Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Tuesday,April 9,2002
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Jeremy Lang
Editorial Editor:
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Editorial
University
shouldn ’t hop
onto pledge
bandwagon
r ■ mere nas ueen a growing movement aeiuss me
| country to institute a pledge among graduating
seniors, who promise to be socially and environ
mentally responsible in their careers. The University of
Oregon is not exempt, and the school’s proposal would
allow seniors the option to sign pledge cards at gradua
tion. But the concept, while well-intentioned, is unnec
essary and aligns the University with the political
agenda of certain groups that support the vow.
Graduating seniors should already be aware of their
social and environmental responsibilities without hav
i ing to sign a card stating they will do so in the future.
The pledge was a common feature at University com
mencements until four years ago, when student inter
est fizzled. But now a group of students want to bring
back the Graduation Pledge of Social and Environmen
tal Responsibility — but why bother? If the pledges
weren’t working four years ago and the school hasn’t
been able to drum up enough interest, why would any
one care today?
The pledge tradition was not ours to begin with, al
though it sounds like an idea born in the liberal woods
of Eugene. The pledge started at the equally-liberal
Humboldt State University in 1987 and has rapidly
been incorporated at schools across the country. But
just because other schools are hopping on the pledge
bandwagon doesn’t mean the University should.
The University should be promoting a diversity of
ideas on campus and a pledge of responsibility in the
work force defeats this purpose. By incorporating the
pledge, the University is upholding the values and
views of the people supporting it, namely environmen
tally and socially conscious Web sites that appear on
the back of the pledge cards. The school is supposed to
remain neutral on these issues, and with the affiliation
of political groups, commencement is tainted with ac
tivist rhetoric.
Graduation should be focused on the accomplish
ments of students after years of study, not misplaced
environmentalism. By encouraging graduates to sign
the pledge cards at commencement, activists are de
tracting from what the day should be about — celebrat
l ing academic success.
Students should understand their social and envi
ronmental responsibilities in the work force by the
time they have left the University. Signing a piece of
paper that affirms this is not only a waste of time, but
an un-needed event at graduation. If students want to
the sign the cards to affirm their commitments, they
should do so on their own time.
Editorial Policy
editorial board. Responses can be sent to
commentaries are encouraged, letters are limited
to 250 words and guest commentaries to 550 words. Please
include contact information. The Emerald
1 reserves 1
Editorial Board Members
Jessica Blanchard
editor in chief
Jeremy Lang
managing editor
editorial editor
Jacquelyn Lewis
assistant editorial editor
community representative community representative
Peter Hockaday
newsroom representative
CORRECTION
The story "Police arrest student on felony theft charges" (ODE,
April 8) should have identified Benjamin Kelley’s middle name as
Raymond. The Emerald regrets this error.
Political struggle ...
or uncivilized ‘bloodlust’?
If you consume any form of news me
dia, you’ve probably already heard
mention of each of the following,
maybe many times. I ask you to bear
with me anyway. I have something to
say at the end. If you’re not familiar
with the information, I invite you to
sigh with the rest of us.
A Palestinian suicide bomber runs
into a banquet hall
in a Natanya hotel.
The ensuing explo
sion kills 25 Israelis.
An 18-year-old
Palestinian woman
blows herself up in
a Jerusalem gro
cery store, killing
two patrons. An
other suicide at
tack kills 14 in a
Haifa restaurant.
Hundreds of Is
raeli tanks and
Columnist troops enter the
West Bank in re
sponse. In Ramallah, an Israeli sniper
kills a 56-year-old Palestinian woman
on her way home from the hospital.
That same hospital later runs out of
room in the morgue and resorts to bury
ing bodies in a mass grave. One of those
bodies belongs to a 21-year-old Ameri
can citizen who died shielding her in
fant son from a hail of bullets.
In Bethlehem, an 80-year-old man is
shot to death outside his home. The
body lies rotting in the streets. Ambu
lances aren’t allowed to run, so many of
the wounded bleed to death. A tank at
tack kills a 60-year-old woman and her
son. Their family waits a day and a half
for someone to pick up the bodies. An
other tank attack, in Nablus, leaves a
Palestinian girl dead inside her own
home, the victim of a stray shell.
I imagine you’re thoroughly disgust
ed by now, but don’t stop reading just
yet. I haven’t even gotten to the worst
part. Everything listed above happened
during one eight-day period in an area
about the size of New Jersey.
The current Middle East crisis exists in
a moral vacuum so devoid of decency
that I am now officially ashamed to be
human. And the more I think about it, the
more ashamed I get. Have you ever
peered through the scope of a rifle? It’s
better than having a pair of binoculars. So
how did that 56-year-old woman end up
dead? Unless she had a beard, I find it
hard to believe that the Israeli sniper mis
'■•■FIT * • • » * •*.*
.*••••• . • • . *
took her for anything but a 56-year
old woman. Through the scope of his
rifle he could probably see the ex
pression on her face.
And the girl in Nablus — how did she
die? Do people aim tanks at private resi
dences? It seems like a couple of ma
chine guns would do the trick. It could
have been aimed at another building,
perhaps a police station. But how does
anyone, let alone a trained solder, miss
a building with a tank? Whoever
botched that shot literally couldn’t hit
the broad side of a barn. Why, then,
were they operating a giant, armored
death machine?
The acts committed on the Palestin
ian side are no less revolting to the civi
lized palate. Blowing up one’s military
adversaries is one thing; soldiers know
ingly put themselves in life or death sit
uations. Blowing up civilians is entire
ly another. Take a look at the two most
oicvc Day yd unciaiu
successful bombings in the first para
graph. One happened in a restaurant,
the other in a banquet hall. The suicide
bombers chose communal dining areas
as targets, places where friends and
families gather to enjoy food and com
pany. They weren’t hoping to catch an
Israeli general or politician on lunch
break. They wanted a large, civilian
body count. That sounds more like
“bloodlust” than political struggle.
I guess my only point here is to of
fend your sense of decency as mine has
been offended (yes, I have a sense of de
cency). Israelis and Palestinians are not
only ruining each other, they are doing
the world a great disservice by display
ing so openly those parts of humanity
we would much rather hide.
E-mail columnist Aaron Rorick
at aaronrorick@dailyemerald.com. His opinions
do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
Emerald cartoon lacked thoughtfulness
1 wanted to write and express my dis
appointment with the Daily Emerald
for printing the illustration that ap
peared in the March 18 issue. The car
toon depicted a Quran, a Torah and a
Bible with and arrow pointing toward a
mushroom cloud. The caption under
neath read, “A means to an end.” To say
this is offensive is an understatement,
but my problem is not with the artist or
the message, but rather the simplistic na
ture of the message and the Emerald’s
decision to print it. One can certainly
make the case that religion has played a
role in conflicts around the world
throughout history, but the cartoon, it
appears, seeks only to convey bitterness
and resentment toward religion rather
than to insight thought or dialogue.
I wonder if one of the Emerald’s illus
trators chose to depict an African
Guest Commentary
Jake
Shore
American with an arrow pointing to
ward a picture representing urban de
cay with the same caption, would the
Emerald print it? Why not? I’m sure
there are a lot of statistics that
could suggest a correlation between
African Americans and urban decay
in America.
The Emerald (or any significant pa
per) would not print such an illustra
tion because it’s supremely ignorant
and fails to take into account a whole
host of realities, such as poverty, poli
tics, policy, economics and their rela
tion to race. And most of all, it would be
insulting, bo too, is tne suggestion mat
religion by itself leads to war. Human
beings don’t need religion to wage war.
They have plenty of greed, hatred and
ignorance all on their own.
Religion and faith are deeply person
al to millions of people everywhere and
too big of an issue to be discussed light
ly. The Daily Emerald is a fine campus
newspaper that no doubt has a lot of in
telligent and experienced people work
ing for it, and as such, it has a responsi
bility to show a measure of respect to its
audience. That’s why the decision to
print something so lacking in thought
fulness or content reflects poorly on the
newspaper and the University and in
sults the intelligence of the audience,
religious or not.
Jake Shore is a junior majoring in history.