Opinion
The University Daily Kansan
Laura Roddy, Editor
Sarah Hale, Managing editor
Kristi Elliott, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
4A
Shauntae Blue, Business manager
Brad Bolyard, Retail sales manager
Matt Fisher, Sales and marketing advise
Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
tuesday, April 4, 2000
Editorials, Pro and Con
Amendment banning flag burning would torch freedom of speech
In an election year, anything can become important. Wedge issues, those that have no real goal except to drive up the blood pressure of countless Americans, become the legislative norm. One need only witness the behavior of incorrigible patriots in Congress during the recent defeat of a flag protection amendment.
No issue is more inconsequential, yet more insidiously wrong-headed, than the fight to protect our nation's flag. When debating the issue, proponents of a constitutional amendment will give countless reasons why people should respect the flag. But that escapes the true question: Whether a conforming sense of patriotism should be man-
The statement that burning is not speech cuts at essence of the U.S. Constitution
ated. The answer is a resounding no.
Obvious among the reasons why a constitutional amendment is wrong is the complete lack of urgency attached to the issue. While there have been a scattered amount of flag burnings in the last decade, the number of flags lost hardly threatens the nation's nylon supply. Further, desecrating the flag gives new meaning to the term victimless crime. The only danger inherent in
one desecration of the flag is that it makes many people severely uncomfortable. Should a specific form of protest be outlawed in an attempt to make everyone comfortable?
If Congress passes an amendment of this nature, it will be the first time it has tampered specifically with the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court has ruled that flag burning is protected speech, and Congress would aim to circumvent that decision and effectually change the First Amendment. Protected speech is a strange beast that is meant to protect all otherwise legal forms of protest. The argument that flag burning is not speech cuts at the very essence of a Constitution, in which brevity is beauty.
Jeff Engstrom for the editorial board
Flag amendment boosts Constitution
It appears that flag burners may need to find new material to burn in the near future. Last week, a Constitutional amendment to make flag desecration a felony failed in the Senate by a vote of 65-35. While opponents of the amendment cheered it as a triumph for free speech, proponents claimed a quiet victory because they gained two more votes since the last time the amendment was brought before the Senate.
This could become a major victory this November when retiring senators from among the 35 who voted against the amendment could be replaced by those in favor of it. Sen. Orrin Hatch, (R-Untah) vowed, "This is going to pass, whether it does today or tomorrow or next year."
Proponents claim quiet victory because they gained two votes for the cause, hope for future
Its passage would confirm the decision of the House of Representatives, which voted 305-124 in favor of the amendment last summer. Then it will be up to three-fourths of the 50 state legislatures to ratify the amendment.
But such statements beg the question: Is this really the type of free speech we want to encourage? Nowhere else in the world can one find the freedoms and rights that we as Americans enjoy — freedoms and rights that our flag embodies.
But why such fervor about a piece of cloth? This burgeoning power among those who favor the amendment worries advocates of free speech. Ralph Neas, president of the People for the American Way, claims, "It would diminish free speech — the very thing the flag protects."
The proposed amendment does not "undermine or trivialize the Constitution," as Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) would have us believe. Instead, such an amendment strengthens the Constitution because it protects the very thing that it symbolizes—the flag. Let's not view protection as diminishing free speech, but rather as a tribute to the men and women who have died beneath its colors to preserve our rights to this privilege.
Kansan staff
Drew Ryun, dissenting
News editors
Seth Hoffman . . . . . . . Editorial
Nadia Mustafa . . . . . . Editorial
Melody Ard . . . . . . News/Special sections
Chris Fickett . . . . . . News
Julie Wood . . . . . . News
Juan H. Heath . . . Online
Mike Miller . . . . Sports
Matt James . . . Associate sports
Katie Hollar . . . Campus
Nathan Willis . . . Campus
Heather Woodward . Features
Chris Borniger . . Jayplay
T.J. Johnson . Photo imaging
Christina Neff . Photo
Jason Pearce . Design, graphics
Clay McCuistion . Wire
Advertising managers
Advertising manager
Becky LaBranch . . . Special sections
Krista Lindemann . . . Campus
Ryan Riggin . . . Regional
Jason Hannah . . . National
Will Baxter . . . Online sales
Patrick Rupe . . . Online creative
Seth Schwimmer . . . Marketing
Jenny Weaver . . . Creative layout
Matt Thomas . . . Assistant creative
Kenna Crone . . . Assistant creative
Trent Guyer . . . Classifieds
Jon Schilt . . . Zone
Thad Crane . . . Zone
Cecily Curran . . . Zone
Christy Davies . . . Zone
How to submit letters and guest columns
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"For every crooked pot, there's a lid to fit it."
— Dorothy Hoffman, on marriage
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photocared for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be e-mailed to opinion@kansan.com or submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stuuffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Nadia Mustafa or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff
*lauren@kannon.com* or call 864-4924
'Offensive' literature shouldn't be regulated
(opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924
Perspective
While walking through the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. I was a hit by a revelation about how easily fear and hatred denies so many facets of basic knowledge and how this resulting lack of knowledge causes such hardship and discrimination
Rupall Limaye columnist opinion@kansan.
The Nazi party in Germany organized a massive book burning to rid the Republic of ideas that were perceived, in their eyes, as poison to the progress of the Republic. Books that were most commonly burned were those that were contrary to the political teachings of the Nazi doctrine, and most importantly, those works that were of Communist ideology and Jewish background. Even though this hop
pened more than 50 years ago, this hatred and fear still is quite prevalent when examining the flow of information and knowledge in the present day.
When I was a junior in high school, my English teacher made us read Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, followed by Alice Walker's The Color Purple. To have the opportunity to read these novels, we had to have our parents sign a form allowing us to be introduced to topics that may have been "offensive." We, ourselves, were required to sign a form stating that we understood that we were going to be exposed to literature that could be seen as "offensive."
My question is: How exactly does one determine what is deemed offensive and what is not? More importantly, in this case, why does the school district covet the power to make this determination?
I grew up in Johnson County, which I thought to be a more liberal county than some, but I wonder if it would have been different if I had received my education in some big city with a lot more diversity.
Therefore, the ability for a school board to determine what I may believe to be offensive is not correct. If I had never taken that class, or if my parents hadn't let me read either of those two works, I would have missed out on a lot. Invisible Man is by far my favorite piece of literature, and I find it appalling that the state, by supposedly looking out for my best interest, has the ability to take away the opportunity for me to read it in school.
I know that some students in my class didn't get to read those two novels, as their parents refused to sign their forms. This, I believe, is the worst thing that a parent can do supposedly to protect their children from offensive material. By keeping something taboo and not having healthy discourse on the subject matter, the person is more likely to be more fearful of the subject.
Literature, which possesses an important aspect of history, should be looked at with an open mind. There is nothing more frustrating in the education system then the closed-mindedness of those who govern it.
It seems to me that the person being exposed
to specific ideas defines the term of what is offensive, and there is no clear way to determine what may be offensive.
Instead, I believe that books that tell a historical story should widely be read and then talked about. Opening up the lines of communication can do wonders for the knowledge of people in a community, and it gives them a better chance to avoid events that are based in fear.
I hope that more of you will take the time to open your eyes in class and, more importantly, your ears. The University of Kansas offers a variety of classes and subject matters, some of which many of you probably do find offensive. All I ask is that you go into your discussions with open minds. You don't have to agree with people who present different sides of arguments, but at least give them the opportunities to speak their minds, and understand that there are other ways of looking at the subject matters in question.
Limaye is an Olathe junior in political science and advertising.
Stereotypes of women in Spain outdated, false
In 1993, Rosa Montero, one of Spain's foremost feminists and journalists, asserted that "the cliché of Spanish machismo is clearly outdated. Sexism still exists in Spain, of course, but no more so than in neighboring countries."
However, it is commonly believed that Spain is the home of machismo. In her column in the March 1 Kansan, Emily Hughey contradicted the opinion of Montero in support of a more stereotypical view of Spain based on her experience as a study abroad student in Seville.
Mar
Freire
guest columnist
In an attempt to shed light on the Spanish situation, we would like to offer a fact-based perspective on women rather than a hasty conclusion after a few short months of living in the country.
According to this stereotype, it may seem that feminism is nonexistent in Spain. In fact, since the nineteenth century, female theorists and writers have discussed the "woman question" within the country.
In 1869, the female theorist Concepcion Arenal opened up the debate with her first book about the role of Spanish women in society.
Mark
Harping
guest columnist
xminion@kansan.com
panish women clearly showing that Spanish women do not, and have not, enjoyed their submissive roles. Since the early years of the 20th century, organized groups of feminists have sprung up throughout the country, first in the major cosmopolitan centers of Spain, and then in the smaller provincial cities such as Seville. And if it is true that during Francisco Franco's dictatorship, the state embraced a highly traditional set of values, it is no less evident to anyone familiar with the Spanish transition to democracy that those values have been rapidly and progressively discarded during the last 25 years.
Many women would expect a patronizing response from a Spaniard when mentioning their career goals as a doctor, geologist or journalist. We would have to wonder if that would be Rosa Montero's reaction, considering her own success and that of other Spanish women.
Likewise, the number of women architects, engineers, lawyers and economists continues to rise each year, and women chemists and physicists were already at 38 percent eight years ago. Women such as Sánchez, Aguirre and Montero surely are able to talk of more than just the "typical" female topics of perfume, shopping and relationships.
Today, more than a 100 years after Arenal initiated the debate, women continue to exercise their influence in public life by participating in Spain's political arena. While in the United States women make up only 13 percent of the U.S. House of Representatives, in Spain women hold 22 percent of the seats in the Congreso de los Diputados, the equivalent of the U.S. House. Even more, the president of Spain's Senate, Esperanza Aguirre, is a woman.
Many people in the United States believe that the stereotype of the American domestic woman is outdated, while they consider the image of the Spanish woman without professional ambitions valid. But for Spanish women like Arantxa Sánchez, Esperanza Aguirre and Rosa Montero, the sky is the limit, as their professional successes have shown. Maybe inspired by such strong female role models, more than 50 percent of Spain's university students are women.
Freire is a Santiago, Spain, graduate student in Spanish. Harpring is a Batesville, Ind., graduate student in Spanish.
Not only do Spanish women excel in politics, but they also do so in sports. Surely, most people recognize the name of the internationally-known tennis player Arantxa Sánchez, who, with Conchita Martínez, ranks at the top in women's tennis. Also, two of Spain's female track and field athletes are ranked in the top 10 worldwide.
Feedback Unions ideal places to conduct classes
The Kansas and Burge Unions may not be meant for academics, but they certainly should support learning. The March 13 editorial, "Unions Not Meant for Academics," takes a limited view of the possibilities.
Learning occurs outside the classroom from peers and professors. That opportunity for exchange happens regularly before and after class in Union lounges, hallways and dining
areas. Union classes facilitate casual interaction that spurs discussion and learning.
Rather than disparage the presence of Sturbrucks, embrace the occasion for a coffee-fueled fight over ideas. Do not discount the opportunities "hundreds of people milling outside the door" presents — that's the vitality of education on a diverse and intellectually engaged campus.
The unions also offer the serendipitous encounter with an exhibit, performance, speaker or event that sparks inquiry within or beyond one's major or
interests. Given the hours students spend out of class and the demands on their time (studying, working and living), putting these elements together at one campus spot makes sense. Some universities are even building libraries and classrooms in their unions for these reasons.
I would argue, by some measures, that unions are ideal for classes.
David Mucci
Director, Kansas and Burge Uniones
---