opinion
greg wasson
a quorum of one
As I left Friday’s House session, I felt like a
sixth grader who'd been sent to the principal for
talking back. Five members of the lower body had
risen to publicly condemn the column I wrote on
marijuana last week.
Ostensibly, the representatives were upset
with the use of a barnyard reference to what your
parents did nine months before you were born.
The moral indignation that filled the chamber was
pervasive. It was also, I suspect, contrived.
If any of the speakers were sincerely offended
by my vulgarities, I apologize, because that was
not my intent, fiut I'm afraid "thou doth protest too
much."
Capitol conversations, in fact some I’ve had
with the very representatives who jumped on me,
usually contain language I wouldn’t use around
my grandmother. For someone who includes the
words in their vocabulary to so feverently cas
tigate me when I write them reeks of hypocrisy and
contradiction.
However, the experience did provide a reason
to pull my writing out of the gutter: the shameful
word allowed opponents to shift the focus from
unjustified state control of pot to me and my style.
Perhaps, Rep Grattan Kerans, himself a
former Emerald editor, was right when he said the
battle of what you can print isn’t worth fighting
(and it’s not one I’m interested in taking on).
Giving detractors opportunity to divert the ar
gument to other, and meaningless, discussions is
too high a price to pay for writing like you talk.
So, like our sixth grader, I’ll modify my
behavior; not because I’m convinced that they’re
right; but because it’ll make it easier to get along.
Finally, the debater in me forces a response to
two points made in the House Friday.
First, Rep. Max Rijken, the ring-leader of the
verbal circus, siezed on my writing and drew an
anology that looks strong at first blush, but col
lapses upon closer scrutinization.
In the article, I talked of legislators exercising
self-control and not attempting to regulate a
lifestyle simply because they disagree with it. In
his discourse, Rijken suggested that I also show
some self-constraint and concern myself with the
impact of my writings.
My reply would be that decisions Rijken helps
make about who gets hassled by the police far
outdistance the importance of whether my pieces
are offensive.
Second, the hypocrisy mentioned above
reached its extreme in Rep. Ted Bugas. Bugas, an
attorney, prefaced his remarks by pointing out that
he was an expert on the First Amendment. Allow
ing that I was protected to write all the filth I
wanted to, he made it clear he no longer wanted
anything to do with me.
Translation: The First Amendment is one of the
things that makes this country great, but try to
shield yourself with any of its protections and I’ll
dump on you.
yours
Jackson Browne
As a supporter of Pacific Alliance and
a Jackson Browne fan, I feel I must
respond to Darrel Plant’s belittlement of
Browne and of today’s benefit concert
(Feb. 16 Emerald). Mr. Plant is rather
misinformed about Browne’s work as a
songwriter as well as his role in the
anti-nuclear movement.
I don't believe that anyone regards
Jackson Browne as "an expert and world
authority on nuclear power plants." He is
simply a rock and roll band man with a
rare concern for life and the future of our
planet. When he performs in a benefit
concert, he is doing his job for no pay —
the profits will be used to support organ
izations that are taking action to keep the
world intact for the next generation.
Mr. Plant pleads for "some social sig
nificance" in Browne’s music. I refer him
to "Rock Me on the Water,” "For Every
man and “The Fuse” for starters. Mr.
Plant’s criticism is based on his refer
ence to "Cocaine" — a song that Jack
son Browne did not write and only sings
for a laugh, not as an anthem Anyone
who is committed to the anti-nuclear
crusade knows Jackson’s anthem:
"Some of them were angry at the way
the Earth was abused,
r
By the men who’d learned
How to forge Her beauty into power
And they struggled to protect Her from
them
Only to be confused
By the magnitude of Her fury in the
final hour. . .
Let the music keep our spirits high
Let the buildings keep our children dry
Let Creation reveal Its secrets and by
and by
When the light that's lost within us
reaches the sky.”
"Before the Deluge”: Jackson Browne
I wish Darrel Plant much joy with his
“good novel" tonight. I'll be at the Pit
having a great time for a good cause.
Dale Blanchard
Senior, journalism
Brainy teams
I have news for Doug Butler ("Brainy
teams,” Tuesday):
The present College Bowl academic
competition is a lineal descendent of the
College Bowl academic competition is a
lineal descendent of the College Bowl
television progam of the '50s and '60s.
Hi-Q, the program on Portland’s Channel
8 for some years in the late '60s and '70s,
was a high-school version of the old
College Bowl. It may have carried on the
tradition, but can hardly be called
original.
Michael Stamm
Grauduate, English
Reasoning flawed
Re: Ms. Skinner's defense of abortion.
The failures of her reasoning (I use the
term loosely) are evident. First, there are
some similarities between appendixes
and unborn children (fetuses); there is,
however, at least one important differ
ence: all of use were fetuses; none of us
were appendixes. Second, if she will use
the unborn’s dependence as a rationale
for the right to extinguish its life, will she
not be willing to use the same reason to
justify infanticide and euthanasia?
(Those who consider this a fatuous
question should consider that the in
cidence of both has increased sharply in
the last few years.)
Finally, although she doesn't make
herself completely clear, she appears to
believe that abortion is a religious issue.
She is correct if she means that most of
those who consider themselves religious
are opposed to abortion. In another
m ukSp Tlim SWW^
#e*€ss?*.
tjfeV^
r\*y**9± m*Z Cw/vjjfrs _
OFfiuK it's a real bomb—Bur if we idlp ®n tw, it wouip Wnhis^ncehikm'ion .'
sense, however, abortion is no more a
religious issue than income tax fraud or
rape. If any of these were just religious
issues, only those strongly religious
would oppose them. That is obviously
not the case.
From neck down
At the Oregon vs. Oregon State men's
basketball game here last week, a group
of students stood at courtside waving
tortillas in the direction of the court.
That’s right, they were waving tortillas.
And they were so earnest and proud on
themselves that there was even a large
sign hung from the stands explaining
why they were waving the tortillas. Their
reason? One of the referees was a Mex
ican-American.
Unless it's an affection for tortillas that
they find offensive, their mocking
behavior seems to indicate they feel
there is something wrong with being
Mexican-American. I suggest to those
students that there is, instead, some
ting wrong with ethnocentrism and
bigotry. It is sad to see human beings
functioning only from the neck down.
Skewer reporter
Your reporter Phil Bernstein should
be skewered. Slow Train may be loud.
They may be a little crude sometimes and
their music may not be breaking any new
ground, but what they do, they do well;
they make people dance The last work
Phil can use to describe them (and be at
all justified) is "bland."
He’s nuts.
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.
Mark Albrecht
Law student
Russ Winlck
Law student
Staci Wertz
Geology