opinion_
‘A literal misuse of power’ is right
They’re humming a different tune downtown.
In a Sunday editorial, Eugene’s other daily
paper bemoaned the “Alumax clause” of the
Northwest Power Bill, which guarantees Bon
neville Power Administration will supply Alumax,
Inc. with 320 megawatts of power if it ever makes
good on plans to build an aluminim manufacturing
plant in Umatilla County.
Alumax has a contract with BPA insuring the
power through 1986, but the power bill clause,
which the Register-Guard says should have been
stricken from the bill, requires Bonneville to con
tinue supplying Alumax’s energy requirements
after the contract expiration date.
“Those 320 megawatts should have been put
to other uses in which 10 times, perhaps more
than 20 times, as many new jobs would be creat
ed,” the editorial laments.
Meanwhile, it continues, the Northwest may
face power generation deficits of 2,000 to 4,000
megawatts by 1985.
Apparently enough energy remains in Oregon
to shed some light on 10th Avenue and High
Street, however.
Unfortunately, the enlightened Register
Guard stand comes after months of supporting the
power bill. The paper says other Oregon con
gressmen should have joined 4th District Rep. Jim
Weaver in opposing inclusion of Alumax in the bill.
In November, the paper said sorry, Jim, we can’t
back you up this time.
This Alumax scam is only one of several
serious flaws in the power bill that Weaver so
plainly and consistently warned us about. The
Register-Guard knew the bill’s flaws as well as
anybody, but it chose to support its passage.
That discrepency should be remembered
when reading the Guard’s new opinions,
especially when they try to pass off this aluminum
power grab as a big surprise.
"That Alumax may end up with a dispropor
tionate share of the Northwest’s lean energy
supplies is therefore not merely paradoxical," the
Sunday editorial says. “It’s economically, and
morally, indefensible. It shouldn’t be possible.”
The Register-Guard’s swing of opinion, too, is
more than paradoxical.
However, as they say downtown, "licking at
spilt milk won’t block Alumax."
New art
I'd like to draw everyone's attention to
the newest work of art here on campus.
It's located on the north end of the Mu
seum of Art. I just wish the artist would
make him-herseif known so I could thank
her-him personally. And ask him-her
what the hell EQUIPE-X means.
I'd also like to express my appreciation
to whomever called in the bomb-scare
that caused 150 Geology to be vacated at
8:20 last Thursday morning. I hadn’t
studied for that Chemistry mid-term
either.
Rod Schaffer
Sophomore, psychology
More on ‘Daniel’
Affirmation is due Prof. Sanders’
points, in his letter of Jan. 29, against
religious malice, public allegations of
nastiness, and editorial partiality.
Students of the Bible should avail them
selves of leading scholars in their field,
either in person or in print. The genius of
the university system is that there is no
"dogma’’ or “heresy” — all viewpoints
can receive an equal hearing.
In the interest of continuing such
dialogue regarding the difficult question
of the dating of the Book of Daniel, three
brief points should be made for the ben
efit of your readers. First, the question of
the dating of the book is anything but a
closed one Some scholars argue for a
second century B.C. origin. Second, the
late date so attributed depends heavily
I
upon a quasi-Hegelian theory of the
evolution of the religion and cultus of
ancient Israel, which theory we have
receive from the 19th century Tubingen
school. Third, among contemporary
scholars there is a growing contention
for a sixth century B.C. date for the Book
of Daniel, aided and abetted by the ac
cumulating Near Eastern archaelogical
and literary discoveries of this century.
For arguments pro and con, and biblio
graphies, see: Daniel, J.G. Baldwin,
University of Bristol, Inter-Varsity Press;
Notes on Some Problems in the Book of
Daniel, D.J. Wiseman, University of Lon
don, Tyndale Press; The Stones and the
Scriptures, E.M. Yamauchi, Miami (Ohio)
University, Holman Press; The Bible in its
World, K A Kitchen, University of Liver
pool, Inter-Varsity Press.
T.H. Cook
Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship
Staff
Not forgotten
Vietnam veterans are bitter about the
“heroic" welcome the former hostages
have received. Where were the ticker
tape parades and handshakes with the
president when the vets returned home?
The veterans were not forgotten by the
American people when they returned
home in 1974. In fact the public at large
was responsible for their homecoming.
The massive protests of the '70s were
against the crime of war, and the men in
uniform were the victims. The public
showed its care for human life by pres
suring the government to end the war. It
was the care of the American people that
brought the soldiers home. They were
victims, not heroes, and the public saw
them as such.
Today 52 people were victims of inter
national politics. Whether due to a public
sense of guilt, capitalization by the
media, or some other reasoning, they
were called heroes. What effect this
misplaced emotion will have on the
former hostages remains to be seen. I
suspect it will do more harm than good.
The plight of our Vietnam veterans,
relative to the former hostages, was not
forgotten by the public, but perhaps
better understood.
Chris Gilmore
Junior, business
Yet another side
In his letter titled “Another side,” Clark
Porter claims that “the most pressing
problem in the world today is over
population.” While it is true that over
population is a serious problem in many
Third World countries, here in the U.S.
the opposite is true. Except for the "baby
boom” just after World War tl, the birth
rate in the U.S. has been declining
steadily since the 17th century. In 1957
for example, the number of children born
per woman was 3.76; this figure had
been cut to 1.75 by 1976. This is less than
the replacement level.
I fail to see the relationship between
abortion on demand in the U.S. and
-1
©i<Wf swe.
If I HANDED OrtR THE TCREI6N AID MONEY, WD STOP TERRORIZING ME ... AND
IF I DIDN'T, WD BURN DOWN MY EMBASSY'
e 4
overpopulation in India. Certainly the
argument sounds good. We’ve all heard
it before: "One less mouth to feed in a
world where 500 million go to bed hungry
every night." The hunger problem is not
so simple. It is basically a problem of
unequal distribution of both population
and resources. One less mouth to feed in
America does not mean one less hungry
person in India; it means cheaper food
prices, more waste and more farmland
converted to other uses. Mr. Porter in
sinuates that the 1.2 million would-be
mothers chose to abort their children in
order to adopt a Cambodian refugee
instead No, they aborted them because
they were just “unwanted.” And if they
won’t sacrifice for their own children,
they certainly won’t sacrifice for some
child starving in a distant foreign land.
This is the sad thing. Abortion is only a
symptom. The real issue is selfishness.
Nick Wilson
Senior, landscape architecture
Boob review
After reading the review of George
Bernard Shaw’s play "Misalliance” in the
Emerald (Jan. 22) I checked my eyes
carefully for cataracts, sties, fly-specks
or other hindrances to vision. But no,
there the review was in all its gorgeous
confusion! For your reviewer to call
Shaw’s brilliant dialogue "weak and
wandering,” and his script “bland" only
shows that this unfortunate creature has
obviously never heard a decent conver
sation in his whole life. The clever and at
the same time quite profound lines of this
play are its main point, as in any of
Shaw's plays. And to follow this obvious
gaffe with TWELVE paragraphs of a
weak, wandering and bland summary of
the plot was as silly as the preceding
opinion was misinformed.
Your reviewer would be better set to
criticize old Walt Disney cartoons as
more appropriate to his talents. He writes
like a boob who has been suckled on the
boob of a boob-tube!
Edmund Soule
Professor emeritus, library
letters policy
The Emerald will accept and
try to print all letters containing
fair comment on ideas and
topics of interest to the Univer
sity community. Letters must be
typewritten and no longer than
250 words.
Letters must be signed, the
author’s field of study or faculty
status noted and must include
address and phone number
for verification.
Tuesday. February 3.1981