Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Jodie Chester, Editor Marc Harrell, Business manager Gerry Doyle, Managing editor Jamie Holman, Retail sales manager Ryan Koerner, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Wednesday, October 28, 1998
Editorials
Right to free speech doesn't end with KU students Web pages
The University will be treading on shaky ground if it implements policies regulating the content of student Web pages.
Two weeks ago, in response to advice from the American Civil Liberties Union and KU Legal Services, three Templin Hall residents removed an allegedly offensive quotation from their Templin Revolution Web site.
The groups said the obscenity laden quotation, attributed to a former University housing employee, was potentially libelous. KU Academic Computing Services threatened to remove the Kansas University Campus Internet Association's Web page, which contained a link to the students' Web site, from the University server.
Rightfully, KUCIA refused to remove the link and defended the students' First Amendment rights to determine the content of their Web page. The students were aware of their constitutional rights, but after their consultation with ACLU and a Legal Services for Students, they decided to remove the quote to avoid a potential libel suit from the former University employee.
Nonetheless, legal action rests in the hands of the quote's alleged author and a judge, not with ACS or any University employee. Housing Director Ken Stoner originally brought attention to the Web site. Stoner declined to comment about who he discussed the matter with, and the students were not directly contacted by the administration.
But Stoner's blatant attempt at unlawful censorship should not be
The University should not control the content of Web pages.
condoned or ignored, especially in an academic atmosphere supposedly set up to foster free expression. Stoner now says he regrets that his actions were misunderstood. He said he is not an advocate of censorship.
Most importantly is that the establishment of these regulations would almost inevitably violate students rights to free speech. Kimberly Dayton, professor of law, said content-based restrictions on university Web sites were prohibited by law.
Reportedly, the University is using this incident as an opportunity to draft policies regulating student Web pages. This is not a path the University should pursue for a multitude of reasons.
The federal government has been attempting to pass legislation regulating Internet content for years but has failed because it would violate our constitutional rights. The only significant piece of Internet-related legislation to be passed so far, The Communications and Decency Act, was overturned and found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Responsibility for libel or defamation lies in the hands of the Web page author. He or she may be sued by the individual claiming libel. It makes no sense for the University to adopt this liability.
In addition, there is no realistic
method of regulating the content of the Internet. As a medium containing an infinite number of links, cyberspace is inherently ungovernable and nearly impossible to police. A hap hazard attempt at censorship on the part of the University would not only be unconstitutional but also practically impossible.
There seems to be a discrepancy between the recent tolerance of gory anti-abortion displays on campus lawns and the current persecution of students Web content. Just like the pro-life demonstrators, the Templin Hall residents were exercising their invaluable right to free speech and political activism because they thought that their hall government was not representing them.
The students shouldn't have been advised to alter the content of their Web site. Their ultimate course of action was rooted in a desire to avoid potential conflict with the University and further conflict with Stoner.
KUCIA should be praised for standing its ground by not removing the link in face of pressure from ACS.
As this issue is dealt with further, we can only hope that its resolution will be used as a precedent to uphold future assertions of students rights to free expression.
The University should not be allowed to formulate an unconstitutional, oppressive policy of Internet censorship.
Kansan staff
Ann Premer ... Editorial
Tim Harrington ... Associate Editorial
Aaron Marvin ... News
Gwen Olson ... News
Aaron Knopf ... Online
Matt Friedrichs ... Sports
Kevin Wilson ... Associate sports
Marc Sheforgen ... Campus
Laura Roddy ... Campus
Lindsey Henry ... Features
Bryan Volk ... Associate features
Roger Nomer ... Photo
Corie Waters ... Photo
Angie Kuhn ... Design, graphics
Melissa Ngo ... Wire
Sara Anderson ... Special sections
Laura Veazey ... news clerk
Nadia Mustafa for the editorial board
News editors
Advertising managers
Stacia Williams ... Assistant retail
Brandi Byram ... Campus
Micah Kafitz ... Regional
Ryan Farmer ... National
Matt York ... Marketing
Stephanie Krause ... Production
Matt Thomas ... Production
Traci Meisenheimer ... Creative
Tenley Lane ... Classified
Sara Cropper ... Zone
Nicole Farrell ... Zone
Jon Schlitt ... Zone
Shannon Curran ... Zone
Matt Lopez ... Zone
Brian Allers ... PR/ Intern manager
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"People hate, as they love, unreasonably." — Thackeray
How to submit letters and guest columns
**LEFTERS:** Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kanson newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Filn Hall. The Kanson reserves the right to edit, cut to length or rejit all submissions. For any questions, call Ann Prenpremer@kansan.com) or Tim Harrington (tharrington@kansan.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4810.
Humanity must forgive but not forget genocide
Perspective
John Wilson
opinion @ kansan.com
I wandered through a book store on a stormy afternoon. The sky had splattered down rain all day. It pounded down in waves like the ocean, impairing vision to the outside world.
I picked up the first hardback back that I saw. The title read: "We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families."
I flipped through pages detailing the history of an African country called Rwanda. I vaguely remembered the country from newspaper headlines from the mid-90s. I knew wrongs had happened because television cameras had captured the situation. But I hadn't nailed enough attention.
I didn't remember the word "decimation," the killing of every tenth person in the population. I didn't remember the word "genocide." the planned extermination of an entire ethnic group.
"Although the killing was low-tech — performed largely by machete — it was carried out at a dazzling speed; of an original population of about 7.5 million, at least 800,000 people were killed in just 100 days. Rwandans often speak of 1 million deaths, and they may be right. The dead of Rwanda accumulated at nearly three times the rate of Jewish dead during the Holocaust. It was the most efficient mass killing since the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki," Philip Gourevitch, the author, wrote.
I felt a sickening irony. I had heard this story before.
I remembered a summer during high school that I spent in Germany. I remembered hopping off a train in Dachau, the site of one of the harshest Nazi concentration camps. I remembered dark skies above Dachau.
Rwanda's skies must be the same color.
Rwanda's skies must be the same color.
I wrote a high school column about Dachau, about an old Jewish man who taught me a simple lesson. Wandering through the concentration
camps, he said: "Forgive but never forget what hanged here. Never let this happen again."
I spotted the sentence again and again in the column, and I begged anyone who would listen to never let it happen again. I felt better about the world. I had done my part to change something that happened more than 50 years ago when my parents weren't even alive.
The same thing was happening in Rwanda, and I didn't even notice.
But it disturbs me how little we know about Rwanda, the Hutus and the Tutsis. It disturbs me how little the United States did to stop these murders. These stories must be told so that we can avoid repeating our mistakes.
We all know the story of the Holocaust. It is a grim tale that has been ingrained in our minds—and rightfully so. We must remember atrocities, and Hitler's Third Reich was as bloody and wrong a group as any in history.
The Rwandan government implemented a policy that called on everyone in the Hutu majority to murder everyone in the Tutsi minority. Genocide ripped through the country, leaving a comparative handful of Tutsis alive.
I have a hard time finding a moral in genicide. We all come into the story knowing that there is no new moral to be found. Still, for some reason, I think we all should hear these stories.
We should be taught about the atrocities of the Hutus. We should be taught to guard against behavior of that kind. We should be taught not to hate. Far too much blood has been shed through the years.
There are realities in the world with which we must deal with. Every society in the world faces a struggle — a struggle to live together when we share the same bloody history.
We should learn to act in our own time, to watch the world we live in and ensure our future. We must guard against the wrongs of the past. We must learn to live beyond the wrongs of the past. If not, we will be caught in the angry, backbiting web of the past.
we nepe the skies clear. Forgive but never forget.
We hope the rain never comes again.
Wilson is a Lenexa senior in journalism.
t's easy to ignore the uncomfortable.
Vigil against hate fosters tolerance, acceptance
It's easy to ignore the uncomfortable. The death of Matthew Shepard, University of Wyoming student, at the hands of homophobic attackers is obviously an uncomfortable
Clay McCuiston opinion@karsan.com
topic. Already, it is beginning to be ignored, explained away as robbery, or marginalized as a "gay issue." This is unfortunate because Shepard's death has a significance that crosses all boundaries.
Oct. 16, I attended the candlelight vigil held for Shepard and James Byrd, a black man murdered in Texas. Despite the persistent rain, it took place in front of the Lawrence City Hall.
These people did not assemble on a dark, cold, rainy evening for an insignificant purpose. They came together for justice. Justice and equality are goals that cannot be pushed to the side or imored.
As long as any group in this country has something to fear from any other group, no one can really be free.
of the 200 people assembled there was their diversity. There were grandparents and grandchildren, with every age in between represented. There were members of different ethnic groups. There were gay and straight, male and female, students and professors.
Respect and tolerance are words that have been repeated so often that they seem meaningless. How many times have KU students been told its wrong to hate? It all seems pointless and redundant — until someone like Shepard shows us that hate is alive, feeding on the ignorant like a cancer.
The most striking feature
Shepard's incident shows us that respect and tolerance aren't just words. They're ways of life.
Obviously this issue affects gay people. Shepard was gay and murdered because of it. But straight people have a much larger part in this equation. They must understand that a person's sexual orientation doesn't make them any less (or more)
It was raining heavily, and I was drenched. Smiling back, I gladly accepted. She held the umbrella with one hand, and a tall white candle with the other. The flame of the candle dwindled, to a small blue glow.
Beside me, an older woman smiled and offered space under her umbrella.
As people huddled together, staying out of the rain and trying to hear, there was a definite sense of community. There was determination in the crowd — determination to find an end to violence and hate. This resolve must continue beyond a mere vigil, though. It must spread throughout the towns and cities of our country. Matthew Shepard should have lived. But his death must not be in vain.
She cupped the flame with her hand, and it flared up brighter than before.
McCusinion is an El Dorado sophomore in pre-journalism.
many spoke at the vigil, talking about respect and tolerance. They raised several of the issues I've mentioned. Unfortunately, with traffic racing by and low-powered amplification, the words were mostly inaudible as I stood in the back of the crowd. The occasional phrase floated by, but mostly I watched the people surrounding me. Mothers with their children, bearded academics and tattooed students were straining to hear. It was a sense of grief mixed with hope, as if perhaps the tragic story of Matthew Shepard might right the grievous wrenes surrounding us.
than human. Those who murdered Shepard did not see him as a man. They saw him as a hated object that should be punished and destroved.
As long as our country ignores homophobia, we can't have justice. People forget that this very country routinely discriminated against black people only 40 years ago. Derisive humor directed at African Americans was commonplace. The vast majority of our country saw nothing wrong with degrading people because of the color of their skin. We've been wrong before — blatantly, horribly wrong. If we can't learn from the past and apply the lessons of decency and acceptance of others, we are fated to see many more share Matthew Shepard's fate.
Feedback Vigil detractors' arguments wrong
I am writing in defense of the women's circle that takes place as part of Womyn Take Back The Night. In a recent column, Michael Bannon claimed that public accusations of sexual assault made by women in the circle leave the accused with no recourse. His argument is simply not true. If a man believes he has been falsely accused, he can
sue the accuser for slander. In the United States, we can't stop people from making public accusations, and we shouldn't.
I would also like to comment on Stephanie Moore's recent letter in which she claims that her friend was falsely accused of improprieties by someone in a Womyn Take Back The Night circle. She argues that the woman making the accusation did so because she was not willing to take personal responsibility for her actions. The time has come for us to stop blaming women for not taking responsibility and for men to start taking on personal responsibility for themselves. If you want to engage in any kind of sexual contact with another person, make it your responsibility to be absolutely certain that the person is consenting — simply ask permission first. It may sound corny, but it's easy and it is the right thing to do.
Michael T. Schmitt
Harrisonburg, Va.
graduate student