Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Wednesday, November 27,2002
-Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Editors:
Salena De La Cruz, Pat Payne
Editorials
Administration
deserves praise
for logo decision
The University reversed its policy on student group
use of the “O” logo, and we applaud the administration’s
willingness to listen to student concerns and respond.
Student groups — which are funded by student
dollars and run by students — will not be forced to
put the “O” logo on their printed materials. This
makes sense, given that these groups are not run
by the University and do not represent the
University’s opinions.
We can’t help but wonder if incidents like The
Insurgent’s publication in the 1999-2000 school
year of an Animal Liberation Front “primer” — a
how-to guide to subversive tactics for protesters —
gave administrators pause. Does the University real
ly want its seal of approval on all of the free expres
sion in which student groups engage? Might it be
liable for expression found by a court to be illegal?
The next step, frightening in its implications,
could have been the University demanding to
“approve” all information put out by student groups,
in order to avoid legal or image problems.
We are thankful those concerns are over. It’s good
that this issue has been put to rest, and again, the
University deserves praise for letting student
groups have their own voice. Congratulations.
Clarifying our
stance on KUGN
In the past two weeks, the Emerald has received
considerable feedback about our editorial concerning
KUGN-AM calling itself “the voice of the Ducks,”
while broadcasting syndicated talk shows by hosts
that engage in speech that is harmful to specific pop
ulations in the community. After reading much of the
feedback, it seems that a clarification is in order.
Our editorial did not call for censorship, as we
don’t believe Savage’s and Medved’s shows should be
forced off the air. This is not a case of a government
agency withholding funds from an organization be
cause it disagrees with the organization’s politics. It’s
a different matter when a government agency accepts
money from an organization and allows that organi
zation to represent it in public — when the organiza
tion’s behavior violates the agency’s stated principles.
By disassociating with KUGN, the University would
not be withholding money in an attempt to censor, it
would be upholding its mission.
Editorial policy
This editorial represents the opinion of the
Emerald editorial board. Responses can be
sent to letters @>dailyemeraid.com. Letters
to the editor and guest commentaries are
encouraged. Letters are limited to 250 words
and guest commentaries to 550 words.
Authors are limited to one submission per
calendar month. Submission must include
phone number and address for verification.
The Emerald reserves the right to edit for
space, grammar and style.
Editorial board members
Michael J, Kieckner
Editor in chief
Salena De La Cruz
Editorial editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Managing editor
Rat Payne
Editorial editor
Jenna Cunningham
Student representative
Din t put pot in the iiint
Marijuana became illegal in the
United States in 1937. The plant has
been grown here since 1611, primari
ly for the hemp products made from
the stalk of this hearty, naturally oc
curring weed.
George Washington, raising support
in France for the American Revolution,
gave this excuse for cutting his visit
short: “I wouldn’t miss the hemp har
vest in Mount Vernon for all the tea in
China.” Pot plants weren’t magically
discovered in some hippie’s dorm
room during the ‘60s, as popular cul
ture would have us believe.
Neither can
growing marijua
na plants be asso
ciated with crimi
nals who tend to
use the buds or
leaves of the
plant to get high
any more than
with farmers who
plan to use the
stalk to make
rope, paper or
clothing. Thomas
Jefferson wrote the original draft of the
Declaration of Independence on hemp
paper. As to whether he used any other
part of the marijuana plant during this
process, your guess is as good as mine.
After graduating from high school, I
moved out of my parents’ house and
worked for a roofing contractor for
eight months before attending college.
During this period, I experimented
with much more serious substances
than marijuana.
I am not proud of this, nor do I con
tinue to use drugs, but I can tell you
from personal experience that lumping
marijuana in with harsher drugs is
sending the wrong message to youth.
Smoking marijuana acted as a gateway
drug for me specifically because our
society does not differentiate it from
addictive, life-threatening drugs such
as methamphetamines and cocaine.
When I did not keel over from trying
one illegal substance, I began to think
that other drugs were probably not
overly dangerous either. Now, I know
differently. I have had many traumat
ic experiences as a result of engaging
in a lifestyle that included drug use,
most of which only resulted in tempo
M. Reilly
Cosgrove
Separate this
METH
CRACK
YOU DRUGS ARE ALL THE SAME
OHHH PLEASE
Peter Utsey Emerald
rary physical and emotional suffering
for myself.
But I have been around people for
whom drugs have been a way of life for
years or even decades. Their addic
tions affect everyone they meet. I
knew a mother who gave metham
phetamines to her 12-year-old son. I
know people who were born addicted
to drugs.
One time I was riding in the back
seat of a car with a 10-month-old baby
on my lap when his mother, age 17,
had her boyfriend hold the wheel so
she could smoke methamphetamine
while driving. I asked her to stop the
car, but she refused. I tried to roll
down the window so the baby would
not have to breathe the smoke, but she
locked the window from the driver’s
side console.
If you use methamphetamines or
other drugs that are as harmful and ad
dictive, you will eventually do things
that affect not only yourself but also
those around you.
We must do everything in our pow
er to educate against drug use and de
cisively punish people that perpetuate
the problem in our society. Focusing
on truly harmful drugs will increase
our chances of success.
If the young men and women of this
nation are old enough to vote and old
enough to be drafted for service in the
armed forces at age 18, they are old
enough to decide for themselves
whether or not to use marijuana.
Legalization has decreased the rate
of marijuana use in Holland by 40 per
cent. There is simply no reason to
think that marijuana use would
increase in the United States if it were
legal, and at any rate, 83 million
Americans have already tried it.
Efforts to suppress marijuana use
are simply not working. Let’s spend
our time and money fighting the war
on drugs, not a war on plants.
Contact the columnist
atmichaelcosgrove@dailyemerald.com.
His views do not necessarily represent those
of the Emerald.
Smoke harms others, unlike Twinkies
Guest commentary
I am writing in response to Michael
Cosgrove’s column (ODE, “Smoke
filled logic,” Nov. 11). This is not the
first time that personal freedom has
been used as a reason not to curtail
smokers’ rights (privilege?) to indulge
in their habit in public. As is often the
case, they dredge up comparisons to
other bad habits, such as eating junk
food, that cause serious medical prob
lems as well. What is often overlooked
is the fact that an unhealthy diet
mainly affects the individual, while nu
merous studies have shown that sec
ondhand smoke has harmful effects on
anyone in the vicinity of the smoker.
When a Twinkie-eater consumes a
Twinkie, those around him or her do
not involuntarily ingest the high fat
and sugar that comprise the poorly
chosen snack. Not so with the smoker.
Some smokers believe that the smoke
from their cigarette dissipates harm
lessly into the air. I have had numer
ous occasions when I, trailing in the
wake of a smoker, have breathed in
the residue they leave behind. This is
not the case with “Junk Food Junkie.”
They leave no trail of fat, sugar and
preservatives behind them for me to
take into my body against my will.
Cosgrove calls on us to defend the
rights of smokers in the name of per
sonal liberty.
If they, like the junk-food eater,
could keep the harm from their choice
confined to their own bodies (take a
drag, but don’t exhale until the harm
ful constituents have dissipated) I
would be more inclined to do so. How
ever, I don’t believe that the freedom
to make personal choices guaranteed
to us by Jaw and. tradition extends to
those actions that cause harm to oth
ers. Freedom of expression does not
protect you if you choose to express
disapproval of someone by punching
their lights out, no matter how annoy
ing you think they are.
Private decisions carried out in pub
lic should not pose potentially harmful
risks to those around you. What peo
ple do in private is their own business,
so long as it doesn’t affect me. What is
done in public is another matter. By
the way, one of the reasons that
habits, like tobacco, are often taxed is
that those who tax know that those
who engage in the habits will continue
to pay, no matter the cost. The fact
that even some smokers who have had
lungs and/or larynxes removed from
cancer and yet still smoke tends to
bear this out.
BlacitaTelles is a senior majoring in planning,
public policy and management.