Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 1, 1981)
Costly action One wonders why the financially strapped University which has cut programs, financial assistance, GTF po sitions, and maintenance of facilities; the impoverished University which is talking of closing professional schools and departments, and which cannot even afford to mail grade reports and tuition refunds to students — has now taken the unprecedented and costly action of mailing out Summer Course Schedules, which could as easily have been picked up as usual, in Oregon Hall or at registration. Could this University be holding out on us, or is this merely another example of the bureaucratic inefficiencies which drive the costs of education up and quality down? Hiawatha Graduate, music & philosophy Students’ job In your May 20 issue, the writer of “Whose Job is the University’s Image” disclaims any and all responsiblity for that image, and not only for the image but for the University itself it seems. . . The Emerald has a long and distin guished tradition of being an indepen dent newspaper. No one, I think, wants it to become "an arm of the public rela tions department” or insists that it cul tivate only “a positive image for the University.” Certainly it is the Emerald’s responsibility to print “news that’s both good and bad;” nor should any of the University’s “image-makers” urge it to ignore the bad and print only the good. The Immorald, however, was not "news” either good or bad; it was only, as someone on your staff should have seen, bad judgment. It was bad judgment to publish, even on April Fool's Day, an issue which could bring only harm and disfavor to the University. For although the Emerald is and should remain in dependent, it should also be responsible to the community of which it is a part. That community knows, and the larger community of the Emerald’s readers knows, that the Emerald’s staff is com posed of students, who whether they like it or not represent the University, are products of its educational programs, and cannot therefore consider them selves yet to be independent journalists, alone responsible for whatever praise or blame comes their way, as the staff of the Washington Post were when they won praise for Watergate, and bore the blame for Janet Cooke’s hoax. The Emerald is seen by its readers as an integral part of the University. The Immorald may or may not have deserved the blame it got; but the hard fact is that it was the University that suffered from that blame. The Im morald dealt a blow not to the Universi ty’s “image," but to the University itself as a state-supported institution, at a time when higher education is facing drastic cuts in state support and needs all the help it can get. The members of our administration and our public relations department are trying hard, and not hypocritically, to present the University's best side, to explain its real excellence in order to preserve that excellence. As for the troubles caused by the En vironmental Law Clinic and the Tomseth Incident, these and the matter of the Immorald were handled responsibly and well by Mike Lee in that same issue. (Admissions director Jim Buch’s quote in) conclusion, furthermore, far from being “unsatisfactory,” as your "Opin ion” writer judged it, was just right: “Anything you do, you represent the University of Oregon." Surely there is nothing to be lost, and much to be gained, if we all try to represent its ex cellence, and help to maintain it. Carlisle Moore English department Erroneous name In Sally Hodgkinson’s article about the Campus American Civil Liberties Union Symposium on abortion and reproduc tive freedom May 26, she erroneously labeled Senator Jesse Helms’ anti-abor tion bill as the "Human Rights Amend ment.” The bill, or series of bills of this Oregon Daily Emerald I subject should either be identified as the “Human Life Amendment” or the “Human Life Statute.” Calling such a bill as a “Human Right” surely degrades those who believe in a woman’s choice as her right. Steve Schneider Campus ACLU ‘Judge not, lest. . . ’ Once again I am disturbed by what I label as “the Christian double standard.” In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ a mixture of Eugene religious groups, pur porting to be Christian, tried to disrupt and stop the speaking engagement of Robert Artison, witch and high priest of the Wiccan religion. As a guest of 4th floor Carson, Mr. Artison was invited to share with us his views on the Wiccan religion and witchcraft on May 20. Unfortunately, he was met by a group of rude and righteous Christians who, hoping to “warn” the audience against this evil “devil,” seemed to have lost sight of two of America’s basic First Amendment rights: freedom of religion and speech. One Christian gentleman repeatedly and loudly yelled, “The devil is here; the devil is within.” On the con trary. I contend that the devil lies not within Mr. Artison, but within Christian groups who in religious fervor and zeal try to suppress my civil liberties by dic tating what I can and cannot listen to. I would like to remind the Christian gentlemen that tried to bar Mr. Artison’s way into the Gold Room, and were eventually escorted off the premises, that the razor edge of censorship can work both ways. Many religious groups are allowed the use of Carson for their Bible studies, and the residents have always repected their right to religious practice. Likewise, I expect these Christian groups to give Mr. Artison an equal opportunity to express his views on religion, no mat ter how off-the-wall and different from mainstream society they may seem, and to respect my right to attend and listen to his presentation. In the final outcome the acceptance or rejection of an idea, be it religious, scientific, or economic, will lie with the individual listener, not with a self-right eous, censoring group. Perhaps Chris tians and non-Christians alike could benefit from following a simple teaching in Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” Clayton Lance Senior, English Amputation best? The air is full of statements purporting to represent the faculty that staff and faculty cuts are preferable to salary POPEjOIIIN PAUL II 2/19/81 "THE. CHI RCII W 11 1 NKV ER IMI.I TE I>R CHANCE IT’S TEACHING ON MAKKI \GE AND THE I \MII \ .. reductions because pay cuts will "wea ken" the university. Surely the trauma of dismemberment must have some wea kening effect on the main body! I believe that to survive the virus of the amputation will depend ultimately on an act of will; a mental, emotional, and physical rallying of all our institutional powers. I don't know just what principles are thought to be served by the support for program or staff cuts but isn't it time for those who hold the principle of integrity in high regard to come out of hiding and damn the strategies? The faculty of the Department of Fine and Applied Arts has my notice of motion for a proposed statement of preference for some form of salary reduction rather than solutions that would have worsen ing effects on student access and program continuity. I hope similar proposals are surfacing all over campus. A clear demonstration of our unity and resolve has never been more necessary. If we can face our dilemmas, community intact, we may find a strength which is uncommon and never to be found when the survival of those presumed fittest reigns. George Kokis Associate Professor Fine and Applied Arts Kick squirrels Lately, I have read quite a few articles in the Emerald about squirrels. Most have been negative and until yesterday, I was rooting for the squirrels. But enough is enough. I was walking home from school, minding my own business, when a whole gang of them (must have been at least five) stepped in my path on Kincaid I practically tripped over them. Fortuna tely, they gave me advance warning; one of the little buggers yelled "stop.” Being one who follows the directions of Eugene natives, I quickly stopped But that was the extent of my cooperation with them, for next I was asked to walk on the other side of the street. The nerve of those squirrels, I thought I told them I had as much a right as they did to walk on either side of the street They disagreed. That’s okay, but when they lifted me up by my feet and proceeded to plant me on the other side of the street, I retaliated After they set me down (on the other side of the street, I might add), I said, "oh, yeah,” and kicked two of them up in the air. The other three scuttled away. My advice to all you humans out there is the following: the only way to keep the squirrels in line is to kick them Otherwise, you'll have to walk on the other side of the street. Jay Leisner Junior, finance Page 5
