Page 4
Opinion
University Daily Kansan, March 31, 1983
To those who returned
"... And we were sharp, as sharp as knives,"
"And we were sgung ho to lay down our lives . . ."
Billy Joel, "Goodnight Saigon"
And so they were, the 8 million Americans who served in connection with the Vietnam War. But in time we discovered that we were not sharp or gung ho enough.
So on March 29, 1973, 10 years ago last Tuesday, we came home. The last U.S. ground troops left Vietnam with the pledge that we would return if needed. But everyone knew that for America, the war was over.
We left behind more than 2,000 missing more than 50,000 dead
Most KU students remember those days only vaguely, if at all. We were children. Occasionally, we hear the merits of Vietnam argued between intellectuals on a television show or in some history class. But for the most part, we ignore the war and the people who fought it.
It took us nearly 10 years to build a memorial to the men who died in Southeast Asia, and even that was shrouded in controversy. The government has yet to deal with the problems of those missing in action or the effects of Agent Orange.
Whether you were for the war or against it, whether you served time in the military or moved to Canada, whether you lost a loved one or had one come back safely, or even if you are ignorant about what Vietnam was all about — as too many people are — we must acknowledge that the war left a deep wound in the flesh of this country. It is a scar that perhaps nothing will heal. But turning our heads away won't help.
We still have many debts to pay for Vietnam. But we owe our greatest debt to the veterans: the people who, in good conscience, fought and died there, and those who returned.
Because right or wrong, they did what they did for us.
Americans need to examine how much freedom is worth
"I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London; that a young healthy child, well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome meal, often roasted, baked or boiled, and I make no doubt, that it will equally serve in a fricassee . . ."
Jonathan Swift, "A Modest Proposal"
When Swift proposed in 1729 that the people of Ireland turn to cannibalism to help eradicate the poverty and starvation in that country, his proposal was meant to be shocking. An ad which ran in the Dublin Intelligence that year proclaimed that, "The late apparent spirit of patriotism, or love to our country, so abounding of late, has produced a new scheme," wherein the author ingeniously advises that one-fourth part of the infants under two years old be forthwith fattened, brought to the market and sold for food."
Somewhere in the proposal, which Swift explains in great detail, there is a hideous
MATT BARTEL
practicality. It would provide the poor with a means of subsistence they are without; it would decrease the burden on families and presumably make them happier; it would increase the national revenue. All are desirable ends and are attainable by the means set forth; still, most people would question Swift's sanity after reading such a proposal.
Somewhere in the maze of arms negotiations being staged in Europe by the United States and the Soviet Union there is a similar grain of sand. The reason it has it yet to surface in either side's proposals.
Any defense built upon nuclear weapons, or to extend this one step further, any weapons capable of killing another person for the sake of national boundaries immediately pose some very difficult questions about the importance of those boundaries.
To what lengths are we willing to go to assure our status at the top-of-the-world hierarchy? Is our freedom worth more to us than the lives of hundreds of millions of Soviet and American citizens? For the past 200 years Patrick Henry's famous choice of death over persecution has remained the right for generations of politicians who have built America's defenses to their present level.
But today's world is not the world of Patrick Henry, where armed conflict amounted to musket balls and bayonets fired between a relatively small group of men. Today that small group could launch a destructive force that would obliterate entire cities with one blow while inflicting such misery on the survivors that they would envy the dead.
The size of this force, and its destructive power, should cause us to stop and consider again what our freedom is worth. Is there no length to which we would not go to ensure it? Could we make such a commitment, every last dollar on weapons, will we then eat our young to avoid spending that dollar on food?
That, unfortunately, is the direction in which we are heading. The desirable end, freedom of speech, press and religious practice, has been parlayed into a drive to build the biggest, most advanced, and most grushese collection of woeony on Earth. We have been continually rewarded security at any cost, as if no means were so expensive or too revolting to consider.
But some means are too expensive, and too revolting, and it is time this voice of reason was heard. We cannot afford any longer to sit down and count troops, or planes, or warheads, as if we were playing some big game of Risk with dice and plastic armies.
A mathematical approach to defense does not allow for skin that is melted and running down the side of someone's body, the pile ofashes where another was walking down the street, or the millions with burns that will never heal. This means a person must die in fire until the person mercifully dies of infection.
Death and mutilation are the reality of any war, and nuclear war multiplies the misery exponentially. We must allow ourselves to be ruled by reason, even when the choice is as difficult as one between barbaric freedom and noble servitude.
Letters to the Editor
Ignorance on gays shown in column
To the editor:
Bonar Menninger's column (March 25) regarding "Wear-Blue-Jeans-ifYou're-Gay Day" was read with amusement in the Gay and Lesbian Services office. Indeed, a few of his sentences sent us into unbelievable gales of laughter. The double standards and ignorance apparent in the column are the reason "Jeans Day" is needed.
"An easy way out," Mninger says? Easier than what? Does he really think that being gay in this society is easier than being straight? Almost every gay person alive today was raised by the values of heterosexual marriage and lifestyle are the only possible way to live.
We are trying to "harass" him into accepting our beliefs. We are "harassed" into accepting heterosexuals' sexuality every day. We hardly "flaunt" our sexuality in any way comparable to the way heterosexuals flaunt theirs. Men and women hold hands and kiss; advertising shows men and women in heterosexual relationships. Look around. Everyone in this country is constantly bombarded with heterosexual-only values.
In spite of this, however, some of us are simply not heterosexual. Why? No one knows. There is no "cure." Our wish is to be allowed to live our lives productively and without discrimination; this is apparently too much to ask of Mmeninger. He claims he has no desire to "persecute or oppress members of the gay minority," yet his whole attitude says he does. We would have gone back into the misery of hiding our true selves, stopped thinking of ourselves as worthwhile individuals, and the "stereotypes and trashy labels" persisted.
Few gay people today live "relatively free of persecution." It's something each of us lives
Bonar be thanked. He shows us that Gay and Lesbian Awareness Week did make at least one person aware, if not accepting. We are not demanding that we be accepted unconditionally with open arms. We simply ask that people become aware that gay people are no longer willing to be treated as second-class citizens.
director, Gay and Lesbian Service of Kansas
Ruth Lichtwardt.
Menningor correct
To the editor:
Bravo to Bonar Menninger for last Friday's straight-to-the-point column! **is about time we heard from a self-confessed heterosexual on the topic of gay rights.**
Since transferring to KU 18 months ago, I have been repeatedly revolted by the inepid campaign by the Gay and Lesbian Services of Kansas. I feel that it is an ideology that 1) has led to discrimination against gay students and 2) tolerated by straight students and 3) the gay population should certainly keep to themselves.
As I slipped on my dunni last Friday, I suddenly became enraged by my indecision about wearing my favorite ensemble. Throughout the day, this emotion only escalated as friends jested about my outfit. (I wonder if the girl in chemistry lecture thinks I'm gay.)
But wait, all of this is not right! Homosexuals have no right to dictate what clothing others wear, and this "special day" has no justification in life. I firmly believe that this type of senseless campaign needs to be expurgated on our campus. It has no significance to those of us who belong there, but we should be subject to its ground rules. I do have one suggestion: Perhaps the item of clothing could be changed to purple corduroys. I seldom wear those.
Tom Rodenberg,
Tom Rodenberg.
New Ulm, Minn., junior
Menninger has it easy
So Bonar Menninger is hot because once a year he feels uncomfortable doing something as innocent and harmless as wearing blue jeans. Boy, has he got it rough, imagine what he would be like if he had that same uncomfortable feeling 365 days a year.
To the editor:
This is why the "Wear-Blue-Jeans-I'll-You're-Gay Day" is such an effective way to bring people together. Those people who are afraid of wists others who Bonar was afraid others might think he was gay.
He contended that gay people are constantly "flaunting" their sexuality. He should remember that whenever he and his girlfriend hold hands, dance close. walk arm-in-arm or kiss in
public, they are "flaunting" their sexuality in ways other are ridiculed, barred service, refused employment, fired and beaten for doing. Don Cotton,
computer programmer, office of information systems
Drive-In not closing
To the editor:
After having talked to several fellow students who thought the Sunset Drive-In was closed, it is time to set the record straight. Contrary to what the misleading Kansan article would have you believe, the drive-in's days are not numbered. Although it is true that drive-in theatres are in decline nationally, the Sunset is not for sale because of a "decline in attendance" and will be kept open as long as Commonwealth Theatres want it open.
Another thing I would like to take issue with is the story's attempt to portray drive-ins as "passion pits" full of drunks and marijuana smokers. I and the managers before me have worked hard to rid the Sunset Drive-In of that image, and insinuating articles in the Kansan do little to help the matter. The Sunset is a good place for the sunset, but it can be an enjoyable time. For example, the Interfraternity Council has held two successful Greek Week parties at the Sunset.
Also, the reporter did not have to be so melodramatic in the lead of her story. The swingets are "seatless" because we remove them for the winter when we close down. The doors are locked to prevent the equipment from being damaged or stolen before the drive-in reopeners in the spring. Speaking of equipment, it is "covered with dust plastic" for a very obvious reason, to keep the dust off! I realize the machine is operated as a learner. You don't study but even you gather the facts and then write the story, not the other way around.
Finally, it might have been a good idea if the reporter had attempted to talk to me, the manager, before she wrote a story about my theatre.
Lawrence sophomore and Sunset Drive-In manager
Letters Policy
The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and should not exceed 500 words. They should include the writer's name, address and phone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, the letter should include his class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kansan reserves the right to edit or reject letters.
The University Daily
The University Daily KANSAN
The University Daily Kaman (USP5 606-440) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Ft Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 60043, daily during the regular school year and Monday and Thursday during weekends. Subscriptions are $4 for a six month subscription at Lawrence; Kan. 60044. Subscripter amounts are $12 for six months or $26 in Douglas. Amounts paid through the student activity fee. POSTMARK. Send address changes to the amstermor pay through the student activity fee.
Editor
Rebecca Chaney
Managing Editor
Editorial Assistant
Associate Campus Editor
Associate Campus Editors
Assistant Campus Editors
Mark Zieman
Michael Robinson
Colin Carey
Catherine Behn
Sharon Appetbaum, Duncan Cunningham
Retail Sales Manager
National Sales Manager
Campus Sales Manager
Production Manager...
Business Manager
Matthew P. Langan
1
Advertising Adviser ...
General Manager and News Adviser ...
Ann Hornberger
Susan Cooksey
Ted Massing
Jeanny Jackson
John Oberzan Paul Jess