American Catholics challenge church’s birth control rules Guest commentary What are reproductive ethics? Who decides what they will be? It depends upon whom you ask. A chance encounter with Con science, a journal of pro-choice Catholic opinion, introduced me to a very large community of people who think reproductive decisions for themselves lie with themselves. These, I discovered, are not lib ertine, anti-institutional, anti-gov ernment people on the fringe of so ciety. Rather, they are serious, caring individuals well-versed in the issues of reproduction, contra ception, abortion, social health and family life. They include priests and nuns, scholars and teachers, and, of course, parishioners. Their journal is forthright in an nouncing its purpose. Its goal, it de clares, is to promote sexual and re productive ethics “based on justice, reflect a commitment to women’s well-being, and respect and affirm the moral capacity of women and men to make sound and responsible deci sions about their lives.” Despite the low media profile of this group, the majority of the American Catholic community thinks this way. About 59 percent of Catholic women of childbearing age practice birth control, essentially the same percentage as the larger American community. In addition, a stunning 88 percent of American Catholics think someone who practices birth control can still be a good Catholic. This Catholic community must have its emotional struggles, for their decisions run counter to the church they love and counter to efforts of the church hierarchy to have them accept church teachings. Despite proscriptions on behavior, threats of excommunication, denial of sacra ments, generous doses of guilt, and that favorite tactic, claims of the in fallibility of the church and Pope, these Catholics know that they and they alone will determine their most personal matters. As one person put it, “Bishops never acknowledge that family plan ning assistance saves lives and en ables women and families to take better advantage of economic and educational opportunities.” Why this disparity? Why this profound difference between Catholic leader ship and American parishioners? Simply put, American Catholics are well-educated. They are con versant with world affairs and trends. In that distinctively Ameri can way, they’re not blindly sub servient to authority. They know, as the Alan Guttmacher Institute reports, that access to affordable contraception can reduce a woman’s chance of having an abor tion by 85 percent. They know that worldwide, unsafe abortions are the leading cause of maternal deaths. They know that pregnancy and childbirth take the lives of 600,000 women each year. They know that unbridled reproduction can be devastating to themselves and the children they do want. So where does this dissenting ma jority go from here? Even more than Americans at large, they support efforts of the United Nations Population Fund to slow population growth. They con tinue to confront that most patriar chal of institutions, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. They force public dialogue on public policy, community life, social think ing and teaching, and womens’ health and personal development. It’s quite an ambitious undertaking, but it will determine the quality and character of their lives and the lives of their families. They will not go quietly into the night. Glen Kaye lives in Salem. Protesters need to review their belief system Guest commentary Well, I support free speech and the right of people to assemble and demonstrate peace fully. However, there are a few things that I’d like to point out to all of you protesters. First, this war isn’t about oil! If you think it is, stop driving your car! You’re like the “vegetarian” that wears leather shoes. You don’t have a moral leg to stand on. Second, some of you are just hippie want-to-bes and aren’t sure what you be lieve. You’re just jumping on the band wag on or have a hidden agenda. Third, what if Sept. 11,2001, would have happened in Portland, Eugene or Seattle? Do you honestly think you would still be against the war? I think not. Iraq and Sad dam Hussein are bent on the destruction of Israel and the west. Are you anti-semitic, or does your loathing of our government reach new heights? By the way, did you vote? The Muslim extremists will stop at nothing to include suicide bombings to kill you (yes, you)! It is an automatic ticket to heaven in their eyes. It doesn’t matter how, to kill an infidel is a rubber stamp to heav en! Ticket punched. Fourth, President George W. Bush is looking after the safety of the U.S. citizen ry. His job is to protect us, get it? Stop ar guing about the legitimacy of his presiden cy. Get over it and get behind him and the defense of our way of life. Fifth, I am a soldier and have been for 22 years. I was born and raised in Oregon. I was bom and raised to protect the environ ment, like most of my fellow Oregonians. We need to get over our dependency on oil and especially foreign oil. If oil was worth nothing, those people over there wouldn’t have the money to hurt us and just would n’t matter anymore. I didn’t say this was about oil. I said they wouldn’t have the money to hurt us anymore. Sixth, many men and women of all races have died to make this country free and an example of what is right in the world. Iso lationism isn’t the answer. We are not safe when our own technology is used against us (airliners full of innocent passengers). I do not question your patriotism; I only question your thought processes that went in to your position. Finally, soldiers fight for each other. We are sworn by oath to defend the constitu tion of the United States against all ene mies foreign and domestic and to obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the officers ap pointed over us according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. That is not an oath that I take lightly. You may call it blind obedience. I call it mak ing sure that you have the right to stand in the street and state your opinion. Richard A. Berger is in a 'C' Company Aviation Unit stationed in South Korea. Letter to the editor Petroskey’s censorship correctly portrayed It is rare to find a published column that successful ly combines passion with skilled writing. The Emer ald’s Philip Huang achieved that with his column about the arrogance of Dale Petroskey, president of the Baseball Hall of Fame (“Unsportsmanlike con duct,” April 15). Petroskey showed his feet still are mired in the mud of the Reagan administration, which he once served as an assistant press agent, when he banned showing of the baseball movie, “Bull Durham.” Huang accurately portrayed him as a right-wing censor. What Philip wrote reminds us that this nation and its national game still should honor freedom of expres sion. The actions of a petty man — Petroskey — re mind us we need to stay watchful as the politics he sup ports continue to threaten the rights of a people, as well as the credibility of our national game. George Beres Eugene INTERESTED IN GIVING TOURS? The Ambassador Program is seeking students who are interested in getting more involved at the University of Oregon. The Ambassador Program is hiring multiple undergraduates for various positions. Applications now available in 465 Oregon Hall For further questions, call 346-1274 LAST