/ANTED
Went, n,;
<1 time day'
tJo appt
1815 Han;
U- Peter
*1 Specij’
Wbns, ligiiis
Book earty
Wockdj.co?
IS
lens for j
fcts, tesi
ialments. n
One proven:
to leonisr-
Opinion
IliSliii
The Battalion
Conflicts of interest
erry’s abortion philosophies conflict political stance
7i/2btti,
npus, $88i|
2bdrm/1btt (
3s, Carlos a
>0. 979-22J!
s the Democratic
National Conven
tion comes to an end
oston, some undecided,
-time college voters may
in to see what the party
rs via its presidential
ninee, Sen. John Kerry,
a more accurate portrayal
;ht have already been
icted while he was on the
paign trail.
ccording to published reports,
ry recently stated, “I oppose
rtion, personally. 1 don’t like
^^^_rtion. 1 believe life does begin
lAltb conception.” In May, similar
roommate corments were made by his wife,
ne p ac J,': let tsa Heinz Kerry, who said
tbortion “is stopping the process
Jjife.”
“i 0 understand the gravity of
romo♦he Kerry’s comments, one might
361-648j<* e || t0 cons i ( j er the follow-
Q/mo j n l jn-efutable facts. Pregnancies
189 or m B the result of conceptions and
py believes “life does begins at
ception.” Abortion ends a preg-
icy. According to Kerry’s own
io. includes:jhilosophy then, abortion ends a
i93 ~ 711 -- y 1,111 I>f e -
fDne might assume that this
uld mean the Massachusetts
ator is against abortion, es-
cially since he is Catholic and
itholicism openly rejects the
a of abortion. According to his
sidential campaign Web site,
rry plans to protect “(women’s)
JOSHUA
DWYER
duplex, t
:ion, w/d.
pring. 4W.
is, $325/to i
constitutional right
to choose.” This
point is confirmed
by his 100 percent
pro-choice voting
record as assigned
by Planned Par
enthood and the
National Abortion
and Reproductive
Action League.
These incon
sistencies stir up a question. Is
Kerry supporting abortion to gain
pro-choice votes despite his own
views, or does he
believe it is per
missible to end
the life of human
beings?
Since Roe v.
Wade, the abor
tion debate has
centered around
two issues: the
time that a baby
receives recogni
tion as a human
being, and what,
if any, are the
boundaries of
the pregnant
mother’s rights.
Pro-life advo-
cates have sought to define the
legal status of the fetus as a person,
beginning at the time of concep
tion. This would entitle it to full
protection under the law from any
Is Kerry sup
porting abortion
to gain pro-choice
votes despite his
own views, or
does he believe it
is permissible to
end the life of hu
man beings?
attempts by any person to abridge
its rights, including its right to life.
Pro-choice advocates have
maintained that the fetus does
not meet the legal status of per
son, and therefore does not have
any individual rights. While de
bate continues in the pro-choice
community regarding when the
fetus does deserve the rights of
personhood, the time frame for
permissible abortions ranges
from some time after conception
up until birth, in some cases.
A review of history provides
two notable examples
of the personhood
debate. Up until the
mid-nineteenth cen
tury, the United States
permitted the owner
ship of slaves based
on the assumption that
they were property,
not people deserving
the rights of citizens.
Fortunately, the er
ror was overturned
by the 13th and 14th
Amendments. A more
recent occurrence of
the debate took place
in Germany with the
rise of the Nazi Party,
which denied the personhood
of certain classes of people in
order to justify the inhumane
treatment of them. This was only
rectified by the defeat of the
Axis Powers in World War II.
As president, Kerry claims he
will only appoint federal judges
who uphold the constitution
ally protected status of abortion.
That means not only will Kerry
stand idly by as an estimated 1.3
million lives—in his view— are
ended in the next year, but he
will be a material accomplice in
the act.
Ending a human life is ho
micide. In some cases, such as
executing death row inmates or
in self-defense, homicide is con
sidered justifiable by the govern
ment. The government does not
consider the intentional, unpro
voked ending of innocent human
life to be justifiable. Kerry does.
Kerry has committed himself
to stand by his positions; he
just doesn’t know what those
positions mean or what conse
quences they might have.
Joshua Dwyer is a sophomore
political science major.
oalition-building necessary for sercurity
2 house,
979-690-8. 1
By Bryant Melton
THE CRIMSON WHITE
(U-WIRE) TUSCALOOSA, Ala. — This
ek, the 2004 Democratic National Conven-
n began in Boston. As the camera pans
|e crowd during speeches, be sure to take
te of the audience. The
mocratic Party is one of
traordinary diversity. You
11 see men and women,
ck and white, Hispanic,
ian and Native Ameri-
jns. We are a family com-
ised of individuals young
d old, who come from
61-293-82® fferent cultures and social
id economic backgrounds,
short, when you glance
toss the audience, you
will see America.
I Partisan politics has its
i ace, but governance can
jonly be done efficiently
rough cooperation and
alition building. It is
immate ne«
to, still *
787-2481.
king roomfi
lugainvilleai
ill Jacob all
S.
, need
se. $425'
979-693-3! 1
We must rede
fine out concept
of national secu
rity, and our ap
proach to home
land security must
be seamless.
r 1bd/1ba
W/D, 40511
n/2bth
ble, on st.|
r 3/2/2,
5/mo. +1®
portant that we all be open to ideas, whether
ey come from moderates, conservatives or
erals. Taking the best of our different back-
ounds and blending them together is what
flakes this country so great. We must bring our
bdrm/4btli
'/d, cable, *
O/mo. 972-5
;bdrm houS
pets ok. !
varied ideas together in order to progress.
We must work to unite our country, not divide
it. It’s a shame, but it seems in recent years the con
cept of coalition-building has fallen awry. We must
build alliances that will help bring about prosperous
change. Only a broad-based coalition will be suc
cessful in creating solutions to problems.
Invading a country is not a prudent way to
protect ourselves from terrorism. We
need to focus on homeland security,
meaning security in our “home land,”
something I think we have lost sight
of. When you live in an open society,
there are great privileges, but there are
also great risks. With a little attention
to detail, we can lessen those risks
and protect our open society.
We must redefine our concept of
national security, and our approach
to homeland security must be seam
less. Sept. 11 was sobering. We can
no longer afford to think of security
as the sole responsibility of our
military and law enforcement. We
should share information, as there
is currently not enough sharing
of intelligence within the federal
government. It is clear that our government
hasn’t invested enough in America’s home
land security.
Although some money has gone to pro
tecting our homeland, it is a pittance com
pared to the funds we have spent outside this
country in the name of security.
While we spend hundreds of billions of
dollars abroad, our nation’s power grids and
water supplies are vulnerable. Currently, 95
percent of our nation’s overseas trade moves
by sea, yet there is very little being done to
protect our ports. Public health continues to
be under funded and ill-prepared for a bioter
rorism attack.
We must work to strengthen our police and
fire departments. We must make every effort
to protect our water and food supplies from
possible attack. Our borders must be moni
tored more closely.
Domestic defense must be a top priority in
the everyday work of government, not exclu
sively in emergency situations. Federal, state
and local agencies must work together to
have a central clearinghouse and prepare a
comprehensive plan and program for home
land security. We must all work together,
embrace our diversity and build coalitions
that will protect all of America.
Bryant Melton is a columnist
at U. Alabama
Fahrenheit’ twists meaning of simple facts
By Tony Mckee
EAST CAROLINIAN
(U-WIRE) GREENVILLE, N.C.
for 3bdrIii%H ave you noticed that some peo-
. insoutiitiple have a different concept of re-
2>-82o-oiK|j t y, truth and j nte g rity 9 That they
in take simple facts and twist their
eaning or context so much that
nrhead hurts just trying to follow
dr illogic?
Michael Moore is one of those
icple and his newest “documen-
ity,” Fahrenheit 9/11, is a prime
xample of what can happen when
»se, nicetj truth” becomes nothing more than
^$347^0 J political agenda.
S70-2f7$ This movie is so far removed
■^T$25^ ^ om lh e truth that even liberal
ommentators and critics are trash-
ig it. Not all of them of course, but
[nough to be noteworthy nonethe-
ss. I won’t even try to counter
the lies and misrepresentations
the movie. I’ll just hit the most
laring ones.
First, Moore lays out the ongoing
beral-whacko claim that President
lush “stole” the election in 2000.
Fact: Of the most respectable re-
am-2'30® orts different groups and news
20yrs. inj rganizations such as CNN, ABC,
issued af-
adrm/lblli j
1st roof j
rnet ii#
□69.
4bdrm/!j;
srd. Call !
ing. Lol f
smissalfr 1
Inn, Sis/
^/Valk-ins
lajor newspapers, etc.
rice by l! srthey did full recounts, and there
\i. Sho» y ere q U ite a number, only perhaps
three showed that Gore would have
won the election. The only problem
is that the criteria they used to sup
port this claim could never have
been met. Besides, if there was
“credible” proof that Gore would
have won don’t you think that the
Democrats would still be screaming
at the top of their lungs to the press
and in court to this day? Next.
Second, Moore implies that Pres
ident Bush let some Saudis and bin
Laden family members “skip out”
while all planes were grounded
and before the FBI could question
them.
Fact: Richard Clark, not Presi
dent Bush, authorized the flights in
question. The FBI had interviewed
those they wanted to and deter
mined they had no knowledge of
interest. Next.
Third, Moore insinuates that part
of the reason for going into Af
ghanistan was to make it easier for
UNOCAL, supposedly connected
to the Bushes, to get a pipeline
across that country.
Fact: The pipeline project did
exist... under Bill Clinton’s watch.
UNOCAL dropped the whole proj
ect in 1998, two years before Bush
was elected. Next.
Fourth, and I love this one,
Moore complains about the Patriot
Act and “giving up/losing” some
rights. This, after all the attacks on
free speech through PC nonsense
and gun ownership that have come
up? Utter hypocrisy. Next.
Fifth, Moore shows scenes of
Iraqi insurgents after Saddam was
thrown out dancing around de
stroyed equipment and dead bodies
and calls them proof that we were
not wanted. He even had the temer
ity to show pictures of the mutilated
and burned victims hanging from
that bridge. He does not show the
planes slamming into the World
Trade Center killing thousands of
Americans but he does show that.
He also does not mention the in
nocent people brutally murdered
by these insurgents, most of whom
were over there trying to help the
Iraqis. Typical.
All these examples of Moore’s
lies, innuendos and misstatements,
as disgusting as they are, pale in
comparison to the way he exploits
an unfortunate family who lost
their son in Iraq. His shameless use
of those people, and the effect on
the audience that he tries (and suc
ceeds) to elicit is among the lowest
things I have ever seen. The whole
scene is poignant and heart-rend
ing, but when put into the context
of Moore using them to support
what he knows are lies, the exploi
tation is obvious.
There are so many other things
that I can say about this film, but I
won’t. You need to see it for your-'
self.
Yep, I’m recommending that you
go see the movie. If you are already
a true believer of Moore’s lies it
will let you keep your anger and
hatred stoked. If you think Moore is
a blithering idiot, your beliefs will
be resoundingly confirmed. But it
is really those of you who haven’t
decided or don’t care that I recom
mend going to see the movie. It will
be an experience.
Tony Mckee is a columnist
at East Carolina U.
Page 7 • Thursday, July 29, 2004
MAIL CALL
A&M should not make deals
with Napster
In response to Mike Walters’ July 28 column:
The deal that Napster has made with other universi
ties is not something that A&M should enter into. What
the Napster deals assume is that every college student is
pirating music and so every college student should pay for
music they’re assumed to be stealing anyway. Although
music pirating is most definitely widespread among stu
dents, it is unfair to punish every student (guilty or not) by
forcing them to pay for a service that they may not want.
It’s bad enough that I have to pay 17.50 per semester for
a “software licensing fee” which gives me the right to buy
Microsoft products I don’t want. This deal will make me
pay something like a “music licensing fee” for the right to
download music I don’t want.
The deal also brings up some logistical questions. Do
all students pay the fee, or just the ones living on campus
(the ones with the very high speed connection which
makes piracy so easy)? Will the software only work on
windows? If so, what about students who don’t have win
dows? Should they have to pay even though they can’t use
the service? Will there be an “opt-out" option if you refuse
to use (or cannot use) the service? Do you actually get to
buy the music and burn it to a CD or just listen to it while
you’re online? Students should demand answers to those
questions before blindly accepting a deal with Napster or
any other music service.
These deals, while saving the people who want the
service a little bit of money, are a bad deal for everyone
else. Don’t make everyone pay for crimes they may not
have committed. Also, for the record, Apple's iTunes
service offers single tracks for 99 cents and whole albums
for $9.99, and you can burn the tracks to a CD.
Adam Kemp
Class of 2005
MSC Visual Arts seeks both
modern art and classic art
In response to Mike Walters' July 27 column:
I graduated in May 2004 with a bachelor’s in genet
ics and am one of a long line of Aggies (Srd genera
tion). I am also one of a long line of art lovers.
I believe, that at Texas A&M University, I received
a great education, and the “proper knowledge that
Aggies seek in their education and growth at this Uni
versity." Art played an enormous role in realizing this
proper knowledge.
Art promotes thought and philosophy, and de
scribes visually the human condition. Abstract art is
special, in that it gives the artist total freedom of ex
pression, and its audience total freedom of interpre
tation. The MSC Visual Arts Committee is a student
organization that realizes this concept to its fullest.
VAC hasn’t forgotten classic art and its principles. In
fact, these organizations help cherish, promote and
preserve it. The Visual Arts Committee takes a spe
cial interest in promoting modern art because it is
symbolic of and represents our ever-evolving culture
and ideas. Art organizations are preserving old values
and promoting new ones.
It saddens me that some are scared of this vision,
and of free expression and interpretation. It angers
me that the column twists and contorts people's
words to fit a restricting agenda. For Mr. Watlers’
sake, and for others sharing his opinions, I pray that
he opens his eyes and finally appreciates the beauty
that surrounds him every day.
Addie Embry
Class of 2003
Former Chair of the MSC Visual Arts Committee
Aggies can appreciate
abstract art
In Response to Mike Walters' July 27 column:
Never before in my experience at this school have
I come across an article with less intellect than the
one I read on July 27th entitled, “Too Abstract for
Aggieland". I sincerely hope that every single per
son that read this article took personal offense. Mr.
Walters’ article painted a picture of the students of
A&M being aesthetically incompetent, opposed to di
versity, and ignorant enough to be against abstract
art. This art is in no way offensive and takes nothing
away from the artwork that is already displayed on
campus. It is very apparent that Mr. Walter's is not
an artist of any kind, as no person with any aes
thetic values would refer to another persons work
as "twisted guesswork” as he did in his article. It
disgusts me that The Battalion would allow personal
attacks on Liz Jurewicz, the chair of the Visual Arts
Committee. I happen to know Liz very well and think
very highly of her and her organizations commitment
to bring art and beauty to this campus. She works
incredibly hard to make this campus a better place
for not only those who enjoy art, but everyone who
attends the university. I love this school and what it
stands for, but I can’t help but be disappointed when
I see people such as Mr. Walters creating a crisis
over something like abstract art.
Johnathon Cramer
Class of 2005