Page 4 University Daily Kansan, June 23, 1980
Opinion
The right man
Del Shankel has a new lease on life.
A week from tomorrow he was scheduled to step out of the hot seat of the executive vice chancellorship and return to a less position as professor and researcher.
Now he's next in line to assume, on a temporary basis, the highest administrative post at the University of Kansas. The Kansas Board of Regents Shankel Thursday to act as chancellor until a permanent one is appointed.
Characteristically, the job of acting chancellor has not been an easy one. Only three men in the history of the University have served in that capacity. W.C. Spangler held KU's reins after the Francis Snow administration ended in 1900.
John H. Nelson took the post for a boy, two months in 1851, then Raymond Nichols presided over the University after the death of Laurence Chalmers Jr. in the early 1870s.
The search for a permanent chancellor probably will take a year. During that time
the university must continue to improve, but the growth should be subtle.
The University is at several crossroads in its development. The pursuit of academic excellence has declined. Bigtime athletics have encouraged foul recruitment practices. Concessions are being made to state legislators to gain money for programs that may benefit part rather than the whole of the University. Academic freedoms cannot interfere with the University's public image.
But for Shanklet to suggest fundamental changes would be an invitation to dissent and turnover. Within the existing environment of the University, revitalizing the University and that only.
There is plenty of room for experimentation in curricula, courses, methods and ideas. Acting chancellors must provide balance—that is, neither understressing nor overstressing certain issues. Moderation insures the University's stability, and places an acting chancellor in a self-efacing position.
Fortunately Shankel is the right man for the job. His reputation and record stress compassion. He sympathizes with those who seek his counsel, but he acts decisively after careful consideration of the facts at hand.
In fact there are those whose only objection to his appointment is that it cannot be permanent.
Registry an omen
All available signs indicate that registration for the military draft will be revived by the end of this summer. After a five year slumber, registration has again returned to trouble the consciousness of the youth of the United States.
The Senate voted two weeks ago to spend $13.3 million to begin registration of 19- and 29-year-old men. The Senate legislation has already been passed by the House, but the measure must again come up for House House of an amendment added by the Senate.
House approval and the signature of President Jimmy Carter are the only steps that block the legislation's passage into law.
If the registration plan passes both steps, it will be only a matter of weeks, or perhaps days, until about 4 million young men fill out registration forms in post offices throughout the nation. Registrants will list their names, addresses, dates of birth, telephone numbers and social security numbers on the forms, which will then be sent to the Selective Service System.
Supporters of the plan to revitalize registration claim that the move is a prudent one. Supporters claim that registration is necessary to insure a swift mustering of troops if the United States should suddenly become involved in war. The all-volunteer army's failure to attract volunteers is but another reason why registration is needed the proponents claim.
Critics of registration warn that the lessons of America's long and bitter struggle in Vietnam have been lost upon today's leaders. The God-given right to
refrain from waging war and other civil liberties are violated by draft registration, the onponents claim.
Another large group is critical of registration because women are excluded from registering under the current plan.
The American Civil Liberties Union claims that any registration program that does not include women is unqualified. The ACLU has said that it will file suit.
Registration is not harmful at face value. The registration form is simply another form of governmental red tape, similar to identity numbers or other identifying cards.
But resistance to registration can be easily understood when one remembers that the United States has always offered boundless room for individual freedoms. Registration for a possible draft obviously restricts some of these freedoms, and naturally, criticism results. There are times in all democracies, however, when certain individual freedoms must be sacrificed for the common good. An aggressive and unprovoked attack upon the U.S. would be one of those instances.
But one result of registration that cannot be overlooked is that a move to register men for the draft moves the U.S. one step closer to war. Seldom in the history of there been draft registration without an actual war, and, eventually, an actual draft.
As the events in Iran and Afghanistan unfold this summer, and as the U.S. has been embroiled with the Iraq seems as if the nation is edging nearer and nearer to global war. Let us hope not.
Letters to the editor...
Old Green misnamed
To the Editor:
Amid the often positive and occasionally negative judgments of the administration of Archie R. Dykes, there is one event which has made a large mark on the lore of the University. This is the decision of the administration to rename Green Hall after an obscure 20th century chancellor
This might not seem very relevant to old Green Hall until one realizes that Kate's father, Judge Nelson Timothy Stephens, was the individual responsible for the establishment of a school of law at the University of Kansas.
Students and faculty might be interested to know that this Joshua Lippincott was responsible for one of the most outrageous displays of sexist discrimination that this university has. Professor Lippincott persuaded the Board of Regents in a closed-door meeting to dismiss the professor of Greek, Kate Stephens. Lippincott cited subordination as the cause of dismissal, but no talks were to cover the fact that he was a member of a woman in the University's Greek chair.
Long before the term "sexism" became popular, Kate was writing about the evils of "sexualism" in society. For us at KU, the most important single face that Kate's life is portraying is her role as a student at the University, she was one of the most active supporters in the history of the Alumni Association. This University has had few friends as loyal to Kate, yet the naming of Old Green after the man who fired her for being a woman seems a rather callous flow to her memorial.
If Kate were alive today, she would certainly be fighting to have this building named
Although the naming of a building may seem insignificant in light of the many issues facing our school, it would be an honorable task to finalize the story in the book Kate Stenhens.
after her father. This seems appropriate, and I would suggest this as a worldwide project to any of the several women's groups on campus. Kate was the first feminist at KU, and I dressey the most outspoken of any of the University's feminists, then or now.
David Ramsey Wilson Lawrence Graduate Student
Protesters disruptive
Banner-wavers at Commencement reflected favorably on the university? Yeah, sure, and the 1986 Democratic Convention favored a gun ban. The Police Department's crowd control methods
regarding Kanye Kase's column in *summer Kansan*, what could she be thinking of?
To the Editor:
Kathy, how would you like to have banner-waving radicals at your wedding? Come to the organ. Take a look at the organ. Put Tim Miller (lecturer in religious design) on the stage, and it will be amazing.
As much as anyone else, I respect the right of citizens of this country to protest against things they do not like or want. However, calling the Commencement protestors 'rambunction students' is like calling Billy the Kid an unruly boy.
Bill Menezes Overland Park Senior
4
It is just a bit of an understatement.
Gay Services deserves funds
It's taken 10 years, but the Gay Services of
Kansas finally eligible to receive Student
Senate funding.
Since 1970, GSOK has battled the University of Kansas to be recognized as a student organization eligible for funding. But the University denied GSOK recognition because the group, according to the University, supported homosexuality, a personal proclivity.
GSOK, known in the early seventies as Lawrence Gay Liberation, responded to the denial with a series of court cases. They got as far as in 2014 and 2015 when the judge Colo., which sided with the University in denying GSOK recognition. That decision was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, but the court refused to hear the case. And since that time, the case has been denied for recognition and has repeatedly been denied.
GSOK'S MOST RECENT application for recognition was made to the University this past fall and, predictably, the University denied recognition. The denial was appealed to Caryl Smith, dean of student life, with GSOK planning to take刀 to court if the appeal was denied. But the university did not be appointed or denied the University changed its policy for registering and recognizing clubs.
Previously, the University required that all campus organizations had to register with the Office of Student Organizations and Activities. If an organization wanted to be eligible for Senate
funding, it had to apply for recognition. But any group that the University felt supported political stances religious viewpoints or personal pro-
test views was not given access, and subsequently, access to Senate funding.
But now the funding eligibility process has changed. Groups will no longer have to be recognized by the University because the University is dropping the recognition policy, as well as the clause that forbids "particular, personal and university private activities, habits or proclivities."
Columnist Kathy Kase
IT IS SIGNIFICANT that the personal proclivities clause has been dropped because it was the only barrier to GSOK's recognition. And GSOK is the only group to have been barred from funding by that clause, according to GSOK members.
The clause's biggest problem was its vagueness. Although it forbade the support of personal habits, it did not specify which personal' s were to be permissible and which were not.
Obviously, the University had to make the value judgement that the personal proclivity of homosexuality was bad. And who is the University to judge bad personal habits from good?
sonated proclivity was. It also did not specify what constituted support of such a proclivity.
The clause was not only unclear in what a per-
IN A STRICT SENSE, GSKO supports homosexuality. GSKO will support those who have chosen homosexuality as their sexual preference. The organization does not, however, support any type of sexual preference or practice to the exclusion of any other.
Despite the fact that GSOK's "support" of homosexuality is conditional, it was still enough to deny them access to funding. And that's too much. Because GSOK is a group worthy of funding by Senate.
GSOK, a service and social organization for gays and straights alike, serves to educate the public about homosexuality. In a community, as well as a nation, where 10 percent of the population is estimated by researchers to be homosexual, education on homosexuality is needed.
Furthermore, GSOK is the only service organization on campus and in Lawrence that deals solely with homosexuality. It would be difficult to replace the services this organization offers. Therefore, the university community should support GSOK monetarily.
Hooray.
NOW STUDENTS WILL have that chance.
It's overdue, but it's a welcome change for perhaps it signifies a new era of freedom at KU, freedom of sexual expression. At the very least, it signifies that no organization will again have to wait 10 years to be eligible for funding just because it supported a "personal proactivity."
Bureaucracy steps on the little guy
Have you ever noticed how the government is always looking out for you? Take the Transparent website to see.
Last week, Wilford Sorrell, my best friend,
stopped his 20-foot Ford car, the Infarto, to
drive home.
JUST AS WILFORD knelt down to check the rear left tire, the van's transmission slipped into reverse and ran over his foot. All 20 feet and 2,500 pounds of van—including a half-foot of water—flattened Wilford's toes, much to his distress. At last the truck rolled on, but imagine Wilford's front wheel lifted off the ground as parked bicycles and smash into the glass window of a pearly car dealer's showroom.
Wilford was relieved to see that the showroom belonged to a Ford dealer. He marched—somewhat lamely—into the dealer's office. After
Columnist
show you something in a mid-size economy
pressure four-speed Flame
resistant link*
Wilford shouted something unprintable and limped out of the office.
The dealer shouted after him, "Whatever you do, don't buy one of those imports. be patriotic."
An outraged Wilford called the Transportation Department from a hospital pay phone. After hearing the story, a tired government voice told him that but a single incident in a very complex case.
"No dice," said the dealer. "It's your fault for not securing the shift lever. Our cars are as safe as any other maker's. You could just as easily have been run over by a faulty Chevy."
J.V. Smith Jr.
an explanation of the problem, he demanded
that the injured foot and water
damage to the interfoot's nerve be
problem for over three years. Trust me, we're about to make a decision. We first must give Ford the chance to prove its innocence. Justice, you know."
"Listen, yours is the twenty-three thousand, four hundred seventy-seventh complaint," the court declared.
Wilford indignantly told the dealer, "Well, I wasn't run over by a Chevro, it was a Ford. If you don't settle with me properly, I'm going to report you to the Transportation Department."
WHICH BRINGS ME to the government.
WILFORD HOPES the decision is soon forthcoming and he has some doubts about Justice. He's now in jail because of complaints by 17 irate bicycle owners and one derisive Ford dealer who's demanding payment for the plate glass. Wilford, the hardhead, won't pay up.
Poor Wilford. He'll never be able to get a job in government looking out for people. He can't understand why the government more than three years to discovers what he had learned in less than three seconds.
"knock yourself out," said the car dealer, stifling a wawn. "We are not I need you." A neighbor said, "Can I
He thinks he has a better idea.
The University Daily KANSAN
(USPS 609-649) Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Monday and Thursday during June and July except Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas 86454. Subscriptions by mail are $15 for six months or a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are a $2 semester, paid through the student activity fee.
Postmaster: Send changes of address to the University Daisan Kalfi, Flint Hall, The University of Kansas University of Kansas Unissigned editors represent the opinion of the Kanaan editorial staff. Signed columns represent the views of only the writers.
Managing Editor
Babie Grobe
Book Owner
Campbell Editor
Cary Cliff
Wiley Winkelman
Layon Editor
Wray Editor
Mary Myers
Golden Editorial Writer
Kathy Kase
Digital Photographers
New Atlantis
Kia Kautch
Business Manager
Renault National Sales Manager
Caitty Wang, Rachel Sunniburrow,
Terri Fry, Kate Wucupu, Susan Kearnlow,
Advertising
Letters Policy
The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor and guest opinions that present different points about topics of concern. The must be typed, double-spaced and no longer than 500 words. The Kansan reserves the right to change columns. Letters must be signed and must include the writer's address and phone number. If the writer is affiliated with the university, you should include the writer's class and home town or faculty or staff position.