4
Thursday October 5, 1989 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN Supreme Court's decisions may negate Roe vs. Wade
Editor's note: This is the first in a series of editorials dealing with the Supreme Court session.
It now seems inevitable that the Supreme Court will suffocate Roe vs. Wade in a pile of smaller decisions, not outlawing abortion by overturning Roe but rather by making them totally inaccessible.
The first case deals with minors notifying their parents of an abortion. The case, Hodgson vs. Minnesota, requires that a teen-ager notify both biological parents 48 hours before having an abortion, even if the parents are divorced, separated or never have married.
This law would restrict abortions for teen-agers who are adopted or live with one parent. Imagine a pregnant young woman and her mother, both wanting the fetus to be aborted, with no way to do so if the father could not be found.
Both cases should be decided in favor of abortion rights. The other, and far more serious case, involves the construction standards of abortion clinics.
A similar but less restrictive version of this case is Ohio vs. Akron Center for Reproductive Health.
The case, Turnnock vs. Ragsdale, if upheld, would require abortion clinics to have the same construction standards as hospitals. At first glance this may seem reasonable, but should a clinic that performs nothing but abortions be required to have the same facilities as a hospital performing complex surgery?
With the use of federal funds for abortion already restricted and the use of public facilities denied, the court, by upholding this decision would, in effect, drive abortion back into the alleyways.
Brett Brenner for the editorial board
Attempted coup indicates Noriega's hold is loosening
The outcome of Tuesday's coup attempt against Gen. Manuel Antonio, Noriaje is a disappointment, but not a setback.
The dissident Panamanian officers should be admired for their effort to oust their country's leader. According to reports from Washington, the dissidents were able to seize control of national radio and television. However, official reports said they did not expand their control much beyond the national military headquarters.
military headquarters.
Yesterday's Kansas City Times reported that if Noriega repeated his actions following the March 1988 uprising, he would "move ruthlessly against those officers who betrayed him." It is important to note that the 1988 ordeal was not as serious as Tuesday's.
The failure of the attempted coup should only serve as a motivator to the Panamanians to try again. The natural reaction would be to step back and put up with Noriega's travesties. But Tuesday's attempt was the second in 18 months by dissident members of the armed forces. This only exemplifies the growing discontent within Noriega's own political machine.
The people of Panama need to unite with the military in order to crush Noriega. The longer Noriega is allowed to continue to impose injustices against the state, the more difficult it will be to overthrow him. The injustices committed by Noriega should not be allowed to continue, but the people of Panama are responsible for putting an end to his rule.
U. S. forces in Panama were on alert Tuesday, ready to intervene if necessary. Because we have a stake in the Panama Canal, the United States should keep in close contact with dissidents. Our country should support the opposition once they achieve power, but we have no business initiating a coup attempt in that region.
On the other hand, proponents of U.S. intervention say that Noriega could have been ousted months ago had the United States taken firm military action. But U.S. intervention is not the way to solve Panama's problem.
The Panamanians are the victims of this failed coup attempt. The efforts by the military dissidents should be seen as getting one step closer to deposing Noriega.
Nortage is still dictator of Panama, but this military strongman's hold on his country is slowly dwindling.
Kathy Walsh for the editorial board
News staff
David Stewart ... Editor
Ric Brack ... Managing editor
Daniel Niemi ... News editor
Candy Niemann ... Planning editor
Jan Dink ... Editorial editor
Jennifer Corser ... Campus editor
Elaine Bung ... Book editor
Luura Huser ... Photo editor
Antholine Winner .. Art/Features editor
Tom Eblen .. General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Linda Prokop...Business manager
Debra Martin...Local advertising sales director
Jerre Medford...National/regional sales director
Jill Lowe...Marketing director
Tamil Rank...Production manager
Carrie Slaninka...Assistant production manager
Margaret Townsend...Co-op manager
Eric Hughes...Creative director
Gavin DeBoulot...Classified manager
Jeff Meesey...Tearstress manager
Jeanne Hinpe..Sales and marketing adviser
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and less than 200 words and must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University of Kansas, please include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
liability
Great columnars should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The
writer will be photographed.
writer will be photographed.
The Kansasman can be the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons that can be mailed or brought to the Kansas newroom, 111 Stuaffer-Flint Hall. Letters, columns and cartoons are the opinion of the writer or cartoonist and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University Daily Kansan. Editorials, which appear in the left-hand column, are the opinion of the Kansasan editorial board.
Postmaster; Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118 Stauffer-Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 68045
The University Dalkan Kaiser (USPS-650-840) is published at the University of Kansas, 119 Stuart/Fint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 6045, daily during the regular school, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and finals period, and during the summer session. Second-class postage is paid in Lawrence, Kan. 6044. Annual subscriptions by mail are $50. Student subscriptions are $3 and are paid through the student activity fee.
Rebirth.
Final 'Solution' for drug war
I applaud George Bush's effort for a drug-free America. However, I agree with the Democrats that the president just does not go far enough. The Democrat's plan is to have an across the board cut in federal spending in order to finance an even bigger War on Drugs. Of course, social security would be exempt from this spending cut. The idea seems to be that Americans, such as the urban poor, would benefit more from having new prisons than spending money on education or aid to families with dependent children.
Society seems pointed in the right direction. However, politicians' intolerance for drugs in America defines the problem without offering a clean, quick answer. A recent legislative proposal to shoot down planes suspected of carrying drugs into the United States is more on track. This is an effective approach. Presumably, after a plane was shot down, there would be a full inquiry to make sure that drugs were indeed being smuggled into the country. If no drugs were found, apologies would be offered to the next of kin.
These ideas for creating more courts, hiring more judges and prosecutors, and generally bothering with all of this judicial process is going to be a severe blow to the American War on Drugs. Instead of George Bush's Zero Tolerance for drugs, may I suggest my One Hundred Percent Solution. It is very simple. All drug users would be eliminated. This program could start out slowly by testing and certifying as drug free those who take handouts from the governments. This would include all federal employees, students receiving scholarships, individuals on Medicare, anyone who has ever set foot inside of a U.S. Post Office. This would then be expanded.
For example, before groceries could be purchased, a shopper would have to show a card proving they were drug free. If this failed to eliminate drug use, the final solution would be used. Military units would patrol the streets checking people for drugs. Anyone possessing drugs or failing a urine test would immediately be shot. The National Guard might be a suitable organization for this. After all, we are fighting a national war. Shooting druggies would be a great example for passers-by. When
Steven
Piper
Guest columnist
someone is killed for having a joint, the body would be left in the street for all to see. At night, less serious criminals, perhaps rapists and embezzlers, could be brought out to remove and destroy the offending remains.
The War on Drugs must also include drunken driving. The highway patrol should randomly stop cars. Consider the following scenario;
Cop: "Ma'ma, could you step outside the car. I'm afraid I will to blow your brains out."
we got to show your breath out.
Motorist: "Oh dear, and tonight's my bridge club."
MOONSTAR:
The move of course would be confiscated for future use in the Final War against Drugs. This program might be America's last chance to reclaim our highways from those who would destroy this great land.
I believe that businesses would quickly learn to accept the casualties of this war. Consider:
Executive: Where is Frede care of him?
Senator: "The Solution took care of him."
Executive: "Gee, that's too bad, but at least now we can find Sally a parking space. Oh, and drop his wife's name from the Christmas list."
This Solution is guaranteed to work. All drug users eventually would see the wisdom of a drug free society, or they would be dead. To pay for this program without disturbing the taxpayers, the life insurance policies of shot drug users would be collected by Uncle Sam. If this seems harsh on spouse and families, just remember that the drug user should have thought of that before deciding to so viciously attack the land of the free. Besides, you wouldn't think that drug users or their families should have any real rights, would you?
= steven Piper is a Lawrence graduate student in civil engineering.
Yeltsin's push invites defeat
Boris Yeltsin turns up in the most unlikely places. Who would have looked for him in Minnesota?
As a brash young delegate to a party congress only a few years back, he rose to say that he was ashamed to have kept quiet during the scandals of the Brezhnve Era. (You can imagine how that made his superiors feel.) And Mikhail Gorbachev promptly made him party boss in Moscow.
A couple of rollingick years later, he delivers a speech pushing reform and attacking the old-liners on the Central Committee — and is demoted to unperson for his trouble.
then come the first free elections in 70 years in the Soviet Union, and he pops up in the new Congress of People's Deputies, having polled 6 million votes, or 90 percent of those cast for his seat. Soon he's a member of the Supreme Soviet.
the supreme servant.
And here he is at the Raddison Hotel in Minneapolis, Minn., appealing for more venture capital and telling an audience of American businessmen that they really ought to loosen up and show some of that good old, red-white-and-blue capitalist spirit. On leaving this dinner, at which Comrade Yeltsin alternately mesmerized, caplosed and amused his listeners, one business suit turns to another and sighs, "We sure could use a salesman like that."
"I'm afraid that you might be indulging in some illusions in this country," he says. "In fact, we are having a crisis in every possible area. . . Gorbachev did not avail himself of every opportunity he had because of his fondness for compromises and half-measures. . . Perestroika is in extreme danger. Somehow it has to be saved." Presumably by Yeltsin.
"There has arisen a need to renovate our society in every area," Yeltsin explains. Reform went well for the first couple of years, he says, but now it's bogged down.
It is surreal.
But does he have a program besides running down his ideological rival, Vigor Ligaché, and criticizing Gorbache for being too timid? Yes. Come the revolution, there will be no more ministries of economics, no more five-year plans. Soviet citizens will form their own corporations and be allowed to make their own deals, especially with foreigners. Producers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your bureaucrats. The ruble will be made convertible — once Moscow can figure out what it's worth, if anything. At the moment, the visitor complains, the Soviet Union cannot find the paper to publish children's textbooks while it still manages to print millions of worthless rubles and even the collected unread works of Ligaché.
Paul Greenberg
Syndicated columnist
As for troublesome article of the Soviet constitution giving the Communist Party a "guiding role" in society, Boris Yeltsin says that detail may need to be revised — or eliminated altogether. In any case, the party should be made subject to law (heresy of heresies!) and held accountable to the new Soviet Congress. (Boris Yeltsin, memeber in good standing.)
Is this guy a genuine critic of Gorbachev or a foil that the Soviet leader can use against the old guard? ("Go along with my moderate reforms or Yeltsin here will take the reins, and there will be a real revolution.") Maybe he's both. Yeltsin acknowledges that he can be useful to the leader he's criticizing. "If I didn't exist," he says, "Gorbachev would have to invent me."
Surreal. Fity that Picasso is no longer around to paint Velsin's official portrait the way it should be done.
"You spoke like this once before," I remind him, "and lost your office. If you keep on like this, won't you be demoted again?" He reminds me that he wasn't fired; he submitted his resignation. (Who says the man isn't sufficiently interested in technical details?) Gorbachev has maybe a year to make dramatic breakthroughs in the Soviet economy, our visitor warns, or there will be a revolution from below.
I listen to Yeltsin explain how democracy will triumph in the Soviet Union and think: This is what it must have been like to interview Alexander Kerensky in 1917, just before the October Revolution crushed his fragile dream of a democratic Russia. Less likely than Yeltsin's revolution from below is the same old revolution from above.
I wish Comrade Yeltas luck, and I imagine he'll need it. His critaries are already painting his U.S. tour as one long alcoholic binge. To paraphrase Lincoln's response to those who complained about General Grant's hitting the bottle, the Kremlin would do well to find out just what Boris Yeltas drinks — and send a barrel of it to every other member of the Supreme Soviet. I hear it's Jack Daniel's Black Label.
= Paul Greenberg is a columnist with the Pine Bluff (Ark.)
Gazette.
LETTERS to the EDITOR
Math needs refiguring
The self taught Math 002 and 101 programs at the University of Kansas need to be restructured in order to better serve the remedial math student. The students who are taking these courses are not mathematically motivated. These are not the type of students who would have the discipline to complete a self-taught class. Not having a teacher is absurd because these are the students who need a teacher the most.
According to a Sept. 20 article in the Kansas, an astounding 50 percent of these students dropped during the 1988-89 school year. The math department should realize that a serious problem exists. The fact that the math department met with students two or three times to discuss student skills and motivation does not solve the problem. The math tutors aren't the solution either. According to students currently in the program, the tutors offer no assistance in giving techniques to solve p.oblems. Instead, they only solve the problem that the student is having difficulties with.
More drastic changes need to be made in order to solve the problem with the remedial math program. The most obvious solution is to have these classes instructed by teachers instead of the students themselves. This is the best way to give students a chance to learn and to curb the high dropout rate.
Scott Boxberger
Russell Junior
Marc Bensing
Blue Springs, Mo., junior
Abortion must be option
Once again an anti-abortionist speaks up, and, wouldn't you know it, he is male I am tired of reading about anti-abortionists who are male or are women who have already passed their child-bearing years!
years.
Yes, I am pro-choice, but wouldn't that make sense? I am single, 20 years old, and I am struggling my way through the process of school, growing up and planning my future. May I emphasize MY future.
I suppose anti-abortionists would not bother me as much if they were to propose some solution to help those children who are born unwanted. However, I have yet to come across one that truly has. You want to take the right to my own body away? Fine. I hope you are willing to adopt that child of mine, provide food, shelter, an education that goes as far as that child needs or desires and unconditional love.
Do you realize that if you take this right away from women, we will do it anyway? The rich will have no problem, but the poor will come to desperate options and revert to coat hangers and other unsantian objects, only resulting in more deaths.
That would not be a problem for you Scott, would it?
On来Scott, face the facts.
Most likely, children who are born "blond, blue eyed" will fall into the hands of that family who is willing to provide him or her with those demands. However, how many people are willing to aid those children born addicted to crack, heroin and cocaine?
Maybe if we were to educate, we could prevent more pregnancies from occurring, but I find that to be a whole other issue at hand. If we cannot get condom machines on campus, how on earth will we get sex education in the lower schools?
Please Scott, and all other anti abortionists out there, stop to consider the lives at hand. Mine, your sister's, your daughter's, your girlfriend's, your grandchildren's, and think. Not only does the inability to have an abortion affect my life, it affects yours as well. Especially when that pregnant woman with an unwanted child is someone you love.
Beverly Barnes
Lexington, Mass., Junior
Other voices
Statesman-Journal, Salem, Ore., on Elizabeth Morgan:
It doesn't take a sharp legal mind to figure out that something wrong with our justice system when a mother who wouldn't tell the court where her daughter is must spend more time in jail than drug dealers and rapists.