Commentary_
Commentator discrimination
based on political views
Imagine a hypothetical situa
tion involving a student group,
say, the Gay and Lesbian
Alliance. A minority group on
campus funded by student fees,
it does a good job providing
support for its members and ad
ding to campus diversity. But
when it asks for a few thousand
dollars from the Incidental Fee
Committee to continue its ac
tivities the following year, it is
told it is “too controversial.”
Several students, obviously
closed-minded, have expressed
their feelings to the members of
the student government, upset
because they don't like
homosexuality and don’t like to
see it around campus. They cer
tainly don't think a minority
student group should be sup
ported by student fees and
suspect that a majority of
students might agree with them
in a student vote.
The I Ft: agrees — after all. .
isn't that what a “controver
sial'' student group should ex
pect? — and votes to deny it
funding unless it receives a ma
jority vote in a student election;
Furthermore, the 1FC rules that
even if the student group
should win the election, its stu:'
dent funding will be cut in half:
The IPC decision is extraor
dinary — , no other student
group has been forced, against
its will, to go to a student ballot
to receive student funding'; But
the group is told that it. should
feel good • about the decision,
since the IFC isn’t.being “too
unfair.'1
. If this were to happen at the
University, would anyone call it
discrimination?
Of course they would, which
is what makes it so troubling
that few will do the same for the
Oregon Commentator, a campus
journal of opinion tjiat prints ar
ticles from a conservative point
of view, among others.
The Commentator's request
for a moderate increase in IFC
funding, based on its third year
of successful publishing, was
met with a unanimous IFC deci
sion to place its decimated
budget on the ballot. Being a
minority group, it is doubtful
that the Commentator can win a
majority, and it is hardly wor
thwhile to campaign for such a
small amount anyway. The IFC
decision in effect may represent
the death of the Commentator.
What is wrong with the IFC
decision? Clearly, there would
be few student groups if each
was required to receive a ma
jority of a student vote to exist.
That is why there is an Inciden
tal Fee Committee: to encourage
a diversity of student groups.
And clearly, the members of the
IFC do not have to agree with
the outlook of each student
group they fund — if so. again,
there would be few student
groups. That is why members of
the IFC' are expected to put
away their personal biases
when making student funding'
decisions.
In fact, they are required to do
so by law. The equal opportune'
ty guidelines of the University,
based on the 14th Amendment
to the Constitution, prohibit
discrimination on the basis of
race, gender, religious belief,
sexual preference and political
. belief.
. Is the Commentator a victim
of discrimination? Compare the
treatment it has received from
the IFC to the treatment the IFC
gives other groups. As I already
have mentioned, the Commen
tator is the only student group
that has been forced to the ballot
against its will. The Fine raid
goes to a student vote each year
because it asks to be placed on
the ballot.
The treatment the Gommen
tutor receives is especially
ironic considering it is one of
the few student publications
that actually publishes as many
issues as the I PC funds, and
consistently of high quality, as
its professional awards in
dicate. It produces 15 issues a
year on a budget of $t>,300.
I have been told The Record,
the ASUO’a publication with a
budget of $5,000, has managed
to publish three issues this year.
That is remarkable, if only
because in past years, with
budgets of $t0,000 and all the
resources of the student govern
ment. the paper was published
even less frequently. Yet year
after year, the paper is funded^
bv the IFC.
Clearly the Commentator is
treated differently than The
Record because it is not
••politically correct,” The
Record is controlled perennially
by members of "Students for a
Progressive Agenda,” who also
happen to control the ASUO
and the IFC. And the funding of
other politically correct
publications that appear on
campus is never challenged,
year after year. Clearly this.con*
stitutes do facto, institutionaliz
ed discrimination against the
Commentator on the basis of
political belief.
The Commentator is con
templating a civil rights suit
against member* of the student
government. Hut this really
isn't the sort of solution the staff
desired. The preferred course of
action would bo for students at
the l University — even students
who disagroee with the paper's
particular political opinions ~
to force member* of the 1FC and
A.SlJO to stand up for the Com
mentator’s right to exist, to add
to the campus diversity, and to
. serve as an alternative voice
By Robert Davis
' Robert Davis is a former editor. '■
of the Oregon Commentator end
a J985 gradiiateof the llnivent- •
Letters
Four women
“He hit me, and it felt like a
kiss. He hit me and 1 knew he
loved me.”
Martha 13a vis
The Motels
“He showed me what the
hole was for.”
Chrissie Hynde
The Pretenders
“I love it when he calls me
names. ,. I love it when he beats
my brains out.”
Joan Armatrading
“Hit me with your best shot."
Fat Benatar
I believe the headline for the
Feb. 19 story. "Crazy men
aren't always major rape
perpetrators,” should have
read. “Men aren't always major
rape perpetrators.”
And just a sidenote to Karen
Kane. .1 appreciate that you
chose Bruce Springsteen as a
representative of American
men. but, “Fire,” the song you
quoted to prove that he
somehow condones rape, was
brought to the charts by the
Pointer Sisters — four women. •
- Vince Adams
journalism
Clarification
I'm sorry to say that reporter
Andrew LaMar seemed to miss
the point of my talk sponsored
by the University Arms Control
Forum on.Feb. 19. This was that
the elimination of nuclear
weapons should be accom
Oregon Daily
Emerald
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published Monday
through Friday except during exam meek and vacations
by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co , at the
University of Oregon, Eugene. Oregon, 97403
The Emerald operates independently of the University
with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial Union
and is a member of the Associated Press
The Emerald is private property The unlawful removal
or use of papers is prosecutable by law
General Suit
Advertising Director Susan Thelen
Production Manager Russell Steele
Classified Advertising Vince Adams
Assistant to the Publisher Jean Ownbey
Advertising Sales: David Wood Sales Manager, John
Boiler, Michael Gray, Laura Goldstein, Robin Joannides,
Carlos Lamadnd. Marcia Leonard. Shawn Leuthold. Joan
Vandermuth, Laura Willoughby
Production Vince Adams, Kelly Alexandre. Lynne Casey
Shu-Shing Chen, Ellen Cross. Monica Dwyer, Stormi
Dykes. Manuel Flores, Steve Gibbons, Rob Hare, Mary
Lewis, Jim Marks, Ross Martin, Mary May. Mary
McGonigal, Rob Miles, Angie Muniz, Kara Oberst. Charta
Parker, Ken Parrott, Jennifer Peterson, Jim Pfafl. Geoff
Rainvilie. Michele Ross, Alyson Simmons, Peg Solonika.
Gregory Tipps,
Editor
Managing Editor
News Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Assistant Editorial Page Editor
Sports Editor
Photo Editor
Friday Edition Editor
Sidelines Editor
Night Editor
Associate Editors
Community
Higher Education
Student Activities
Student Government
University Allairs
General Assignment
Julie Shippen
Michelle Br'ence
Jolayne HoutZ
Michelle Brence
Scott Harding
Robert Collias
Karen Stallwood
Sheila Landry
Allan Lazo
Michelle Brence
Scott McFetridge
Andrew LaMar
Mary Lichtenwalner
Linda Hahn
Kirsten Bolin
Mike Rivers
Reporters Tony Ahern. Sean Axmaker. Dan Coran. Kim
Kaady. Capi Lynn. Chris Norred. Chuck Thompson, B J
Thomsen.
Photographers Shu-Shing Chen. Maria Corvallis. Steve
Gibbons. Rob Hare. Derrel Hewitt, Jim Marks. Ross
Martin.
News and Editorial 806-5511
Display Advertising and Business 886-3712
Classified Advertising 688-4343
Production 686-4381
Circulation 688-5511
paniedby an elimination of
large-sea fe convent itirial
weapons
. ■ o»‘ . • ' t- • 0 ’ X
Furthermore, fruc.h- an.
elimination could probably not
be accomplished without, in the
words of Jonathan Schell;
"revolutionizing the politics of
the earth." in the short term, we
should liie working toward- a
reduction in nuclear weapon's., ,
recognizing that the; extent to
which a nuclear power believes .
a nuclear--war- is .VWinuable
rather than suicidal, vastly in*
creases the probability of "the
use of nuclear weapi»ns
For this reason, I believe it' is
imperative the current situation
of "mutually assured destruc
tion (MADJ" be continued until
we are able to accomplish the
(hopefully) final elimination of
both nuclear and large-scale
conventional weapons.
Incidentally, such current
policies as the Strategic Defense
Initiative and the Counterforce
Strategy are unilateral attempts
to escape from MAD, and thus I
believe them to be destabilizing
and dangerous.
John Moseley
Vice President. Research
Freedom for all
■ . > • "r- •
Why does Michael Dawson
attack the Etna raid for suppor
ting' (He right of till groups., in
cluding ROTC and theCIA, to
free spejech? Doesn't he under
stand that without freedom :pf
. speech for eypryborly, all other
democratic values will la* ir
revocably lost? .
, Moat of' us understand the
military and the CIA have some
mighty-strange wajys; ofprotec
' ting bur- national, security, that
torture, /nurdor and assassina
tion-—have1 become! preferred
modes of operation in the
downtrodden* parts .of our
sphere of Influence.
And most of us don't like it.
Hut rather than abandoning
any. aspect of our democratic
freedoms, why not use our
democratic institutions to
abolish the CIA altogether? If
the “silent majority" realized
that, thanks to the CIA, large
portions of humanity hate our
guts, they might be persuaded
that our long-range security
depends on the practice of our
values abroad as well as at
home.
Chris Browne
History
ss_L a snou