Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 14, 1994)
EDITORIAL Fund-raising drive a win-win situation The largest private fund-raising effort in the history of the state will kick off tonight at a gala, biack-tle dinner — and the University will map all the profits. That's a nice thing to hear. The Oregon Campaign, as the fund-raising effort has been named, represents the best and most ambitious hope for the University in these financially troubled times. Rather than relying exclusively upon the gen erosity of a strapped state government or upon the resources of a largely cash-poor student body, the Ore gon Campaign will bring millions of dollars to the Uni versity without taking money away from anyone who really needs it. Life offers very few win-win situations. But this has the potential to be just that. The campaign has been going on for two years already. This was the "silent phase," which included donations to the business, law and architecture schools, as well as the College of Arts and Sciences. Although the exact amount raised so far will not be announced until tonight, a University nows release indicates that more than 40 percent of the campaign's $150 million goal has already found its way to University coffers. But for the remaining four years of the six-year cam paign, the University is going public with its requests, asking for donations from alumni, corporations and foundations, faculty and staff members, and anyone else who might be interested in investing in the University and the future of this state. And that’s exactly what donations to the University will be: an investment. Donations to the University will bo used to fund schol arships. endowed professorships, curriculum improve ments and research — what campaign leaders are calling the "people"' aspects of the University. What the campaign will provide is a needed boost to the University, which probably could not be achieved in any other way. But in order for the campaign to be successful, peo ple will have to give. Nobody expects most of the 1994 graduates to fork over a big gift: most of them are probably still paying off student loans. But there are a lot of former Ducks who can afford to cough up a little dough for the school that gave them their degrees — especially if those degrees helped them get the jobs they now have. Business and professional leaders who didn’t go to the University should also give serious thought to the possi bility of helping the cause. If the University is of a high quality, its graduates will be too. And those graduates will have to work somewhere. Students today should appreciate the donors who havo given to the University already. Those donor con tributions have halpod make this institution better than it otherwise could've been. And one day. maybe they can return the favor. Oregon Daily Emerald t h* i>rvy*v' daily l mm aid '* pubfcthed daily Monday Ihrowgh f 'Kilty dunng the *ctx>c* y®»' and Tuesday and Tftur*day during the »ummet by the Oregon Da.ty Emerald PiMahatg Co . Inc . at I’'* UravarMy o> Or agon. f ugen*. Oregon 1h« I'matO opt*sin* independently cJ the Urwatiriy wm office* W Soda 300 ot the Erb Memorial Union and > a member o' fhv Aaaooaiad Pn»t Tha f meraAf n private property The unlawful removal ot uaa ol papers a pro*acmab* by taw Edttof-mOial Ka>y Soto Mwtagma EdNot 0«v«d Tbotn Naan Edltot FUtoarxa Mamtt Editorial Editor Joa Harwood Sporta Editor Ova Matt Jad Pasiay Photo Editor Mchaai Srvnd* AlamaBaom Supplements Ednor TnaU Noal Ed Kloplanpem Night Editor Key Sdo Associate Editor a Fnedartch von Carp. SJuOani Government-Acsvtsas Mar cal ana Edwards Commwrafjr Tittany Smrffi, FAgher L'ducaftorv Admmr*tr*hon Nawa Staff: Lori Baftinaato, Wilaon Chan. Amy Colombo. Tatha Etch*n*#h*r Aba EJbmad*. Piano f onlana. Gayta Forman. ChnMophar For. Malt Gwton Gary Grass Sw*i Handaraon Kns Harry, Traaor Ksarney. Adam Kmchsr. UaV Me Tyre Ban Mtabna. Arm Moaar Kom*ld. Snarry Ramey Hobo* Reeve*. Ua Saicaxta. PaU Van Seal*. Km Wau Ganal Waal Bnan Worn** _ Editor EdHoriai Graphic* EdHor Fraalanca Editor tn-Oapth Editor Judy H*dt Advarttalng Dirac tor Mar* W attar " Production Managar: Mena* Hoaa Advertising: Marco Citing. Tony For. tun Harsher. N<o* Harjmatt Jaramy Maaon Michael Mtvacta. Sarah Miches. Tom Mttatttaadl. Kattay Awe* Claaarftad Becky Mar chant. Managar Son Tta Tec* Dlatrtbotlon: John Long. Faranc RMocji, Regina Zacpna Buainaaa; Kathy Carbon* Scparvraor Judy ConnoSy Production Dane* McCobb. ProdtcOon Coorotnaior Shawn* Aba*. Grag Daamond Tara GauAnay, Brad Joa*. Janndar Roland Matt Thangwri Oayton Yaa Naararoom._..MS-S611 Dtaplay Advarttalng_MS-3711 Buainaaa Ofnca ..— MS-SS12 Classified Advartlaing_ ft Bill CL/vroN was FORCED 7t> R£SPOHb THE CRISIS »M »AAS ■ I ...TO REhMVQ MDOAK Ht/yjf/A/... 1 W^F/* : H I...A8x*rrm& | w/rn FOR.U ffFEcni [... ABOUT TVQEArtN/fiJO ms HEKiHBo*s FORSJES THAT 6BOQC* Qosh £fF£C.T\V£LY D£SrQ.C*1ED WflORS | ■ OPINION Opinions, survey results disagree Brian Wom ack II seams wv’ro once again using selective reasoning A survey has come out that doesn't quite match up with some peo ple's politics So the first thing we do is get loose with the facts and hard on the rhetoric. This survey on sex in America says we re not as gay as some thought we were. Hack in the 1940s, Alfred C. Kinsey conducted a survey of similar scope and size He came up with the figure of 10 percent of the population being homo sexual, which has worked very nicely into the politics of the left over the last several years and has been repeatedly used, despite some of its questionable data col lection techniques. However, the new finding says a mere 2.H percent of men and 1.5 percent of women are homosex ual or bisexual. Since these numbers don't match up with some people's politics, there must be something wrong with them. Enter Paul Van Sickle. Yesterday in the Emerald, Paul Van Sickle concluded there must be something wrong with these numbers since they don't match up with Kinsey's and his opin ions. The problem is that he forgot to check the numbers in the Kin sey report As one author of the new sur vey said. Kinsey had problems with using scientifically valid sampling techniques. What were those problems? Well, for one, 4.7 percent of thu homosexuality prevalence rates were taken from male prostitutes Yes. male prostitutes. Second, zo-Z5 percent of the sampling included those from the prison population. You don’t have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out that this would defi nitely skew the data. With "techniques" like this, it's no wonder the numbers were so high The columnist then went on to say that same-gender desire attraction and apf>eal rate at eight percent, which is closer to Kin sey's numbers. .So there might be more homosexuals than the sur vey says, since there’s some attraction But just because someone might have an attraction to some thing doesn't mean he or she pur sues it. With this logic, someone might be considered a vegetarian if they're thinking about eating just non-meat products. Or maybe someone's attract ed to the postal carrier. That doesn’t necessarily mean she’s going to throw away her wedding ring Don’t get mixed up in the stats like “those who have had same gender sex since the age of 18" is five and four percent for men and women, respectively. One-night stands do not account for a lifestyle No. it simply l>oils down to the fact that if people identify them selves as homosexual or bisexu al, that's what they are. Other points Van Sickle brings up are interesting He says,"The overwhelming tide of discriminatory feelings current ly circulating against homosex uals would be scary, and might influence survey subjects' responses.” Uh. Paul, did you go to school on Tuesday? National Coming Out Day? Day to make hetero sexuals feel guilty for not being homosexual? I hen there were all those parades last summer. All of these events were brought to tiear on the public by extensive press coverage. I he entertainment media holds up "the cause” from print to film, as in Philadelphia. I could go on. Not exactly an overwhelming tide of discrimination. Now, before you start scream ing, “What about the Oregon Cit izens Alliance!” at this column and make others in the room stare, let me say that although the OCA definitely has support ers, in most of the visible parts of our society, the OCA is rele gated to the approximate status of Genghis Khan, only without the soft language. Saying you are gay or lesbian today is saying you're political ly correct, and no matter what people say, that's usually fash ionable. Admitting being gay in the 1940s was about as easy as threading a needle with a bon constrictor. Really, Paul, what is the fas< i nation with making sure as many people as possible are gay? It probably lies in those poli tics of yours. You lefty. As you say, "Overall, I find it disconcerting that this kind of information is going to Ihi used to allocate resources for public services and to decide social policy. People shouldn't be jumped into groups according to their sexual activity, especially if it would affect their access to services." So if the survey would have said. “49 percent of us are homosexual," it would have been okay? Then, because there were more than we expected, we should decide social policy based on sexual activity? If someone is gay or lesbian, they'll get the same protection as everyone else. Perhaps you're right, Paul These surveys shouldn't be tak en so seriously. Don't decide to believe the surveys that line up with your opinions. Brian IVomack is a columnist for the Emerald.