Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Wednesday, April 14, 2003
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor
Travis Willse
EOITORIAL.
Student Senate
could be new
reality TV show
Students who care about how the student government
conducts itself and spends student fees should be a tad bit
concerned about last week's ASUO Student Senate meet
ing. The nearly four-hour-long circus was fraught with
troubling goings-on, shady accounting practices and, just
for kicks, a little bit of old-fashioned allegations of racism
to boot.
It all started with a bit of good ol' capitalism: an Ameri
can pastime we like to call "charge it!" Fifteen members of
the United States Student Association, of which ASUO
President Maddy Melton is a member, charged $2,250 to
ASUO Accounting Coordinator Jennifer Creighton-Neiw
ert's credit card for a trip to Washington, D.C.
But apparently, the credit card charge was only a loan!
So, Wednesday night, the ASUO Executive came begging
Senate for more student money to pay Creighton-Nei
wert back.
Melton said the request for money came after the group
already paid, because she didn't want to go before the Sen
ate during Finals Week; we think it was a political ploy de
signed to make the senators feel sorry for Creighton-Nei
wert's quandary and thus approve the funding.
Despite the obvious issue with handing over student
money, regardless of the reason, to an employee of the
ASUO Executive, it technically isn't against the rules. But
the Senate should use greater scrutiny in analyzing such
irresponsible funding procedures in the future. The whole
debacle is reminiscent of a MasterCard commercial. It
plays out something like this:
• Inp to Washington, D.C. funded on the backs of stu
dents: $2,250
• Chance of USSA students bringing meaningful, tan
gible benefits to the University: 1 percent
• Ripping off your constituents: Priceless!
Well, it's water under the bridge, right? A few students
got to lobby, and everybody had to pay. Forgive and for
get, right?
You racists! Oh, sorry, just emulating the next fascinat
ing portion of Wednesday night's meeting. See, the next
order of business before the Senate was to consider form
ing a special "student issues" committee. The committee
would have the sole purpose of deciding whether the In
ternational Student Association should get money from
the President's Fund. Sen. Rodrigo Moreno-Villamar liked
the idea, and he made a motion to create the committee.
But then Sen. Joe Jenkins pointed out, rightfully, that it
would be unfair to all student groups to create a whole com
mittee for the benefit of one particular student group. So
Sen. Jesse Harding proposed an interim student-issues com
mittee be formed while the rules committee looked into
whether the whole idea was breaking any rules. That mo
tion was seconded.
Then the fun really began because ASUO Vice President
Eddy Morales wasn't having any of that! He implied that
the senators were discriminating against Moreno-Villamar
and stealing his ideas, saying "Rodrigo presented the idea,
but now with two white males supporting the motion,"
it's being supported.
As might be expected, nobody agreed with Morales, and
even Moreno-Villamar himself defended the second mo
tion, saying his ideas weren't being stolen. The second mo
tion later passed.
Racism is an ugly element in society that must be com
bated, but throwing the concept around as a political
weapon where it clearly doesn't apply demeans those who
have fought more legitimate battles. We would venture to
guess that not one senator is motivated by race, and
Morales should give them some credit as leaders, students
and people.
Until some evidence of overt racism materializes in
the Senate's proceedings, Morales should just keep his
mouth shut.
EDITORIAL BOARD
Brad Schmidt
Editor in Chief
Jan Tobias Montry
Managing Editor
Travis Willse
Editorial Editor
Jennifer Sudick
Freelance Editor
Ayisha Yahya
News Editor
Forced religion
"The criticism of religion is the premise
of all criticism." — Karl Marx
Michael Newdow may be the latest
American hero. The California physician
stood before the U.S. Supreme Court last
month and argued that his 5-year-old
daughter should not be pressured into
reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at
school.
Newdow should be applauded for
standing up for his daughter's constitu
tional rights. The separation of church
and state as embodied in the First
Amendment is a vital constitutional con
cept that should not be sold out to right
wing interests, as it was 50 years ago.
Supporters of the pledge often appeal
to tradition to make their case, but few re
alize the phrase "under God" was added
to the pledge in 1954 — 62 years after the
pledge was written — in response to
Cold War anti-Communist hysteria. The
phrase is the result of a disgraceful peri
od in American history that we should
stop honoring.
The pledge seeks to enforce conformity
of belief, and that concept runs counter
to the idea of a nation kept vital by vigor
ous debate. There is something Orwellian
about 30 youths standing up in class and
chanting their affirmations of loyalty to
the state.
Newdow is an atheist, and he has every
right to be concerned about the influence
on his daughter of religious beliefs he
doesn't subscribe to. It's especially ridicu
lous for a bunch of adults to be telling a
5-year-old what to think when they are
most likely wrong.
It's considered impolite in America to
point out the absurdity and foolishness
of religious belief. Religion is, and always
has been, a rather poor attempt to ex
plain where we came from and to com
fort us when we cringe at the thought of
mortality.
When we die, our bodies rot in the
ground, and within a couple of genera
tions our lives are forgotten. When peo
ple can't handle this truth, they grasp at
the straws of the faithful.
Chuck Slothower
Taking issue
They go to a building where a preacher
tells them how to think and act. Those
who are too weak of conscience to have
their own moral code are fed one.
As the brilliant essayist Christopher
Hitchens said in an interview, "They say
that a first-century execution gives me a
reason to live and was conducted so that I
wouldn't have to answer for my actions.
I haven't the faintest idea what it would
feel like to believe that. It's a belief so ab
surd that it can't even be justified by its
own rationale."
Religion is an easy way out. Whatever
problems exist, you don't have to worry
about them because it's all part of God's
plan. You can strangle puppies and hack
babies to little bits as long as you let God
know you believe in him and you're real
ly, really sorry.
That being said, religion is not entire
ly malevolent. I admire the role of
churches in galvanizing the faithful to
help the poor and the hungry, and I bask
in the kindness displayed to me by
friends who profess a belief in God.
But you can help the poor without a
man of the cloth telling you to do so,
and you can greet people with a smile
and a kind word because it's the right
thing to do.
I am an agnostic because it's the phi
losophy of "I don't know, and you don't
either." I find it extremely unlikely that
God exists, but not impossible. Atheism
also is therefore a form of faith that can't
entirely be justified.
Reciting the phrase "under God" im
plies both a belief in God and that reli
gious belief is a necessary prerequisite for
patriotism. That isn't right.
If you want to believe in God, fine by
me. However, the founders of the United
States were incredibly wise and forward
thinking in insisting on a secular state,
and religious activists need to keep their
hands off of it.
Contact the columnist
at chuckslothower@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily
represent those of the Emerald.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Student votes should go
to Petkun, Ravassipour
I am writing to give my highest endorse
ment to Adam Petkun and Mena Ravas
sipour for ASUO Executive. Being the
ASUO president and vice president re
quires a wide variety of skills and platform
issues that will speak directly to the stu
dent body as a whole, as well as to
underrepresented students on campus.
Student parents, students of color, grad
uate students, members of the greek sys
tem, low-income and non-traditional stu
dents would all benefit from having Adam
and Mena in office Their plans and experi
ence would create concrete changes to
make education more affordable, to en
sure that students' rights aren't being vio
lated on campus and in the surrounding
community and to create respect for stu
dent interests in the Oregon Legislature
I have carefully considered the qualifi
cations of the other candidates for the Ex
ecutive office and, while they all would
serve well in different positions in student
government, not one individual or ticket
has the combined experience or good in
tentions that Adam and Mena have. I urge
you to vote for Adam and Mena.
Rachel Pilliod
senior
political science
former ASUO President