4
Wednesday, November 11, 1992
OPINION
一
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
IN OUR OPINION
Freedom of religion, not goat safety, is issue
Once again, a hallmark of our nation, religious freedom, is in danger. This time the location is Hialeah, Florida. There, believers of Santeria, an ancient African religion, are being told by the city that they cannot practice their most central ritual, animal sacrifices.
Proponents of this ban cite health reasons to justify this restriction. They claim that blood and decaying carcasses left in public pose health threats. But Attorney Richard Garrett, the city's representative, said that even if the sacrifices were held in slaughterhouses and the carcasses were disposed of properly, he would still hold that a church should not have the right to engage in animal sacrifice.
This seems particularly contradictory when one considers that hunting, rodent traps and even lawn pesticides kill animals in more painful ways. But these practices are not challenged. To this disparity, Garrett replied that those cases are not considered sacrifices, as if the mere idea of sacrifice is wrong.
Such remarks indicate that what is considered wrong about the followers of Santeria is not that they kill animals, but that the killing is sacrificial or has religious overtones.
Considering that these sacrifices are of chickens, goats and ducks (not human beings), with Garrett's logic, a person could legitimately pull out a shotgun, kill a chicken and then say prayers. But forbid if the prayer is said before or while the chicken is killed.
We can only hope that this latest attempt to interpret the first amendment as freedom from religion will be thwarted. The more proper meaning is freedom of religion. This distinction is crucial. Practices should not be banned simply because they are sacrificial. Instead they should be protected because they are sacrificial and do not hurt other human beings.
After centuries of debating the chicken question which came first, the chicken or the egg? — the question now takes on a new spin: what comes first, the prayer or the chicken killing? However, in the latter case, the debate is easier to resolve.
ANN JURCYK FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
U.S. needs different attitude toward guns
Rather than giving us an explanation, the facts that have come to light about the shooting of exchange student Yoshihiro Hattori in Louisiana instead serve only to strengthen our impression of a United States that is incomprehensible.
What is most difficult for us to comprehend is that still not a single measure is being taken to control the deluge of guns that lies at the root of the incidents. ...
Many people in the United States consider possession of guns to be a part of the right to self-defense. But one might expect an important distinction to be made between that idea and the idea of indiscriminately pulling out a gun and shooting someone.
A society that knows no such distinction is sick.
It is even more troubling that the U.S. people have stopped considering these hard facts as something out of the ordinary. ...
On this side of the Pacific as well, the danger of guns in society is gradually taking on an air of reality. We in Japan must maintain our resolve to be a country that rejects guns.
Asahi Shimbun Toyko
KANSAN STAFF
ERIC NELSON
Editor
GREG FARMER Managing editor
General manager, news adviser
TOM EBLEN
BILL SKEET, Technology coordinator
Asst. Manag. ag     Aimee Brainard
News     Alexander Bloemhoch
Editorial     Stephen Martino
Campus     Gayle Oxtonger
Sports      Shelly Salon
Photo       Justin Knapp
Features     Cody Holt
Graphics    Sean Teals
Business Staff
SCOTT HANNA
Business manager
BILLLEIBENGOOD
Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES
Sales and marketing adviser
Business Staff
Campus sales mgr    Annalisa Givenger
Regional sales mgr   Teresa Mellarifo
National sales mgr    Brian Wilkes
Co-op sales mgr    Amy Stumbro
Production mgrs    Brad Broon
Kim Claxton
Marketing director  Ashley Langford
Creative director  Janice Classified mgr  Judith Standley
**Letters** should be type, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. The letters should be type, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansas reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be nailed or brought to the Kansas newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Fint Hall.
Clinton could give Perot special security position
I'm always appreciative when a reader calls with a usable idea for a column. It makes my job easier.
This one came from a supporter of Ross Perot, who said: "I worked in his campaign. I think he is a great man, a great patriot, and wish he had won.
"But just because he lost doesn't mean that this country should be deprived of his services. He has so much to offer.
"So what I think you ought to do is write a column saying that if Bill Clinton is smart, he'll ask Perot to join his administration.
"That would show that Clinton is serious about getting this country moving again, which is what Perot's candidacy was all about. And it would show that Clinton has respect for all the people who voted for Perot."
I told the Perot supporter that if he felt strongly about his idea, he could put it on paper and send it to the department that prints the views of readers.
Well, I have to admit that the thought that some Perot supporters were unhappy with me has caused me to toss and turn through sleepless nights. That is almost as troubling to me as the disapproval of Dan Quayle's admirers or Pat Buchanan's worshipful crowd. Like anyone else, I want to be loved, although the nature of my work sometimes makes that difficult.
But he said: "I thought of that, but I'd rather see you write it because more people see your column than would see my letter. And it would be a chance to do yourself some good because a lot of Perot's supporters didn't care much for the way you poked fun at him. You could get them back on your side if you show him some respect."
COLUMNIST
So I thanked the Perot supporter for his suggestion and promised him that I would do exactly as he proposed. So here goes: my first bit of positive advice to Clinton.
MIKE ROYKO
ing you when you and a Democrat Congress begin figuring out ways to glob on our money and toss it hither and yon);
As you probably noticed, about 20 percent of the voters went for Ross Perot. That's an impressive number, considering that Perot didn't have much going for him except a few billion dollars to spend on the biggest political advertising campaign in the history of the world.
Dear President-elect Clinton (or Dollar Bill, as we'll probably start calling
It has been suggested to me by one of Perot's supporters — and thousands more would surely second the idea that you ask Perot to take a position in your administration.
That strikes me as being an excellent idea. First, it would bring you the gratitude and affection of the millions of Perot volunteers, who have become a formidable political army.
But more important, it would give you access to the wisdom and creative thinking of this unique man.
As we know, Perot is not much of an organization guy. He doesn't like long-winded meetings, dealing with bureaucrats and mulling over lengthy studies and ponderous documents.
The question is, what post would be most suitable for him?
your Cabinet positions, which require dealing with bureaucrats, conceptualizing, implementing, facilitating and other distasteful behavior. I'm sure you can find all sorts of regular Democrats to handle those jobs, since Democrats really love to conceptualize, implement and facilitate. It turnsthem on.
He's an action kind of guy, kind of a freeweeping spirit. See a problem, grab it, give it a few shakes and solve it. He even said that as president, he wouldn't sit around the Oval Office. He would have been out there, doing something.
So what about a job for Perot? I think I have it.
That would rule out most or all of
You should offer him position of chief night watchman at the White House.
Listen, we live in a dangerous society. You never know who is going to sneak through the gate, flip the fence or drop down from the sky onto the White House lawn. It could be swarthy terrorists, deranged Buchanites or weird little paratroopers from UFOS.
But give Perot half a dozen sharp-toothed guard dogs and an industrial-sized flashlight, and you and your family will be safe in your beds. Any trespassers would quickly flee after they received a few nips on their bottoms. From the dogs, of course, not Perot, although you never know what he might do if he got mad, feisty fellow that he is.
And with him on duty, you wouldn't have to worry about any mischief-makers crashing your inauguration ball and holding up a phony photo of you wearing a full-length lace gown.
So that's something you might think about. But if the idea doesn't appeal to you, or Per torus it down, one other proposal: Make him head of the FBI. He'd have so many files on so many people, the leap in the manila-folder industry would be enough to jump-start the economy.
I'll get back to you later about a job for Dan Quayle. You have a lot of lawn there. Could make a neat little pitch-and-putt golf course. So you'd need a head pro...
Mike Roykola is a syndicated columnist with the Chicago Tribune.
STAFF COLUMNIST
KEVIN BARTELS Clinton must play cards right in Congress
Bitterness and recriminations abound in the Oval Office nowadays, ever since President-elect Bill Clinton whipped George Bush like a red-haired stepchild one week ago. Even Barbara, the unassailable First Grandmother, showed signs of hostility and rancor when she proposed a game while flying on her campaign plane.
Loco Locals
Now, though, with George behind him, Clinton and the New Congress, are going to have to produce change quickly if they wish to remain in office. Back in August, Bush derided the effect of having a "rubber-check Congress and a rubber-stamp President," in typical hyperbolic, election-year terms, but the sunny declarations by the Democrats of the end of gridlock in government also seem a tad exaggerated. After all, there are Democrats, and then there are[1] Democrats.
Quite simply, Congress is and has been a maze of competing interests. Dealing with lawmakers who would push Clinton's moderate economic proposals to the left will remain one of the biggest challenges for the new administration. Time will be working against the president-elect.
If President-elect Clinton becomes overly engrossed in the fine print, as he is wont to do, and waits too long to act, whatever sense of consensus that the Congress has will quickly evaporate, and Clinton's proposals will get wrangled and watered down to almost nothing.
And yet, Bill Clinton must not become the veto-ready image of his predecessor because, for once, the voters in this latest election demanded change. While some over-eager pundits inaccurate termed "92 the "Year of the Woman," a substantial number of new faces are on the Hill. In order to clean out the barn, "to borrow from Little Ross, newly-elected, anti-incumbent representatives and senators must swallow what is a bitter pill for most politicians; campaign reform and term-limits. The multimillion dollars caches of polls such as GOP swine Bob Dole and House Majority leader Richard Gephardt all but eliminate any significant opposition.
On election night, Dan Rather asked a hostile and uncooperative Bob Dole whether he would be prepared to work with the new president. Characteristically, Dole frotted at the mouth and replied that Clinton "did not have a mandate" and he would fight to stymie Clinton's proposals. While a certain amount of partisanship was injected into Dole's response, the underlying difficulty of actually making change once elected is highlighted. It will require forthrightness and unparalleled diplomacy on Clinton's part to enact his programs.
Clinton is moving quickly, or at least giving the appearance of moving quickly, on naming members of his cabinet and articulating a strategy. Elvis has a better lock on the "vision thing" that constantly eluded and destroyed his predecessor the political career of G.B.
And if he has any questions about the difficulty of that one, all he needs to do is to give the former Evil One a call.
Kevin Barclay is a Louisville, Ky., graduate student majoring in English.
By Tom Michaud