Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 21, 1989)
_Editorial Records amendment not a joking matter The University submitted an amendment to its stu dent conduct code regulations Tuesday to dear up misconceptions in the administrative rules used to mandate open hearings in academic dishonesty cases The amended version was originally expected to go into effect today, but due to date miscalculations on the part of the University, the amendment won't see action for quite a while. While the amendment has been sorely needed and we applaud the University for its epiphany — we can’t help but wonder about the University's sudden change of heart . The conduct code mandates mat an cases wm>M ed under the student conduct code t»e open to the pub lic; and to the extent necessary to preserve order, the hearing’s presiding officer has the authority to limit at tendance of people present at the meeting. The amended version of the code, should it ever come to light, specifically states that if prosecuted stu dents do not waive their right to privacy »n writing, the hearings officer is required to close the hearing to the public. Perhaps the only reason questions about the code were raised was because VVilly Mils, a third-year law student who had earlier filed suit against the I 'diversi ty and law school dean for alleged privacy violations concerning his academic: records, attended a recent conduct code hearing to challenge the code's proce dure. The amendment, as it stood previous to date mis calculations. was only temporary and would have lapsed in I HO days The University administration would then have considered the need for further rule making after a thorough review by the Student Con duct Committee. What concerns us is what action the University ad ministration intends to take; — not only immediately hut when the amendment is allegedly set out in black and-white. It seems as though the University was caught in a quandary from which it had no other re course than to amend the conduct code to avoid further legal problems. If the University administration only wishes to keep trouble out of its own backyard, how much power will the amendment carry? A student’s personal records should be protected from public: scrutiny at all costs. The amendment should've been in piac.e long ago. And now that the paths iire i lear to set it in place, it had better be taken seriously. Rust takes a stand with spotted owl plan Hardly anybody noticed his calm, ra tional voict! in the continuing public outcry over the old growth logging controversy, but it was nice to hear that lame County Com missioner )errv Kust took a stand in support of the spotted owl. At a sparsely attended press conference last Monday. Rust outlined a plan that he claimed would solve the spotted owl contro versy. Actually, his proposal is not likely to solve anything it is a sketchy plan that has received little attention or serious con sideration. Hut Rust's ideas do show that he has a good, rational grasp on the factors in volved in the issue. After the hyperbole of debate, any voice of moderation is welcome. Rust realizes that the timber industry can only continue to log old growth forest for so much longer, before either wildlife preservation limits halt logging or there isn't any old growth left to log. With these abso lute limits, the commissioner argues that the industry must make adjustments now be gin logging second growth. The end of old growth logging that Rust warns of is not news. Environmentalists have argued this point for years, and the in dustry must grudgingly admit the truth of the matter. To start the transition. Rust calls for a federal appropriation of $10(1 million over a two-year period to create jobs in sec ond growth management. Rust's plan is both common sense and fanciful dream. Rust understands the issues at work, but it is doubtful that the federal government will allocate the funds Rust re quests. It could certainly do so — there is an annual sizable federal fund for the construc tion of timber roads. The Rust proposal is also very similar to proposals bandied about by the National Audubon Office; these pro posals have never been considered seriously by the timber industry. The local media didn't bother much with the Rust plan, in part because the com missioner's plain common sense just didn't make good copy. Reason can't compete with an infamous, histrionic sound bite like the one aired from State Sen. Peg Jolin (D-Cot tage Grove) last week: "And the spotted owl...I think belong(s) in one’s frying pan." We appreciate Rust taking a wise stand on the spotted owl, and we wish everyone were so willing to engage in practical dis cussion as the commissioner appears to be. Letters Take a stand I seem to recall reading about someone who was going to take a stand against "hate" crimes recently ... In the letter entitled "BS" (ODE, April 17). I find that 1 am being accused of "seeking power and control rather than the well-being of unwanted children." because I take the same stand as Bill Moore. I search deep to find any motive of controlling other people, hut 1 find none. Money is a prime tool of control in this society. So why do I give it to the poor instead of hoarding it up to mount an assault by which to gain control? I must la; either really stupid, or I must not fit into the mold which Pain’s word has positively stuffed me into! Shi1 also says that it has "proven presumptuous to be lieve these types ... have mor als"! Thank you. Pam, for these stereotypes whose roots lie in an unfounded assumption as to what I and all others of my "type" (did you really say that? .arghhh!) have done for the "unwanted children.” I cannot apologize for the actions of those who have stood with "pro-lifers” for the wrong rea sons, laT.atise I do not stand with them. They may share u cause, hut that does not make us the same "type.” Now, where is that person who was going to stand against hate crimes' Bob Weigel l.ab technician Keep to yourself William Moore's anti-choice opinion (ODK. April 13) asserts as a fact that life entitled to constitutional rights exists at conception. Strangely enough, the medical community does not support this belief, much to the chagrin of our highly re spected religious community It's hard to believe, but some people in this country disagree with the theory that a i hi Id ex ists upon ejaculation and sup posedly these people have the right to believe as they wish. Moore thinks that our right to act differently from his accept ed norm is not a civil right and I question just what the hell he thinks civil rights are all about Maybe when Pat Kobertson is elected president, we'll find out Moore's recognition of un wanted pregnancies as "real” is observant. I'm sure Moore has researched contraceptive availability and realizes how well-accepted sex education is in our public schools. There fore. I’m amazed his letter didn't address preventive preg nancy measures, especially how the white, male middle class could educate themselves on thi! effects of their sperm. If you don’t believe in choice, keep your sperm to yourself. To Moore's question, do we have the right to destroy inno cent lives, even a pagan pro choicer would answer no! Neg ative stereotypes and poverty ans too often the lot of innocent people who struggle to support children of unplanned preg nancies, especially ii fathers an* not responsible family members. Think about it. Mr Moore. Are you interested in uphold ing your principles, or inflict ing them on other people? l.auren Upshaw Kugene Society loses In response to William Moore's letter (ODK, April 13) in defense of anti-abortion, 1 fool that his and others concern is not for those "defenseless, unborn children" but is the re sult of an over-adjusted sense of "moral reality." Obviously the anti-abortion issue has been a major conflict for the past couple of weeks, hut 1 think that the moralists are missing the point, because in my opinion, there is no way anybody can justify (morally or not) bringing an unwanted child into the world to face poverty, oppression and other unsavory traumas which can be avoided if women are allowed to make their own decisions. 1 say the children are un wanted because they are. Sure, then* are always people ready to adopt a new-born baby, but if abortions are made illegal, there will be too many babies to add to tin; already large amount of unwanted children (the homeless) in our country. When this happens, will all those moral anti-abortionists volunteer to he responsible for these human beings' welfare? Probably not. because the same voices (anti-abortionists) crying loudest to end abortion are the same voices urging cutbacks in the welfare system, child care and minimum wage. Obvious ly. anti-abortionists only care about these lives while they are still unborn. In conclusion, I feel that the anti-abortionists should con centrate on seeing reality, in stead of hiding behind their morality, because the losers are not only the women and the children (after they are born) but eventually our whole socie ty. Susan Price Pre-journalism _Letters Policy_ Letters to the editor must be limited to no more than 250 words, legible, signed and the identification of the writer must be verified.
