Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 16, 1981)
opinion I j£k 9re9 vvasson I jEl q quorum of one Dad, Hope the pizza business is going well, and conversation in Reedsport has moved beyond discussion of last week’s rain. I don't think you and mom understand how uneventful life in small-town Oregon can be. But, enough of that. Saturday was the state’s birthday, so this is an appropriate time to send you the latest installment in my continuing appraisal of the state legislature. Now into my fourth session as a reporter, certain aspects of the process are becoming clear. But even after that exposure, I’m still suprised by the lack of enlightenment in the marble halls. I used to think that government should assume a leadership role, but now I’m not sure I’m interest ed in going where a lot of these bimbos want to take us. Consider this session’s bills dealing with marijuana. There are three bills scheduled for public hearings before the House Judiciary Com mittee this Wednesday, and the restrictions and repression of two of the bills rankles my ass. Like you, I resent people imposing on me their defini tion of what’s right and wrong. I find it especially distasteful when their values are based on misin formation and what I feel are misdirected goals. The proposals all contain attempts to control the drug’s use by restricting sale of devices used for consumption. The first makes it a crime to sell paraphernalia to minors, the second makes it a crime to allow minors on the premises where the implements are being hawked and the third simply makes possession by anyone illegal. Give me a fucking break! I’ve got enough real things to worry about in my life without Rep. Max Rijken and the other reactionaries at the Legisla ture causing me unjustifiable grief. The bottom line is that I'm going to smoke marijuana regardless of the decisions at Salem. It’s cheaper to grow it than buy it, and I plan to do that also. I’ve no doubt that drugs have ruined people’s lives. But, look at the effects of alcohol. There are many who are unable to accomodate that substance without detrimental effects, yet I see no legislation aimed at making bottles illegal. I’m reminded of the fact that you smoked cigarettes for 20 years. You knew you were hurt ing yourself and finafly quit, but it was your deci sion. How is it any different for me and pot? Why should those from your generation be allowed to decide for themselves what they want to do to their bodies, but people from mine need help from others? I would contend that there is no legitimate reason, but that the attempts represent a lack of discipline on those people who control power in the state. Well, guess I better go. Keep 'em honest, and bake one for me. Greg yours Media, hostages The media representation of the “hos tage crisis” is an overt manipulation of the American people. Anyone who can detach themselves from the emotional content of the information and look, rather, at its patterning will see other, more hidden messages. What other recent issue has had con tinuous national coverage, day in and day out, with the days being counted and the tension being built, hopes raised and then dashed, the carrot dangling in front of the horse - "maybe tomorrow," “maybe next month," “we don’t know?" Is it not a bit ironic that the leaders of the most powerful nation in the world with the highest standard of living should present to its public an image of its helplessness? Or was this perhaps their intention? The phrase “hostage crisis" was im printed on all of our consciousnesses. But how did this same media present to the consciences of the American people the “Cambodian crisis?" Did they count the days while SAVAK killed and per secuted the Iranian people? Why haven’t they been broadcasting the coverage from El Salvador of the killing of 10,000 civilians in 1980? Would we sit in our comfortable houses, eating dinner, r watching this? This imprinting by the media on the minds and hearts of the American people has indeed created a resurgence of na tionalism and a hatred of "foreign” na tions not acting “in our best interest.” This allows us to appear lily-white while we project the shadow-element of our nation on convenient "others" (Russia, Iran, etc ). At what price? Linda Kanzinger Senior, general literature Ticket home We are aghast at the controversial statements made by Iranian students that appeared in a front-page Emerald story on Jan. 30. If Amin, the outspoken Iranian student, supports the hostage-taking, maybe he should go back to Iran and support that so-called government, which is barely civilized. If the American media has blown this whole situation out of proportion, then how do you explain the ex-hostages’ statements concerning their harsh treatment? How could the media distort these statements? To sum up our feelings, we can only conclude that Mr. Amin is a hypocrite when he says that all freedom-loving human beings should have supported the complete denial of freedom to 52 innocent people. This man deserves a one-way ticket back to Iran. Maybe he can sell more communist newspapers over there. Caroline Petrich Sophomore, journalism Resist blackmail The attempt by Aaron Jones to black mail the University by threatening to withhold substantial gifts if the Environmental Law Clinic is not disman tled or curtailed should be resisted at all costs. It is good and entirely appropriate for people to take an interest in the opera tion of the University and to offer sug gestions and criticisms wherever they feel these may be useful. It is an especially fine thing for anyone to give to the University to support any of its activities in which they are interested - but to condition such gifts on change or curtailment of some other unrelated ac tivity in the University is simply bribery and attempted intimidation. The University should, as a matter of course, reject all proposed gifts from individuals or firms that attempt to do this — even if it entails substantial cost or f(M& AND&SH 'You g^ntpotmis — I'M k UBB^l1 i WnT aGRPE with jusnc WM' I THINK WE 9«ULP KE3P THESTREETS SAFERRCRIMINALS1 I DONTAMND iFTCUCUimaeuPIUE JUSItCg^TEM! WAIT.,,' sacrifice on our part. Any unit of the University which comes under scurrilous attacks of this sort should be fully and courageously sup ported and backed up through the period of attack and crisis. If change in its activities are desirable, these should be made during calmer periods, not re sponse to outside attacks — particularly not in response to such unethical attacks marked by lying, attempted bribery and intimidation. Bayard McConnaughey Professor, biology Not a ‘feminist’ I would like to comment on Leslie Farris’ article, “Feminists appeal for unity; plead for sexual equality" (Feb. 2 Emerald). Despite the accuracy of the content and most appreciated coverage, the use of the term “feminist" is disturb ing. I am an Asian American woman who studies feminist theory and who has a commitment to a number of struggles, one of which is the women's movement. Must we assume that those who par ticipated in the Feminist Theory and Action Conference are all “feminsts?" Perhaps the opening statements of my presentation will clarify this point: “For minority women, feminist theory and action presents a question of ac cessiblity. The term ‘feminist’ itself is problematic for some of us. The diction ary tells us a ‘feminist’ is a militant ad vocate of equal right and status of women. Why then do so few of us call ourselves feminsts’ or even minority feminsts?’ Why is it that we, who are so accustomed to struggle (against racism), qualify or altogether negate being labeled as feminsts?’ ” I write this letter not to belabor what may appear to be a trivial point. I write to encourage the coverage of any event that focuses on equality to remain free of assumptions. Historically, assumptions have served to perpetuate inequality. Most importantly, I write in an attempt to rectify any misunderstanding among my sisters of color. Colleen Fong Graduate student, sociology tetters policy The Emerald will accept and try to print all letters containing fair comment on ideas and topics of interest to the University 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
