Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Julie Wood, Editor Brandi Byram, Business manager Laura Roddy, Managing editor Shauntae Blue, Retail sales manager Cory Graham, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
Tuesday, October 19, 1999
Tribune Media Services
Editorials
Service learning is wave of future; University should avoid undertow
The future is now. It's time for students to get involved and for administrators to follow through on the chancellor's 2001 Initiative by instating service learning at the University of Kansas.
As part of the initiative, the task force for "Building a Premier Learning Community," included the objective of service learning in its suggestions to improve the University learning environment: "adhere a balance among teaching, research and service."
Student Senate is considering a resolution that encourages students, faculty and administration to establish service learning. Service learning allows students to be involved in the community, enhancing the educational experience and the community simultaneously.
Student Senate's resolution concerning applied learning warrants immediate passage
For example, political science students could register low-income voters as part of their course work. Service learning would not be a requirement, but a supplement that would give students hands-on experience while reaching out to the community.
Senate's resolution reaffirms the chancellor's initiative and encourages the University to move forward and students to get involved through four goals.
The first goal is to include students in the University's long-term public serv
ice plans, which could include forming a student task force to address student interest and student involvement needed. The second goal states that service learning should be instituted through the formation of a University public service and community outreach center, which would coordinate public service activities.
The third goal is for students to have the opportunity to engage in service learning in their fields of study. The fourth goal is to provide incentives for professors engaged in service learning.
All of Senate's goals are consistent with the University's goals. Senate should pass this resolution, and the administration should take advantage of the consensus and involve students in implementing service learning.
Katrina Hull for the editorial board
Housing's swastika decision correct
The most recent free speech crusade undertaken by the University of Kansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union involved what has been called "hate speech."
last month, Jimmy Adra, a Wichita sophomore living in McCollum Hall, wrote the message in question on the public doodle board in McCollum's eight floor lobby. It read, "When the revolution comes you'll be spared." This quotation was embellished on both sides with swastikas. He said he wrote the message to test the limits of free expression at the University.
Adra stood accused of harassment, and faced anything from verbal reprimand to expulsion from the University. Predictably, KU ACLU came to Adra's defense. This time, it was right. The
Unpopular, even racist, speech needs to be safeguarded
Department of Student Housing made the correct decision in dropping the charges against Adra. There is no place for thought police in a university that prides itself on reason, tolerance and freedom of inquiry.
It remains to be proven that anyone living in McCollum Hall felt harassed by the phrase on the public doodle board. It also must be noted that the doodle board is public and in a lobby. The situation would have been different if Adra had deliberately chosen to write this message on a doodle board belonging to a Jewish student. The message itself also was quite vague. What revolution? Templin Revolution, perhaps? And what won't students be spared from?
Certainly, Adra's choice of methods to test his freedom of expression left something to be desired. A swastika, which carries with it such pernicious reminders of racism and death, was probably not the wisest option. However, it is precisely this sort of unpopular speech that needs the most protection, lest we all become subject to the thought police.
The way to deal with unpopular — even racist — sentiments is not to drive them underground where they can fester and become even more poisonous. The light of day must be shone on them so they are be shown for what they are. Reason, logic and the First Amendment protections of free speech demand no less.
Kansan staff
Jennifer Roush for the editorial board
News editors
Chad Bettes ... Editorial
Seth Hoffman ... Associate editorial
Carl Kaminski ... News
Juan H. Heath ... Online
Chris Fickett ... Sports
Brad Hallier ... Associate sports
Nadia Mustafa ... Campus
Heather Woodward ... Campus
Steph Brewer ... Features
Dan Curry ... Associate features
Matt Daugherty ... Photo
Kristi Ellott ... Design, graphics
T.J. Johnson ... Wire
Melody Ard ... Special sections
Becky LaBranch . . . Special sections
Thad Crane . . . Campus
Will Baxter . . . Regional
Jon Schlitt . . . National
Danny Pumpley . . Online sales
Micah Kafitz . . . Marketing
Emily Knowles . . Production
Jenny Weaver . . Production
Matt Thomas . . . Creative
Kelly Heffernan . . Classified
Juliana Moreira . . Zone
Chad Hale . . Zone
Brad Bolyard . Zone
Amy Miller . . Zone
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
How to submit letters and guest columns
"I've developed a new philosophy... I only dread one day at a time."
—Charlie Brown
Letters: 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 hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
**Guess columns:** Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photocarraphed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansai newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. The Kansai reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Chad Bettes or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924.
Students can help curb corruption in politics
Perspective
Politics is dirty. It's filled with corruption, scandals, secret agreements and criminal activities. Some say that the Mafia had its hands in Kennedy's presidency; others say the same about Chinese and Russian crime rings in Clinton's.
The University of Kansas is not immune.
Elizabeth* peacock columnist opinion of kansas.com
Recent attempts have been made to change current campaigning policies. Some people want to get rid of coalition spending limits, broaden the appeals process for fines from violations and limit the referendums students can vote on. "Sure," the average student says "Why not? I don't vote anyway." Well, now's the time, John Q. Student because if you don't take conrol of your Student Senate the Panhellenic Maffa will.
Now, I know that senate elections are a semester away, but you've got to keep an eye on the potential candidates long before the ballots are handed out. If you don't keep your eyes peeled, you will blind.
Even our current vice president Dede Siebel didn't come out of that election with clean hands. Corruption was so bad that after the elections committee certified Sullivan's and Walden's victories (as well as Seibel's), the senate elections commissioner, Chad Perlov, resigned.
Senate elections always have been full of cam paign violations, but some coalitions — or should I say one coalition — always seem to have to shell out more money for fines after elections than others.
In the 1997 elections, newly elected student body president Scott Sullivan and vice president Mike Walden, of the largely Greek coalition Unite, garnered fines of more than $1,000 for overspending, unreported advising services and five other violations. Other Unite candidates also accumulated fines for violations such as perennial illegal distribution of campaign flyers at apartment complexes and fraudulent voting.
were mired out and put forth demands. But have these punishments worked? No. The same people break the rules year after year, and because only one in eight students vote, they win year after year. Not to mention the rumors of coercion in Greek houses to vote along coalition lines — grecks tend to have higher voter turnouts, probably because 60 percent of Unite, my mistake, Campus Cause, oops again, 60 percent of YOU belonged to a fraternity or a sorority. Only a little more than 20 percent of KU students are Greek.
much. Both coalitions, Delta Force and Campus Cause (Unite resurrected), were involved in distributing campaign fliers within view of the polling site on Daisy Hill. But once they were warned and given a deadline to remove the posters, only Delta Force complied. Both coalitions also had newly elected senators lose their seats for not attending mandatory candidate workshops.
The 1998 elections were a little cleaner, but not
And now these same election violators are trying to make it easier to break the rules. By removing the spending limits placed on the coalitions, the richer coalition can hand out more buttons, more fliers and more freebiees without having to pay a fine after they've bought the votes they needed to win.
Last year's election was filled with allegations and name-calling. The same old rules were broken by both sides, although YOU (Unite resurrected once again; same people, different name) still would have the most severe infractions. Fines were meted out and paid just like before.
They also want to make it easier to appeal the fines placed on corrupt candidates. Not only will they get a little slap on the wrist when they also break the rules, but with the appeals process, they may not even have to pay the fines at all. Claim ignorance and save yourself $50. Why not?
It may not seem like a big deal to you, John Q. Student, but it should. These people are going to be the career politicians on your ballots in 15 or 20 years. If we don't curb corruption here and now, politics always will be tainted by it. Elections are not inherently dirty, neither are the candidates. But as long as an atmosphere of evil is accepted and reinforced at the polls year after year, nothing will change.
Peacock is a Newark, Calif., junior in anthropology and political science.
University should unify on-campus alcohol policy
A after reading the Kansan and talking to people on campus, there seems to be some confusion about what the problem is with serving alcohol in Memorial Stadium's new skyboxes. The skyboxes are the most prominent example of the University's inconsistent policies toward alcohol.
Last year, the University began a two-tiered alcohol program: to investigate problems associated with drinking on campus, and then to institute policies that would solve these problems. The investigations are complete, and the policies have been
Partha
Mazudar
guest columnist
opinion at kansan.com
instituted, but the University has yet to articulate effectively what these problems are. It has identified problems, to be sure, but the problems spring from policies the University wants to implement, not the other way around. One usually tailors solutions to fit the problems, rather than claiming problems to fit the desired solutions.
On some occasions, the University has claimed that the safety of students was its primary concern. It applied for—and received—a grant
The University, in newspaper articles, also has claimed that safety was not the primary concern. Rather, the University's focus on alcohol particularly targets illegal drinking (Lawrence Journal World, June 19, 1998). Punishing and reforming underage drinkers, it seems, is what the
that provides money to purchase advertisements to promote safe drinking. The safest place for people to drink is at home (no driving, surrounded by friends who will take care of them, and no strangers who will take advantage of them). Yet the University sends out letters to all residents of student housing reminding them of a zero-tolerance drinking policy. Students caught with alcohol will be punished. The University is forcing students who drink to do so in the least safe places possible — at bars or large parties.
By accepting without qualification the belief that rich alumni cannot have a good time without alcohol, it can no longer insist that we have fun without alcohol. We think that the University lost whatever moral ascendancy it may have held when it allowed alcohol in the skyboxes.
The University also has begun programs to promote the idea that students can party and have fun without alcohol. The University is telling us that the kind of adults it wants us to be (rich alumni who donate lots of money) cannot watch a football game without alcohol. If it wished to have a consistent policy, the University should not have allowed alcohol in the skyboxes; it would have better made its case that alcohol was not essential to a good time. It should have insisted that, just as students must sign a lease saying they will not drink in their residence hall rooms, the skybox renters also must sign a lease saying they will not drink on campus.
University wants to do with its new policies. This is in opposition to all of the grant-funded advertisements. Because of a recent change in the Buckley Amendment, the University now can inform parents of any student who violates alcohol policies. The University has said it might be making those calls.
The people who have been most vocal against the skyboxes agree that the absurd amount of binge drinking is a major problem at the University and at all universities nationally. We, of course, deplore the actions that often accompany binge-drinking, such as date rape and drunk driving, and we agree that if binge drinking drastically was reduced, these crimes would be reduced.
As a Student Senate resolution said this summer, "It is not the alcohol we desire, it is the hypocrisy we deplore." We do not want alcohol served at the stadium or in Mrs. E's. We simply think that if the University wants to reduce binge-drinking, a sentiment we share, then it must craft a policy that will accomplish this.
Mazumdar is a Pittsburgh, Pa., graduate student in American studies. He is also the president of the Graduate Professional Association.
Column provided succinct views on religious ideas
Feedback
Your column (Jennifer Barlow, True Knowledge...) on October 13th was the best statement regarding religion I have ever heard a college student make. You succinctly gave your view without actually putting down any other.
I grew up in a very strict Christian household, and although I deeply respect and love my parents, I am not at the spiritual level they are. I too, could be classified as agnostic. I have a strong inclination to profess Christianity at some times, simply because it would make relationships with my entire family a lot less strained. Also, it's what I was raised to believe. Tell a little kid something over and over and whether it's true or not, they will begin to believe it. But I am not a Christian. I, like you, do not like the rejecting attitudes many Christians seem to adopt. I am dating a non-Christian girl, and because of her religious status, my parents, although well meaning, have shunned her. But even if all Christians behaved like the lovable,
Any religion will require a good deal of faith and trust that what you believe is right. Complete proof simply doesn't exist in my opinion.
Godly Grandma stereotype, I am still not convinced in the absolute truth of the Bible.
In any case, thank you very much for verbalizing so eloquently what are some very hard-to-convey feelings. I am sending your article to my parents as a representation of my own beliefs, but written in a way I could never so clearly communicate.
Luke Middleton Lawrence senior
1