EDITORIAL
Same requirements;
nifty new packaging
That squeaking sound you may have hoard Wednesday
was the University Assembly narrowly passing a revised
rar e, gender and non-European curriculum requirement.
In a 175-155 vote, the assembly required students enter
ing the University in 1994 and after to take two courses
to satisfy the requirement, as opposed to the current one
course required now.
Few at the University would argue that a multicultur
al education is not necessary in contemporary society,
but when 47 percent of the University Assembly disagrees
with the revised guidelines, those guidelines should lie
re-examined.
As passed, the guidelines do not enhance the multi
cultural requirements: they merely add another class to
students’ already full schedules. The guidelines call for
one class to focus on race relations in the United States
and a second course to cover gender, class or ethnicity in
either non-European or European societies
The original t ompiaint against the current system is
that it allows students to take classes suc h as Problems
in Chinese Art in order to meet the requirement. These
classes may be interesting and enlightening, but they
do nothing to better prepare students for life in a multi
cultural society.
The new guidelines do nothing to address this issue.
They simply require students to take two of the very class
es "reformers’’ have repeatedly called a joke Rather than
narrowing the focus of the requirement, which was the
original intent, the focus remains unchanged, merely the
number of classes required has doubled.
The problem lies with the first requirement, which “will
focus on the contemporary race relations in the United
States; or the historic al roots of contemporary race rela
tions in the United States, specifically linking the his
torical matters to contemporary issues." Ideally, that
would be the extent of the requirement, a narrowly
focused course on racial issues in the Unitor! States.
However, the requirement can also be met by studying
"the social, economic, political, cultural, and/or psy
chological conditions of, and/or the artistic, musical, oral
or written expressions" of minorities in America.
There is no difference between these guidelines and
the current system. For example, revising the Problems
in Chinese Art class to Problems in Chinese Art in Amer
ica would satisfy the new requirement. Big change.
If the guidelines were sufficiently narrowed (as they
should be) to deal exclusively with race in America, only
11 of the 178 classes that meet the current guidelines
would be acceptable.
The most likely reason the first requirement was
expanded to include topics irrelevant to it was to appease
faculty and administrators who didn't want to see their
courses cut. The committee that drafted the guidelines
lacked the courage to exclude these classes and thus
turned from academic reform to political vote seeking.
Nowhere was this more evident than at the assembly
meeting itself, where some faculty accused their co-work
ers and deans of using pressure tactics and intimida
tion to coorco votes in favor of the new guidelines.
Professor Thomas Givon. who has been adamantly
opposed to the guidelines, said he received a barrage of
E-mail regarding his position. He told the assembly that
one E-mail note told him to have "courage."
"It shouldn't take courage!" Givon said before sug
gesting a secret mail-in vote. Givon said he believed peo
ple would more likely vote thoir consciences if they were
not under pressure from colleagues.
The motion was defeated, rightfully so considering the
assembly is a public body, but not before Associate Pro
fossor Sumi Cho. a member of the committee that draft
ed the requirements, revealed the true nature of the coer
cion.
Cho. arguing that thoru was no reason to vote by mail,
said she did not believe faculty were being coerced, but
that assembly members should be held "politically
accountable for their vote." If tho issue is not political,
why should people be held "politically accountable"?
The weirdness continued when, during the vote on
whether to hold a mail-in vote, those who wanted an open
vote began shouting at photographors. "No photos dur
ing voting!” Their hypocrisy, coupled with their gross
lack of knowledge about public meetings laws, nearly
made a mockery of the entire proceedings.
In the ond. the assembly passed an imperfect measure
that will require revisions before it can be effective. We
suggest the committee get back to work, draft a satisfac
tory proposal and leave the politicking at the door.
EHbiEr -
- BILL [LlNiON
WELL DOfT )
LOOK AT A\E../
SPOILT!) BRAT -
I <
CWA1CN1
.PROMISES
LETTERS
Pom bad
Scott Bishop shows his igno
rance bv believing that porn
begins and ends with masturba
tion (ODE, April ft).
At a time in history when sex
crimes arid child abuse are ris
ing. we don't need porn
I'm not a foul-minded Christ
ian. and my ideal of a real man
isn't one who would frequent
such an establishment or find it
necessary to "us«" porn to stim
ulate sexual fantasies.
God gave us all pleasurable
sexual feelings and self control.
I view the sign in Springfield
each day on my way home from
work. I find it quite appropriate
and a dear message to young
men that it is OK not to "use"
porn
Bishop's ending thought was
very repulsive. I hope he seeks
counsel soon.
Vicki Travis
EMU Staff
Man's world
Whether the pictures in Play
boy are art or pornography is
debatable, but Playboy's posi
tion on how the women in the
magazine should be viewed is
clearly printed on every issue:
"Entertainment for Men "
You have the information.
Make up your own mind.
Greg Cheong
Computer Science
God helps
Over the past year. I've read
many letters from those who
have chosen the homosexual
lifestyle, and from those who
disagree with it. Often in these
letters, those who are not
involved in a homosexual
lifestyle profess a Christian
belief, and often use scripture to
back up their "side."
I want to state that I believe
there are no “sides." We are all
sinners saved by the grace (a gift
without merit) of Cod.
t realize sometimes, not
always, being homosexual may
l»e due to some type of abuse or
confused gender roles, or some
times people choose it for sim
pler reasons: spite, loneliness
and so on. I may not understand
everything about the homosexu
al lifestyle, but my heart goes
out to those involved
According to our Creator, God
(not to sound preachy), we were
created to be with the opposite
sex, to complement each other,
(iod is not here to condemn, but
to bring everyone to restoration
and healing We all have prob
lems and can benefit from His
help He will change our lives
and bring us to better life
through new relationships.
He can change our circum
stances and build a satisfying
relationship with us. He loves
you so much. If you need a
friend, check into Christ.
Janeen Elmont
Music
Big presumption
Stephanie Sisson states in her
recent column. "Bible answers
tough questions" [ODE, April 5),
that "homosexuality is a chosen
behavior and is wrong." Once
again Sisson has used faulty log
ic and misguided information to
arrive at a senseless hypothesis.
Sisson uses verses of the New
Testament to back up her ow n
prejudices and fears. Though
divinely inspired, much of what
is written in the Bible are man's
interpretations and not God's
exact words.
Originally the word "Bible"
meant “library." and that's still
what it means — a collection of
writings. Sisson uses Romans
26:27 as an example. This was
a letter written by Paul to
friends in Rome. They are not
God's words, but Paul's inter
pretation of right and wrong,
which directly reflected societal
views of the time.
I'd be interested to see a place
in the Bible where God actually
said, word for word, that homo
sexuality is a chosen lifestyle 1
sincerely doubt you'd find one.
Furthermore, it's not my
place), Sisson's place, or the
OCA's plan* to judge others To
do so would indicate that you
have all the answers and thus
presume to be Cod. How’s that
for sin' Like Sisson, 1 am a het
erosexual Christian, but unlike
her and those holding the same
opinion. I believe it's far more
"Christian" to learn how to tol
erate and respect everyone —
even those who are different —
than to expend energy oppress
ing others.
Erik Larson
Biology
Ludicrous
Stephanie Sisson’s column
regarding homosexuality (ODE.
April 5), like her column regard
ing environmental issues (ODE.
Ion. tl). is too ludicrous to war
rant serious consideration. I do
hope that Sisson eventually
gains sufficient maturity and
intellect to he embarrassed hv
them
Russell Barnett
Graduate Student
Public Affairs
Mortal morality
Regarding Stephanie Sisson’s
column (ODE. April 5): For
those of you. Christian or other
wise. who just don’t get it. AIDS
does not discriminate. It is not
an exclusively homosexual or
heterosexual disorder. We are
all, every one of us, in danger of
contracting it by practicing
unsafe sex or otherwise. Get
educated.
And as far as Sisson’s stance
on homosexuality: If it were a
"choice." we’d live in a perfect
world. Since 1 can’t convey the
truth of that statement to her. 1
will settle by saying, natural or
unnatural, homosexuality is not
going to disappear. If it is a
"sin.” let God take care of it as
God sees fit in God’s judgment.
Sisson needs to take herself
off the Jury of the Mortal Moral
ity.
Nick Mahayni
German