4A
Tuesday, October 1, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
Law enforcement alone cannot stop drug abuse
Nancy Reagan's 1980s slogan, "Just say no," was a declaration of war on drug use in the United States. The war was supposed to eradicate drugs from society. But two presidents later, victory is a far cry away.
President Clinton has been criticized severely for his lack of aggression in controlling drug abuse. The 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse indicates that drug use among 12- to 17-year-olds more than doubled between 1992 and 1995 from 5.3 percent to 10.9 percent.
Clinton's response was to allocate $15.9 billion for fiscal year 1997 to combat drug abuse. More than half of this money, 64 percent, will be used for law enforcement and interdiction.
What Clinton fails to realize, as did his predecessors, is that law enforcement alone cannot be used to eradicate drug addiction in the United States.
If the president wants to curb teenage drug use, he should spend more money on comprehensive education programs starting at the primary school level.
Barry McCaffrey, head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, said that under the current budget, only $3 per child was spent on drug education.
Also, more money should be funneled into community programs providing teenagers with places to go at night.
Another way for the president to aid in curbing drug abuse is to make treatment centers more accessible and affordable for drug addicts.
If society does not see decriminalization as a viable alternative to the war on drugs, it must recognize that the president cannot solve the drug problem with the use of force, but must provide alternative ways to fight drug use.
NICK ZALLER FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Morrison's return to the ring could endanger boxers' lives
Tommy Morrison's motives for returning to professional boxing may seem commendable. He wants to raise money for his Knockout AIDS Foundation in one final fight. Unfortunately, this is only another example of an error in judgment in a long line of bad decisions by the boxer. Morrison, who has HIV should not be lauded for jeopardizing his own health and the health of others, regardless of the cause.
Medical professionals disagree about the possibility that boxers fighting Morrison could contract the virus. A Sept. 20 article in the Kansas City Star quoted Michael Poppa, a ringside physician at Kansas City area boxing shows. In the article, Poppa said that there is a slight risk of an infected boxer passing HIV to another fighter in a match. Even if the medical risks that one boxer could contract the virus from another boxer in the ring are slim, Morrison still would be endangering the lives others by fighting.
There are better ways for Morrison to help children with AIDS. He should encourage uninfected boxers to fight for the foundation's benefit. Even better, Morrison should begin to behave like a responsible adult, speaking openly about his careless lifestyle and its consequences.
At the press conference announcing his decision to return to boxing, Morrison said, "I'm not now, nor have I ever been a good role model." He's exactly right. No role model by any standard would so wantonly endanger the lives of others, for charity's benefit or not.
LEWIS GALLOWAY FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
AMANDA TRAUGHBER
Editor
CRAIG LANG
Managing editor
MATT HOOD
Associate managing editor for design
KIMBERLY CRABTREE
CHARITY JEFFRIES
News editors
DARCI L. McLAIN
SARA ROSE
Public relations directors
Editors
KAREN GERSCH
Business manager
HEALY SMART
Retail sales manager
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUPP
Technology coordinator
Campus    Susanna Lóóf
      Jason Stratk
      Amy McVoy
Editorial    John Collar
      Nicole Kennedy
Features    Adam Ward
      Sports    Bill Petulla
Associate sports    Caryn Foster
Online editor    David L. Teoka
Photo    Rich Devinid
Graphics    Melissa Mantel
Andy Rohrbach
Special sections  Amy McVoy
Wire    Debbie Staine
Business Staff
Campus mgr ... Mark Ozdemk
Regional mgr ... Denny Haupt
Assistant Retail mgr ... Dana Centero
Support manager ... Special Sessions mgr ... Heather Valler
Production mgr ... Dan Kopec
Marketing director ... Lisa Quebb曼
Creative director ... Desmond Lavelle
Classified mgr ... Shelly Wachter
Jeff Victor/KANSAN
Students find article offensive, degrading to African Americans
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The Sept. 23 article titled, "Comedians blush for humor," was indeed offensive to African Americans because it portrayed black people (including myself) as ignorant and ill-mannered.
In the future, the Kansan needs to become more sensitive to articles portraying ethnic minorities.
Sandrea E. Anders Kansas City, Kan., senior
If this were the case, why would I attend a major university? The article was very demeaning, degrading and derogatory to me as a black person.
As a student who attended the recent Def Comedy Jam held by the Black Student Union, I can say that the article written in response to the event was inappropriate. The author of the Sept. 23 article, "Comedians blush for humor," could have reported in a more tasteful manner.
The Def Comedy Jam was an opportunity for students to get together, relax and laugh. The writer wrote about the event as if it were some type of uncivilized event held in jest of African-American culture.
The comments the writer made describing the actions of the comedians and the "heckler" in the audience was far from appropriate; it was demeaning. The writer made the African-American performers seem as if they were a bunch of rowdy, pants-ripping jesters.
Throughout the article, there was no positive comment made on behalf of the event. The writer of this article took every opportunity to describe the negative and outrageousness of the program, including the private information of how much it cost to hold the event.
It seems as if the writer should have been able to pull a comment from the audience that mentioned how the event was put together every year, or how great it was to have African Americans come together without the stereotypical violent attitudes with which we are drowned.
The article could have been written a lot better if it had actually represented the views and true opinions of those present, as well as contained better information about the event itself. In the future, we hope that writers would be more sensitive to the people and the events about which he writes.
Erica Hawthorne
Black Student Union treasurer
Lenera freshman
Article repeats past, proves Kansan staff remains insensitive
In an article published Sept. 27, Professor Felix Moos referred to himself as "The Last of the Mohicans." The Kansan staff found this description compelling enough to quote it in both the body of the article and in the caption.
This shows a disgraceful scarcity of learning from experience, both on the part of Moos and on the part of the Kansan. Last spring, Native-American students planned to protest the department of anthropology's refusal to return the remains of their ancestors to their tribes. The Kansan published an editorial describing those people as "ignorant." The Kansan later published a page of letters and editorials written by outraged readers and sent two editors, but not the writer who wrote the editorial, to the protest to apologize for publishing the offensive editorial. The department of anthropology was invited to the protest to make their case for their continued noncompliance with federal law in this matter, but they did not send a representative.
Now, half a year later, we have this display of insensitivity. Moos, whose department was so recently chastised for keeping the last remains of Native Americans in their storage rooms, calls himself "The Last of the Mohicans." Did the members of the department of anthropology learn so little about the pride and possessiveness that Native Americans feel about their culture to think describing himself, even as a joke, as "The Last of the Mohicans," is appropriate?
Did the Kansan editors even consider that "The Last of the Mohicans" was a racial reference? Last spring, the editors stated that they wanted to prevent such gaffes as the "ignorant" editorial from happening again, and that it did not represent their editorial policy or beliefs. However, here they choose to quote — twice — a racial statement without including any justification for publishing that reference. The quote was insensitive, and it did not serve to make a key point in the article. That it was a true quote, that it was a literary reference and that it was meant as humorous are not justifications.
Jocelyn S. Martin Lawrence graduate student
Abortion pill article unfairly represented professional opinions
I would like to protest the Sept. 27 article, "Abortion pill raises doubts," as both contradictory and biased.
If there are doubts among a significant enough portion of the student body to merit a front page story, why quote the opinion of only one student? Furthermore, the way you handle the opinions of the two professionals that you mention is slanted to support your negative point of view.
Charles Yockey, chief of staff at Watkins Health Center is reported as saying that there will still be considerable trauma involved in an abortion using the pill. Instead of this point being shown to counteract the alleged fears of students that women will use this pill irresponsibly due to its accessibility, your article highlights the discomfort of the procedure.
Therefore, according to your article, the pill is both easy to use and not easy enough! Any abortion is obviously going to be horrific, and this has nothing to do with the arguments for or against Mifepristone.
The Kansan has a duty to represent fair and rational reporting for students, not ill-researched and predual sensationalism.
Giselle Hillyer
New Zealand graduate student
Accusing child of harassment brings problem, not resolutions
In one short week, Johnathan Prevette has become famous — or infamous, depending on your point of view.
Johnathan is the first-grader from Lexington, Ky., who kissed the cheek of a female classmate. Officials at Southwest Elementary School deemed the behavior inappropriate and suspended the boy for sexual harassment. It seems that school offi-
STAFF COLUMNIST
class did not have all the information before they took action. Prevette said the little girl asked him to kiss her.
However, that did not matter to the school. A representative for the school district said, "A 6-year-old kissing another 6-year-old is inappropriate behavior. Unwelcome is unwelcome at any age."
U. S. schools have much larger issues to deal with than 6-year-olds kissing: class mediocrity, equity in education, drug and alcohol abuse, teen pregnancy, violence. And yet one elementary school in a misguided attempt to fight sexual harassment chastises a boy who has no concept of what sexuality is in granting the wish of a friend.
The only time something like this should be an issue is if the educational environment of the student is threatened. If the little girl asked to be kissed, this probably was not the case.
Lexington City Schools, to justify the suspension, issued a statement. It said, "The student was disciplined for violation of the general school policy which prohibits unwarranted and unwelcome touching of one student by another." The statement said the disciplinary action was justified.
The whole incident has been blown out of proportion. It is not about sexual harassment. This is about schools trying to teach children morality. The problem that arises when school officials begin to impose their beliefs upon the other people's children is that everyone does not have the same beliefs. What is inappropriate in one family may be acceptable within another.
Other problems could originate from this incident. The negative attention and public outcry that this incident has drawn will have an effect on how other schools handle similar situations. The danger that arises is that schools could become apathetic to this problem. A child who has a legitimate concern about the actions or comments of another child may be ignored by the teacher and ridiculed by classmates. This ultimately could cause the progress that has been made in sexual harassment issues to take an enormous step backward.
Also, children may become confused about appropriate and inappropriate behavior regarding the opposite sex. Healthy interactions such as hugging or holding hands may be taboo. This could result in unhealthy adult relationships.
Children of the next generation will be affected by what happens throughout their education. The focus needs to be on teaching them the essentials. Although it is the responsibility of the parents to teach their children values, children also need some freedom within the school to explore who they are and what they believe. If schools have rules that punish 6-year-olds for showing affection, the generations to come will be a collection of robots unable to express any emotion.
Information for this column was compiled from Associated Press articles.
OUT FROM THE CRACKS
Deanne Engel is a Liberal, Kan., senior in Journalism.
BAD? Just THINK OF IT AS A LOAN, WE LOAN YOU THE MONEY, AND YOU PAY us BACK WHEN you CAN.
By Jeremy Patnoi