EDITORIAL Speculation easy if offer were official Rumors have a nasty way of sparking more rumors, ami before you know it. speculation has run rampant. University President Myles Brand may or may not be the victim of a rumor concerning the vacant president’s job at Michigan State University. He said he has not been contacted by any representatives from the school and can’t be considered a candidate. The campus newspaper, however, reported that Brand has indeed boon made an official candidate for the posi tion. The paper apparently has more connections with in the Presidential Search Committee than MSU itself. If the Michigan State campus paper is correct, and Brand is perhaps ovontually offered tno job. what should he do? Given this opportunity, let’s speculate. His options would be fairly straightforward: stay in the figurative purgatory that defines our university, or escape to the greener pastures of Michigan State. Given the choices — swimming painstakingly upstream on the rapids of discontent vs. floating happily along atop a gentle current — how could he not jump at an alterna tive to Oregon? Oregon has 1990’s Ballot Measure 5. This demon has repeatedly hindered Brand’s ability to be a superior administrator by making him focus nearly all his efforts on solving the budget crunch. Given the cutback choic es he and other administrators must face daily, we should expect a healthy allowance for Tylenol and hard liquor among his business expenses. Had Measure 5 never passed, he could probably have pushed the University forward with new and dynamic program enhancements, which he is still trying to do anyhow. Unfortunately, it seems he must constantly struggle to simply maintain the status quo. In comparison. Michigan State is fairly wealthy. Its programs are already enhanced through contributions. It has a strong and loyal alumni list (as any school with more than 40.000 students will), and backs it up with tradition and prestige that would make any graduate proud. Olven our penchant for speculation, would the polit ical climate at Michigan State be easier for Brand to deal with? Brand could probably escape those no-win situa tions he constantly enters with various campus special interest groups. It is to Brand's credit that he listens to thoso groups, who ofton make excellent points. However, as often as these groups are right, there are those who protest against the administration simply for being in power, and wouldn’t it be nice for Brand to just pack it up and ignore It? Of course. Brand wouldn’t do that. He faces up to nearly all the criticisms he encounters while explain ing the University’s perspective. Through this process, ho has become aware of the complexity of tho Universi ty's shortcomings, such as the lack of ethnic representa tion on this campus. And he understands that no prob lem can bo solved with a quick-fix solution. All in all. he would be a valuable pickup for Michigan State, who probably doesn't need him as much as this university does. Of course, it’s all just speculation. L Oregon Daily Emerald po bo« jiy» iogim c«t c.o* <, ’ The Grogon Dpty f mu ltd d pubkshed daily Monday through Ajfir*‘i ,n* •O'ool year and Tuesday and Thursday during ma summer by lha Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co me jt me Un.v*uty ol Oregon, t ugene. I>agon the Emerald operates netependentty ol ma University with oltices at Sulla 300 ol the Eit! Memorial Unon and a a member ol the Assocmled Pres* The Emerald on Nears Stall: Chester Aden Mall Bender JuSIm Brown. Sarah Clark Meg Dodder,. Amy Darvenport Jen ffckon. Amanda Forme. Anthony Forney Beth Mege. Teresa Muntsoger Usa Maun Rebecca Mertfl. Steve HAms. Katy Mooter T.Hrv Mucrter. Testa Noel. E»en Shoe Ere* Studemck*. Matron Surtor, Mchete Thompson-Aguiar Amy van Tuyl. Todd Wruama General SMnager Judy Modi Production Manager Merges Boss Advertising Tom Leech Sharon Vat Sales Managers Shawn Banter' Oftce Manager J*,» I,Ola Teresa IsabeOe Phil«s Johnson It. Ch«S KanoH Jeremy Mason. Van V O'Bryan It. G*tan Oh. Rachael Truk. Ange Wmdherm. Bnen Wmdhevn Claaatned Becky Merchant Manager Barry Logan. Sharon Sauve Distribution Brandon Anderson. Mck Marmrvng. Graham Srmpaon Busmeaa: Kalhy Carbon* Supervisor Judy Connoay Production Inyrd When Production CoordmaKu Knstme Granger. Dee McCobb. Stacy Mache*. Jerwter Boland Jerwle Smith Newsroom....XfrMH Dlepley AdverdaMg. JaWTU Busmaaa ONIee.-- »»MI» CTaasMad Adverting-MS Q«i I AlA ' STILL HEAD OF .STATE. j r announced Boris Veltsvn in a historic compromise.. 1 I CooiO SoMfflODV ~Gtr THAT ? LETTERS Changes 1 don't see how Stephanie Sis son lias assumed that the "Bible answers tough questions" (ODE. April 5). Many people nowadays are giving up on religion, in part because they can be hard to fol low the way they were followed hundreds of years ago. Society has changed, but holy books like the Bible lannot. I. for one. hope that Sisson finds the strength to abide by all parts of such a book, including the ban on tattoos "given to the Jews” in the Old Testament Doesn't she think she's being judgmental when she says "Give me a break!" If she wants to use only the New Testament, why doesn't she just do so and form yet another denomination of Christianity or a cult? People have come to our country to escape lands where there was no separation between Church and State They came for freedom Nowadays, dis crimination based on race, eth nic group or sexual orientation still exists in this country. Let's hope it is not the so-called Christians (many besides the KKK), who are perpetrating such evils against humanity. Imagine how much her own life would be changed if the Bible were used as law1, as it has been before Or did she ever think about that' Tim Wtost French/Japanese Feeling good I couldn't feel good about myself unless I responded to Stephanie Sisson's column on homosexuality and the fact that the Bible teaches that this "cho sen" behavior is wrong (ODE. April 5). I know she means well, but I doubt that homosexuals on this campus raised their heads from their Monday Emeralds and said, "Oh. so that's it!" Does she really think it's that simple? Where she blew her argu ment. I believe, is in her paren thetical comment on the Old Testament's prohibition of tat toos. She said that she takes the Bible as her "supreme authori ty," but she laughs off that par ticular rule. “Give me a break!" she said. Perhaps she disregarded this rule because many people have tattoos today, and they seem pretty harmless. Isn’t this the same "everyone’s doing it" mentality that she finds so "dan gerous"? Can she really be so selective in following the rules of her "supreme authority"? Maybe the tattoo rule seems arbitrary to her. Perhaps it was written down in reaction to some specific crisis long ago but is irrelevant today. Couldn’t the homosexuality rules be just the same? Arbitrary? Outdated? Think about which rules you ignore and which ones you grasp hold of and then think about whether those reasons behind the choice are good enough to justify telling people that their lifestyle is wrong. Heather Afton English What proof? Concerning Bjorn Petterson's letter (ODE, April 5). Seeing as how Patterson just "proved" to us that "no environmental fac tors play any role" in being gay I wonder if he could lie a little more specific than. “A trip to the library would quickly con vince you of this." I've taken a few trips to the library on this subject in the past and nothing I’ve read quickly, or even slow ly, convinced me. I don’t believe that the scien tific process is quickly con vinced of anything. So if Petter son would give me a more specific reference, such as the title of a source, the title of an article ami perhaps the pages that "prove” his claim, then I will go and enlighten myself. Allen James Pre-journalism Shop cops I am writing in response to the editorial "Police wasting time with Cops in Shops" (ODE. April fi). The editorial addressed the issue of having police officers in the stores in order to curb the purchase of alcohol by minors, which 1 believe to be a wonder ful idea. However, the editorial skews off in another direction and talks about lowering the drink ing age to 18. In defense of its view, the edi torial asks us to think about this question, "Are minors really too immature to drink alcohol? No." I say yes. The whole point of having laws of this nature is to prevent people (in this case minors) from harm And just because "minors have found ways to skirt the sys tem." is not a viable excuse for changing the present law. Is it not the same to say that drug dealers find ways to "skirt the system," therefore wo should legalize heroin, cocaine, etc.? And yes. minors will still drink, but that doesn't make it right Rapists will still rape, but that doesn't make rape right. laws are to protect individual people and society as a whole. 1'in sorry to see that it seems so many believe otherwise. Robyn K. Hagg Pro-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 when the letter is submitted. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length or style.