to integrate and pervade
in their lifestyle.
I thought it humorous for homosexuality to be equated with some
sort of American value that we ought to cherish. It is not a value;
rather, it is a degradation of all that is moral and good. I would also
like to point out that stereotypes in this case represent exactly what
the homosexual “culture” inherently is — perverse and disdainful.
Contrary to what is unfortunately now popular belief, there are
absolute morals; there is a right and a wrong.
Homosexuality is not a culture to be respected or tolerated, or as
many have liked to say, “celebrated.” It is an affront to morals, and
values, and should be shunned as the vulgarity that it represents.
Lindsey Arms
Class of 2005
Homosexuality a dangerous lifestyle
My main concern is not whether the course on male homosexu
ality should be taught at a public university in Michigan. What wor
ries me is Mr. Lively’s seemingly full acceptance of homosexuality
as a “progressing lifestyle,” without consideration of the less palat-
MAIL CALL
able facts regarding that lifestyle. Having an understanding of
homosexuality is very important in our culture, but such under
standing is not possible if facts are ignored and/or stifled.
According to the Family Research Council Web site, homosexu
als tend to have been abused as children and to suffer from poor
self-image. Others’ violations of these men and women leave them
with world views from which it is very difficult to make good judge
ments regarding sex and relationships, whether heterosexual or
homosexual. Studies show homosexuality to be risky and often
harmful. Lesbians are at a higher risk for abuse by their partners
than heterosexuals and are also more likely to consider suicide.
Homosexuals tend to have many more sexual partners.
Disrespect for homosexuals is not tolerable. Such disrespect
includes the disservice of failing to inform homosexuals and our
society at large of the unpleasant details of this lifestyle choice.
David Dunton
Class Of2005
Gays should be allowed to marry
Most Americans do not support legalized gay marriage, but pop
ular opinion is a poor basis for law. There is no foundation for deny
ing equal protection to homosexual couples. Marriage is a legal
institution because it is in the best interests of the state to offer pro
tections that promote long-term, committed relationships. The idea
is that people in stable relationships are better citizens.
Laws regarding marriage have changed, i.e. the decriminalization
of marriage between people of different races. But fundamentally,
the state does not determine the appropriateness or the morality of
the relationship. The law doesn’t prevent people from marrying sole
ly for financial benefit. It makes no moral statements about those
who marry despite a 65-year age difference. A marriage certificate
is blandly given to drunken individuals who just met in a casino.
Legal marriage has nothing to do with the “sanctity” of the insti
tute. It provides legal protections to consenting couples to promote
the stability of their relationship, and thus of the state. The law does
not judge the morality of the relationship when it hands marriage
certificates to heterosexual couples, nor should it do so for homo
sexual couples. Equal rights must be offered to all under the law.
Melanie Edwards
Doctoral Student