4
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Thursday, October 10, 1968
'Just war' theory
Do American men of draft age who consider the Vietnam war unjust have the right to refuse to serve it?
The number of Americans opposing the war has shifted in the past few years from a minority towards a majority figure.
The article recognizes the growing number of draft age men who oppose the war on the grounds that it is unjust and are willing to face prison sentences to escape being drafted.
But, while the general feeling in the United States is fast becoming anti-Vietnam, the standards for those who object to being asked to fight in it haven't changed.
But many of these young men, while believing that the United States should not be in Vietnam or believing the war is detrimental to the Vietnamese people, still do not fit the present qualifications for conscientious objectors.
"Today the CO status is available, theoretically, to any sincere, religious-trained pacifist," the Ripon article states.
The Ripon Society, the moderate Republican research and policy organization, announced a new policy on conscientious objectors in its October Forum magazine.
The number of COs who belong to pacifist religions such as the Quakers or the Jehovah's Witnesses is small. Moreover the definition of pacifist according to present draft standards said Ripon, means one opposed to the use of force in any form.
Despite their feelings that the use of force in Vietnam is wrong and belief that the war violates their consciences, few young men can actually embrace complete pacifism as a way of life.
Ripon, therefore, advocates, the use of the "just war" theory for judging COs.
This position has been considered by a few Protestant churches and churchmen of all faiths in
the past few years. This summer at an annual convention, the Lutheran Church of America passed a resolution upholding this theory.
This church stands by and upholds those of its members who consciently object to military service as well as those who in conscience choose to serve in the military. This church further affirms that the individual who, for reasons of conscience, objects to participation in a particular war is acting in harmony with Lutheran teaching."
Ripon lists the criteria for judging a just war as (a) the war must be waged by legitimate authority. (b) the object must be vindicate justice, (c) the intention must be peace with justice, (d) the war must be waged without hatred and with love and reconciliation as the ultimate aim, (e) the conduct of the war must be just, (f) the damages inflicted must not be out of proportion to the injuries suffered, or threatened, and there must be a reasonable prospect of success and (g) the war must be a last resort only after every possibility of peaceful settlement has been exhausted.
Perhaps the disillusionment of today's youth might subside if they knew they had some substantial recourse to protest a war they think unjust.
From a strictly practical standpoint, this method of judging CO status might result in a drastically lowered draft rate; and also many could fake their conscientious objection.
Using these criteria, many so-called "draft dodgers" would qualify as COs.
But from the standpoint of the American ideal of freedom of thought and belief, the Ripon stance on conscientious objectors is a much fairer and more humane way to judge the young men of today.
Alison Steimel Editorial Editor
Letters to editor
Refutes change; military study
To the Editor:
I am preparing an individual study on the emerging generation and the challenge it presents to military leadership.
There are many indications that the 18-25 year old men of today are significantly more intellectual, more critical of the assumptions and assertions underlying established institutions and radically more intolerant of hypocrisy than previous generations. Manifestations in these pursuits are, however, sometimes puzzling. A long standing principle of military leadership is "know your men." This has proven to be more difficult of late.
Vietnam or no Vietnam, apparent world tensions are likely to require a military draft for the next several years. With this and current youth's desire to
"participate in the decision making process," I would sincerely appreciate your thoughts on the leadership techniques and practices that you believe would be most appropriate and responsive to the unusually talented young men of today. Comments from faculty and administration personnel are welcome but I particularly solicit the views of the students of the University of Kansas.
Ben L. Harrison
3250 Dorchester Drive
Montgomery, Ala. 36111
To the Editor:
Contrary to Alan Jones' recent editorial, Peoples Voice wishes to make clear that it does not consider the student body as the "idiot masses." Rather, the student body is considered only in
terms of the positions which each individual wishes to take concerning the structure and purpose of the University. Our present purpose is to affect the immediate implementation of the dissenting report, not to call students names.
Peoples Voice wishes to make clear once again that it does not consider the majority report on University governance as a compromise in any way. It is the clear expression of superficial change, proposed for the purpose of appeasement. It does not represent the necessary changes which are vital for the future of this campus and this country.
Rick Atkinson
Press Coordinator
Peoples Voice
"Tonight, Hubert, I speak for the dignity of man. . . . "
Cinema under attack
Movie code
By Scott Nunley
The arts in America are once again to fall under assault from the chill ranks of militant matrons whose familiar fleshy nostrils display those same prominent blue rings.
From the depths of Hollywood hypocrisy is soon to issue a new "self-imposed" rating code to limit the freedom of American moviegoers. This new consorship, of course, is far more subtle and sophisticated than the earlier Legion of Decency horrors we survived.
The danger lies in the careful selling campaign now being conducted by industry spokesman Jack Valenti—and in the fact that Americans seem frighteningly willing to relinquish their burden of self-control to any authoritarian institution that promises to ease their dreadful anxiety of decision-making.
In the wake of national violence, for example, the television networks engaged in a spasm of penance, jerking "violent" episodes of their series off the air or, as it frequently developed, postponing their appearance. Hue and cry for control led to a moment's overreaction, but to no lasting change in television content.
Even Mr. Valenti publicly admits that there is no substantial evidence to link our rising incidence of national brutality with that cinematic violence we flock to enjoy. Yet we are asked to react in haste to control in some fashion the fare of American theatres.
Naturally this latest "code" attempts to pass itself off without the stigma of censorship. Apparently it will provide only "guidelines" to adult audiences classing all films into four ratings to aid the viewer in wisely selecting his evening's entertainment. "We don't want the moviegoer to be surprised by what appears on the screen," Mr. Valenti explains.
General, Mature, Restricted, and Prohibited read the ratings: G, M, R, and X. Under the last two classes, "children" will be either banned from the theater unless accompanied by a parent or banned from the theater entirely. Moreover, the X rating will be denied the Industry Seal and the theater-owners will be asked not to book X films.
If you aren't angered already by this moralistic pigeonholing, perhaps you welcome an outside agency sweating out your own thinking for you. It will be easier to read someone's X than it currently is to read reviews and scrutinize advertising. But the rub is obvious: just what does constitute R and X material? "Objectionable" violence and sex, certainly—objectionable to whom?
Moreover, the constitutional considerations that demand a quality judgment of art—based on its "redeeming social value"—can be conveniently sidestepped. A highly sensitive "Dear John" will obviously be more "objectionable" than an innocuous "Son of Flubber Rides West." Thank God our children will be safe.
However, many adults will be "safe" too. We know from experience how attractive is the line of least resistance and how easy it will be for Hollywood raters to scare the American theatergoer from more meaningful films.
The fact that the code will be "voluntarily" and rather vaguely enforced by local theater-owners only makes it more difficult to fight in the courts.
The final and most dangerous insult involves foreign films (which will be rated by Hollywood as it pleases) and those films whose directors or producers choose not to submit to the code's authority. Such "outlaws" will not be merely un-rated—rather, they will automatically receive the Prohibited rating of $X$, sight unseen.
There is a need in America for a more responsible journalism, both printed and televised, that will acquaint our audiences with the merits of new films. Judith Crist cannot do it all. But single-opinion, Olympian judgments (however enforced) have no business falling upon the American moviegoer from the "heights" of Hollywood righteousness.
Quotes
KHE SANH, Vietnam—Marine Capt. Sidney Thomas, commenting on the Marines' return to Khe Sanh where they were be seigeed by Communist troops for 77 days earlier this year:
"It's pretty pleasant out here now."
SAIGON-South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu, speaking on the war in a state of the union message:
"The Hanoi regime has to acknowledge its aggression and accept and end to that aggression."
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom—UN 4-3644 Business Office—UN 4-4358
A student newspaper serving the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mall subscription rates: $6 a semester, $10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 66044. Accommodations, meals, lodging, and transportation are provided on behalf of color, creed or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
Executive Staff
Executive Star
News Adviser George Richardson
Advertising Adviser Mel Adams
Managing Editor Monte Mace
Business Manager Jack Hany
Assistant Managing Editors, Pat Crawford, Charla Jenkins, Alan T. Jones,
Steve Morgan, Allen Winchester
City Editor Bob Butler
Associate City Editor Kady Hall
Editorial Editor Alison Steimel
Editorial Assistant Richard Lundquist
Sports Editor Ron Yates
Feature and Society Editor Rea Wilson
Associate Feature Editor Sharon Ossen
Copy Chiefs Judy Dague, Linda McCreery, Don Westerhaus, Sandy
Zahradnik, Marilyn Zook
Advertising Manager Mike Willman
National Advertising Manager Kathy Sanders
Promotion Pan Flaton
Circulation Manager Jerry Bottenfield
Classified Manager Barry Arthur
Member Associated Collegiate Press