Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 20, 1994)
EDITORIAL Ballot Measure 19 invites censorship Ballot Measure 19, which would authorize state and local governments to prohibit any materials deemed “obscene.” opens the door to state-sanctioned censor ship and should not be approved by voters The Oregon Supreme Court has held that under the state constitution, no form of expression may be pro hibited on the grounds of obscenity, including child pornography. That means that the Oregon Constitution provides more freedom than the U.S. Constitution, a fact Measure 19 supporters have correctly pointed out. They also are correct when they claim that many other states have passed restrictions that allow the government to prohib it obscene materials. But they are incorrect when they state that these lim itations are a good thing. There is no doubt that this measure would result in censorship. That is precisely what is intended. It would allow government to make decisions about what adults should be allowed to read, see or watch. The list of books, plays, movies and artwork that have boon deemed "obscene” by one government agency or another could fill this page. Clan of the Cave Hear. The Diary of Anne Frank, the movie Homeo and Juliet. even Michaelsngelo's statue of David. Many items have been censored even here in Oregon, where the state constitu tion ought to have protected them. Passing Measure lb would only encourage more attempts at censorship, by giving the impression that such attempts would be successful. Measure 19 advocates argue that their definition of "obscenity" would bo whatever definition the U.S. Supreme Court offers. But that definition is not hard and fast, and we can hardly expect to be abio to just call up the justices and ask about a particular book nr magazine Librarians have better things to do than fight endless censorship crusades in court. Measure 19 supporters are banking on a couple of things to improve their measure's chances at the polls. For one. they know that many people believe that pornography causes sexual crimes. And while a high percentage of sexual offenders do possess pornography, so do many law-abiding citizens who would never con sider such violence. There is simply no proven correla lion between porn use and sex crimes. And supporters of Measure 19 know that most Orego nians are against child pornography, and that is why such materials are specifically mentioned in the mea sure. Hut the production and possession of child pornogra phy are already crimes. It is against the law to use a child in a display of sexual activity, or to visually record any sexual acts involving children. It is also illegal to dupli t ate or distribute child pornography. That's the law, and that's enough. Measure 19 does more than authorize the government to prohibit < hlld pornography; it also gives the green light to outlaw any materials deemed "obscene." even for adults In their own homes. And that's too much. Oregon Doily Emerald p 0 eo* m* EU&CNC 0*fGON»?*0) TrM» ( mor9kS t* pubfcshed My Monday twough ff*J*y during the *chx* >•*< and Tuesday and Thursday during |h« mmmfi by !ha Oregon 0«s>y (.matfttd Go , Inc . si the Ur.-vtw vty ol Oregon ( ugene. Oregon Th« / rnmak! operate* t*x)aperx*ent»y o* ffN» Unrversrty with offcoea a? Su4e 300 of the I ft) Memorial Union and »* a mombw ol t*±e Aasooaled Press Th* tnutrau a private property Th# unlawful removal or um ol papers a promk.Utabte by law Managing Editor Editorial Editor Graphic* EcHto# Freelance Editor In Oepth Editor Editor-In-Chief Katfy Solo David Thorn New Editor Joe Harwood J«h Paaiay Ata-na Baum Ed Ktopfenstam Sport* Editor Photo Editor Supplement* Editor Night Editor RetMicca Manat Chris Mel/ Mchaei Shmdter Theta Noel Marcreene Edwards Associate Editor* f f«edt«-ch von Carp. Slutonf CaOverrtment Actwtm Mia octane Edward*. Commuorfy. Tiffany Smith £ dbcj^sxi Adm^sfrafion New* Staff: LO' Bet tine**'. Wilson Chan Amy Coiumbo. T ash a E*chensehe' Abe £ timed*. Pnmo f ontana. Gayle Forman. Christopher few, Man Qerton. Gary Gut, Sarr^ MendWOn Kns Henry. T»«rvor Kearney Adam K inches M*vi Mi.Tyre. Hen Mj«t*us Anne Mnsar ttomtek). Sherry Ramey Hettoe Rerrvut l>a SalCKoa Pilot Van ScAie Km A*u Daniel West, Brian Womacfc Genera< Manager: Judy Rkk* Advertising Director M.i » Aa’er Production Manager Mchel* Ross Advertising Marco Chny, Tony To* Er»n Harsher Ncoie Herymarti. Jeremy Masor M* had Mftatfe. Sarah MtcheH. Ton1 Mateistaedt. Kalsey Wat* Classified Hm*y Merchant. Manager S*m Tie Tec* Distribution John long. Ferenc Rahocji Regmp ?*upnA Busina** Kathy Carton*. Sqpervsor Judy ConnoVy Production Oehia Me Cobb Pnxluchon Cc**d.u#ftv Shawna Abate. Gag Desmond. Tara GauHney Brad Joss. Jerwter Rohmd. Matt Thangmpt. Dayton Yea Newsroom 346-5511 Display Advertising 346-3712 Business Office 346-5512 Classified Advertising 346*4343 2 Oregon Da<tv Emvraid Thuisday. Octobor 20. 1994 ■ OPINION Statistics easily compromised In responding to Brian Worn at k's column [DDK Oct 14 J. 1 would simply like to defend my views concerning the treat ment of homosexuals Their treat ment in the ro< ently published sex survey still concerns me. I am not necessarily calling into doubt the ability of the researchers who condut ted the survey, bill it is important to question what implications their results might have Those impli cations include whether or not Womack himself has some poli te x that don’t fit the data that wo have been given by this survey. If 4.7 percent of homosexuali ty prevalence rates were taken from male prostitutes, and 20 to 25 percent of the sampling came from prison inmates, why is that a problem' Are prisoners and male prostitutes not "real” homo sexuals' Are they somehow infe rior or not "fully” gay because they on- in prison, or engaging in illegal activity' I am not Stephen Hawking, hut I am sure that even he would not understand how that logic is skewing ” the data I am very com erned with Womack's perceptions that sub stantial anti-homosexual senti ments do not exist Portland and Eugene aside. Oregon is still very conservative. Do you remember what c ity lies just across the Willamette River from us? The same one that passed a certain anti-homosex ual measure just about a year ago? It is true that the majority of counties that passed Ballot Mea sure 9 were in rural Eastern Ore gon, hut the problem isn't really that far from home. The (X!A is a very real threat to civil rights in Oregon. The same state in which a new mea sure is on the Nov. 8 ballot that would set Iwu k the civil rights of a substantial group of people sev eral decades. Ask any gay person. They'll tell you just how accepted they feel in Oregon. It is because of groups like the OCA that events such as Cloming P m i Van Sickle Out Dnv have become necessary If people feel discriminated against, to the jKiint that they are scared to admit they are homo sexual. something needs to lie done to make sure they feel comfortable being themselves. No one should be committed to living as someone they are not - for example, straight • if they art! not. Yes, I did go to school on Tuesday I thought National Coming Out Day was an impor tant step towards the acceptance of homosexuals in our area 1 didn't fwd guilty about not being homosexual I am sorry if you did Hut giving gay people a for mat in which they can speak out and be heard, without being threatened, shouldn't make any one leel uncomfortable about their sexual orientation. It was intended to make everyone feel more comfortable with every one's sexuality. The pro-homosexual move ment has brought on some important changes, only palpa ble in recent years. The film Philadelphia, is a good example. No film chronicling the efforts of a gay man to save his job and his dignity would have been possi ble in the 1940s when the Kin sey report was publisher! We have been witnessing a change in public tolerance toward gay people, which has never before been seen in this country. We should lie grateful that such positive change is hap pening at all. not feeling guilty or frightened. It's true. I am concerned with the reporting of the number of homosexuals in this country. Low percentages give anti-gav ■ promoters a dangerous weapon with which to squash further gay-rights advances I don’t pro mote the use of faulty data to further one's cause, whether you are for or against the gay move ment, but who does it hurt more? People working for gay rights aren't hurting anyone. Contrary to what the OCA might have you believe, no one's children is going to he (orrupted and no one is going to hell on account that they believe gay people are humans. Conversely, those who work against the gay movement, armed properly, could take away rights that have supposed ly been given to us uncondition ally. Millions of people could have the right to acceptance tak en away because of some mis used statistics You are partly right. Brian. 1 do tend to look at those statistii s that meet my politics with a lit tle more favor. However, statistics are an incredibly dangerous tool As the potent and fallible thing that statistics are, we should always lie w ary of the information they portray. Statistics can lie made to show anything or favor any body the user desires. No statis tic should Ire taken lightly. 1 am for gay rights I admit it 1 want gay people to l>e accepted in our society as equals. I want them to lei able to iead productive, independent lives free from prosecution I wont homosexuals to be able to get a job when they are deserving, or a plac e to live if they need one. I want gay people to he able to walk down the street holding hands without worrying if they will Ihi killed that evening. Homosexuality is such a tricky thing to define, no matter what th«* statistics show It all depends on who the individuals feel they are. not what the news paper numbers tell them. Paul Van Sickle is a columnist for the Emerald
