2
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Monday, December 4, 1967
Government vs. cigarettes
Many clinical experiments in the past 10 to 15 years tried to link cigarette smoking with various diseases, primarily lung cancer. Most resulted in inconclusive evidence. But two years ago, an American Cancer Society experiment produced evidence that cigarette smoking could be a factor in certain types of lung cancer as well as hardening of the arteries. A short time later, government legislation required the cigarette industry to print "Caution: Cigarette Smoking May be Hazardous to Your Health" on every pack of cigarettes.
The government now is being asked by various groups to pass legislation to prohibit the sale of cigarettes and evidence suggests the government is listening. This in turn raises a question. Is the government infringing upon an area in which it has no business.
A government ban on cigarettes is only one sign of the increasing national pressure against the cigarette industry. The most recent pressure has come from the public health campaign to persuade smokers to quit. The efforts have turned to television. This was made possible last year when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), acting upon a complaint filed against New York's WCBS-TV, ruled that the "fairness doctrine," which requires broadcasters to air both sides of controversial issues, also applies to cigarette advertising. According to the FCC, all stations that carry commercials praising the satisfactions of smoking also must carry messages about its risks.
Elected officials also are speaking out against the industry. Sen. Robert Kennedy has introduced bills designed to limit television cigarette advertising to programs after 9 p.m., in order to cut down on juvenile viewing of the ads. He also proposed a tax on cigarettes according to their tar and nicotine content.
Last month, the FTC warned the cigarette industry against making safety claims in their advertising. The commission said that although a reduction in tar and nicotine might reduce the harmful effects of smoking, there is no reliable evidence that all health hazards are eliminated.
Indeed, one wonders if perhaps the government is not headed toward passing legislation similar to that passed in England two years ago when cigarette advertising on television was banned. England's Minister of Health, Kenneth Robinson, recently said he would ask Parliament to limit cigarette advertising in newspapers and magazines also.
Where is all this clamor over cigarette smoking leading us? Perhaps to the loss of one's basic prerogatives to smoke cigarettes if he so desires.
Before it passes more legislation in this matter, the government should ascertain if it has the legal right to ban cigarettes solely because they may be hazardous to a person's health. If a person wishes to take the risks involved in smoking, should he not have that right?
HERBLOCK
—Sam Neff
"Praise Allah — You're Your Old Self Again!"
Has Ike set stage?
By Stewart Hensley WASHINGTON—(UPI)—Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower has done a nice piece of downfield blocking for President Johnson should the administration decide to carry the ball across the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) into North Vietnam.
To date, direct U.S. assaults on the North have been exclusively by air. American planes have hammered military and support targets in North Vietnam for 21 months but U.S. ground forces have been careful not to step across the line.
But Gen. Eisenhower's proposal for a limited ground invasion to knock out Communist artillery shelling U.S. forces just south of the DMZ is very similar to the course urged on Johnson by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Eisenhower's prior endorsement of such a "hit and run" operation would give Johnson a considerable weapon with which to defend himself against charges that he was irresponsibly widening the war and risking Red Chinese intervention.
The backing of the man who led the Allied armies to victory in
Europe in World War II is a prize asset.
There is speculation here that the impending departure of Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara might lead to a limited American invasion of some sort, since he is widely believed to have been one of the principal opponents of the idea. This is far from certain, however. Other high officials besides McNamara have strong reservations about the wisdom of any invasion, however limited, of North Vietnam.
There is evidence that Eisenhower was floating a trial balloon for the Johnson administration when he made his suggestion last week that a limited ground action would not be an actual invasion but "simply removing a thorn in our sides." Nevertheless, administration officials will be watching closely to see what the reaction is here and abroad.
They have felt that this ran the risk of bringing Ho Chi Minh's full strength of 320,000 troops into play against American ground forces. At present 54,000 North Vietnamese regulars are reported actively engaged in the fighting in the South.
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription rates: $6 a semester, $10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 60404. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised to all members are required by color, except for nationality and Olympic reserves are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas on the State Board of Regents.
Newsroom----UN 4-3646 --- Business Office----UN 4-3198
Managing Editor—Dan Austin Business Manager—John Lee
Assistant Managing Editors ... Will Hardesty, Jerry Klein
Paul Haney, Gary Murrell, Rich Lovett
City Editor ... John Marshall
Editorial Editors ... Betsy Wright, Allan Northeutt
Associate Editorial Editor ... John Hill
Sports Editors ... Chip Rousse, Rich Lundaunist
Wiz Editors ... Dan Walker
Assistant City Editor ... Charla Jenkins
Photo Editor ... Dale Pippet
Advertising Manager ... John Casady
National Advertising Manager ... Beverly Hath
Promotion Manager ... Dave Holt
Circulation Manager ... Warren Masse
Classified Manager ... Leo Duer
Production Manager ... Joel Khaassen
Member Associated Collegiate Press
Letters to the Editor
To the Editor:
'Miss X,' Big 8 questioned
I am a man and I'm glad. And I, too, am confused on many current issues. But with all due respect for the intelligence and values of the woman who wrote Thursday's letter to you, I feel that she may have chosen the wrong answer to the traditional dilemma of virginity versus expression of love. Let me add before I go any farther that I do not intend to speak from a position of not having been wrong myself in the past by my present set of values. I have learned from painful experience.
I am not totally sure just what part of Miss X's views to reply to. I think she started out desiring to condemn the "mud-slinging throwers." But she ended up giving us an expression of her own views (which seem totally irrelevant after just telling us that "What's right for me is definitely not right for my roommate") and asking for tolerance of her views. Let me say that I did not attend any of the "episodes" in question and I am writing in reply to the other sections of her letter. I could be tolerant of her views (and indeed, I will be) but I would hope to be able to show her that they are wrong.
I think that Miss X will someday look back on her college days and find that her free expression of her love has gotten her nothing. I question whether or not her affairs will be meaningful to her a decade from now. Will she then be able to say that it was worth losing something she can never replace—her virginity—for the passing pleasure of these affairs? And does she realize that, even in those of us who start out with the most noble of standards, it is difficult to not take advantage of a situation in which it is possible to gain a little free sex experience? And believe me, the phrase "take advantage of" is the one that applies in many cases.
I would be one of the first to say that two people who really feel they are in love should reserve the decision of if-and-when for themselves, not to be dictated by the date on a marriage license.
But granted that taking advantage of your power to make love can be a very powerful form of communication, by its very power it seems to me that one would have to be very, very careful about when one uses it. By definition, I think, one of the elements of a true love is reserving such communication for her (him) alone.
And as for my sister taking The Pill, I think I can say with a great deal of confidence that she would have someone to tell. I think she wouldn't be afraid to tell me, but if she were I feel certain she could tell her roommate. I doubt that she would find her only outlet to be the editorial page of her campus paper. I hope that if she ever does use it for an affair, it will not be with an occasional someone special, but with one with whom she will spend a lifetime.
Bart Heffron Metuchen, N.J., junior
To the Editor:
After listening to the OU-KU football game, I could not help but feel that there is a paradox surrounding Big-Eight athletic contests and the University of Kansas.
Bill Mayer called the actions of KU students at last year's CU-KU
basketball game "ugly," "unruily," etc. Yet, the game officials put an end to the crowd's unsavory antics almost immediately with the threat of a technical foul.
As a senior, I've seen and heard of worse things than throwing ice or pennies at a ball game. CU is noted for its "school spirit," which can include throwing empties at will. And the NU fans love to reach out and interfere with the game and opposing players.
But, with all of these happenings around the league, who is called down for them? Who is made to stop? Who turns themselves in to the Big-Eight for recruiting violations, while other coaches buy and sell players?
Yes, Virginia, there is a double standard in the Big Eight—it's KU vs. seven other schools. While I advocate good sportsmanship and fair play, why do we always appear with egg on our face?
And, after the CU football game, I feel that Coach Rodgers, the members of the team, and the students and alums have a perfect right to be angry and to wonder when we're going to get a fair and/or equal shake.
Stuart Forster
Stuart Forster
East Greenwich, R.I.
senior
Paperbacks
From these a brief visit to new ones in the Fawcett Gold Medal line, designed for easy holiday-type reading. They are Gerald Hanley's The Last Safari, Richard Stark's The Green Eagle Score, Donn Pearce's Cool Hand Luke and Donald Hamilton's The Ambushers (50 cents each). The first is African adventure (formerly called "Gilligan's Last Elephant"), an exciting tale tailor-made for Stewart Granger. The second is private detective stuff, with near-naked broads and cool anti-hero types all over the place. "Cool
Hand Luke" is the new Paul Newman movie, a prison story about a guy who tries to buck the system. And finally the new Matt Helm, wild and somewhat silly and almost formula for Dean Martin.
Another new volume that will interest students of the theater is Lanford Wilson's The Rimers of Eldritch and Other Plays (Spotlight Dramabooks, $1.95). Wilson is a young man, born in Missouri in 1938, who attended the University of Chicago. His work has been experimental off-Broadway stuff.