4
Wednesday, June 12, 1991 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Homelessness
Difficulties encountered by local homeless prompting relief efforts from city coalition
W when the Salvation Army Safe House, a homeless shelter, closed its doors earlier this year, the door was not
completely closed on the homeless problem in Lawrence.
And with community help and support, this door can remain open.
Because Headquarters Inc. is now the only emergency housing open to all people in Lawrence, a committee has been formed to study the needs of the homeless.
Informally called the Homeless Coalition, this committee counts churches, social-service workers, city officials and homeless advocates among its members. Though subsidized by a federal grant, the financing for the coordinator's position ends in August.
The homeless problem, however, does not end with the money.
Homelessness is not a disease. It is not contagious. Homelessness is a situation in which ordinary people become caught in extraordinary situations and need help to find a way out.
Homelessness is, however, a community responsibility. It requires community action.
The Homeless Coalition is attempting to define homeless problems in Lawrence and determine what services, possibly including a shelter, are needed.
but coalition members and other homeless advocates realize that without community volunteers and help, the doors to helping the homeless will swing shut.
For information on the Homeless Coalition, contact Jeannie Blankenship, 842-3703.
Liz Kennedy for the editorial board
Bush feeds racial flames with quota scares
Civil-rights bill
In threatening to veto the House-passed civil-rights bill, George Bush is using the word "quotas" as a scarce tactic in much the same way that "busing" was used by those opposing desegregation a few decades ago.
He is stirring up unnecessary fears and inflaming racial tensions, all for the sake of having a juicy campaign issue in 1992.
The Democrat-sponsored bill passed in the House last week did not gain the two-thirds majority it needed to be veto-proof. It is hoped that a compromise acceptable to Bush will have been hammered out by the time it reaches the Senate floor, but don't hold your breath.
Despite the heated debate surrounding it, the goals of the Democrats' bill are fairly modest. It would:
- hold employers to a strict standard of proof that their hiring and promotion practices are fair.
- overturn six 1989 Supreme Court decisions that have made it harder for women and minorities to prove employment discrimination.
- allow damage awards in cases of intentional discrimination against women, the disabled and religious minorities. Racial minorities already can collect damage awards
The bill does not treat all minorities equally; it gives women only partial equity by limiting damage awards from employers found guilty of sex discrimination.
Despite its drawbacks, however, the bill does not deserve to be branded as a quota
bill by Bush.
Although it specifically states that hiring by quotas would be illegal, Bush says the bill's provisions would force employers to use hidden quotas as a defense against lawsuits.
That is nonsense. The bill would simply take the law back to the way it was — and had been for almost two decades — when only a few thought it encouraged outas.
And besides prohibiting quotas, the bill would ban racial curves on tests used to make hiring and promotion decisions.
Sen. Jack Danforth, R-Mo., is working to bridge the gap between House Democrats and the President. He and eight other moderate Republican senators are working on bills that would reverse five of the Supreme Court decisions limiting civil-rights protections.
They are hoping that Bush won't fight a Republican bill and that some kind of advance for civil rights might be achieved this year. But they may be working in vain
Bush has an election coming up next year. The afterglow from the war is fading, and his great victory in the Persian Gulf is beginning to look less glorious every week. Voters in 1992 might be tempted to look at their pocketbooks and not at their patriotism-swelled hearts.
Bush doesn't want unemplaced voters to be angry at Republican economic policies that favor the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. So he's invented a bogeyman: quotas.
Imagine the TV ads. "Bush: He vetoed quotas" would make a great sound-bite.
Mike Brassfield for the editorial board
McGee Doeff and Danny Larson
CHOICE IS ABOLISHED AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD
NEET STUDENT
EDITORIAL ARTISTS
WHO RECEIVE
FEDERAL AID
DO YOU KNOW SOMEONE WHO IS NOT 'RIGHT'
AND REQUESTS FEDERAL FUNDING?
CONTACT THE CHUR. ER. CRH. GOURDON.
Men should reinforce women instead of overpowering them
his is a column for men.
It's not what you might think. This is not a macho column that deals with manly things; rather it is intended to make us men look at some things that we do without questioning why we do them.
I'm troubled by an attitude that seems to pervade our society. The attitude is that men should act as protectors of women. Somehow, the world is perceived as a cruel, evil force that will survive without men to guide them.
Although it's true that a woman in this society is much more likely than a man to be assaulted or made the victim of another violent crime, I am not sure whether it happens as protectors causes and perpetuates violent crime against women.
Such crimes are usually committed by men. And in cases of sexual assault or abuse, the attacker is most often a man who knows his victim. Often, he is a husband or boyfriend. A woman has been relying upon for protection has little chance of getting out of this type of situation.
The socialization begins at an early age. Little boys are taught that they should not hit little girls. Implied
Staff columnist
Michael
Christie
here is that, while it isn't okay for boys to hit boys, hitting another boy at least isn't as wrong as hitting a girl.
As a consequence, boys grow up with a basic knowledge of how to defend themselves.
Then, as we grow older, were taught that because young women have been removed from this wonderful, societal self-defense course, they need protection both by and from men.
So, for the few of you who have made it through my ramballs thus far, what am I saying? Am I saying that I won't offer protection to women at all?
I'm oversimplifying the process, but you can see at least one of the ways both men and women are taught roles they must to live.
Most definitely not. The fact is, it is a cruel, evil world out there, and
women are more likely to become victims of violent crime.
We should realize that the reason women need protection is that we all are socialized into this perception of men as protectors and women as防
Men have no right to make decisions for women. Assuming that men can make judgments that are somehow more sound than judgements made by women is offensive and exist.
What we men can do is realize that the world is unsafe and offer our support to women in the decisions they make. If we can help remove a woman from a violent situation, we should. But at no time do men's wills superdecease women's wills. We have no right to impose our will on women.
Because men are most often the attackers as well as the defenders, we shouldn't view ourselves as the good guys. Men, by virtue of the fact that they are not usually the problem. We need to start working on being a part of the solution.
Michael Christie is a Shawnee senior majoring in journalism.
Have an opinion? Want to share it? Write a letter to the editor. Better yet, write a guest column. They can be mailed or delivered to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. Include name, address and telephone number.
Gulf war veterans deserve praise but not overblown parades
This past weekend, welcome home parades for U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf War were conducted around the country. Some were simple, hometown, high school band parades. Others were like Sunday's "Canyon of Heroes" parade through New York City, which followed through Manhattan reserved for ticket-tape parades for various heroes.
Those honored in past parades include Charles Lindbergh (first man to fly non-stop from New York to Paris), astronaut John Glenn (first U.S. citizen to orbit the earth), General Douglas MacArthur (when he returned home from Korea), three New York City baseball teams that have won the World Series and veterans of both world wars.
This year, an estimated 10,000 tons of paper was thrown down from New York skyscrapers on the troops and other groups who paraded through
Patrick
Brungardt
Staff columnist
Manhattan. Although I'm not sure this kind of glory and recognition was fully deserved, at least it does fit with the tradition of New York City.
What really disturbs me, though, was last Saturday's "National Victory Celebration" in Washington, D.C. This wasn't just a parade. There were no floats or high school bands. Instead, there was a display of more than 80 aircraft of various types, all from the United States and thousands of troops from the various branches of the armed forces.
Not only was this parade shown on
television, it was advertised before-hand with suggestions of donations to pay for it (advertisements neatly containing a U.S. flag to boot). One side complaint is that the advertisements said the parade would be paid for by donations, but I later learned that the taxpayers are going to have to pay for the parade. But for this extravaganza, which was expected to cost $12 billion.
The advertisements proclaimed that this was the biggest national celebration of its type in 45 years. What they neglected to say is that it is also the only one of its kind in 45 years. And why is that? After all, U.S. soldiers have fought in several armed conflicts since World War II
The soldiers who fought in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama and other places since 1945 did not get national welcome-home celebrations.
The only Korean War officer who
rode down the "Canyon of Heroes"
was macArthur. As for veterans of
Vietnam, I've seen or heard many
unpleasant things about their return:
• Coming home to find protesters at
the airport calling them baby-killers
and being told, "Here, soldier,
change into civilian clothes before
you get off the airplane; there are
some angry protestors outside."
- One unit of Marines had just returned from Vietnam and was told it would march in a parade. After being jeered and spit on, they said no. So they were placed in the stands while a group of recruits was taken from a nearby training base and to march in their place in the parade.
The invasion of Grenada wasn't even announced until after the operation was nearly complete, and the assault was averted. The "Just Cause" of bringing Manuel Noriega to trial in Miami on drug-trafficking charges.
Because of those reasons, there wasn't any sort of national festival to honor the return of our soldiers, Marines, sailors and air personnel from those conflicts, they yet bled and died just as their predecessors did in the "popular" and "public" wars.
And now we have this huge parade to honor the veterans of the Persian Gulf War — supposedly. I think that if this is solely to honor those veterans of the gulf war, then it is simply too much for what was accomplished. Yes, these veterans deserve to be honored, but if our history of past wars and parades is indicative of what should be done, then this celebration is simply too much for the results of that war.
I also think this celebration is a national guilt trip for the way the soldiers who found them return home. In the advertisements for the Washington celebration, various service personnel are shown donning and touching up their best uniforms with their medals.
One of these shots is a screenwide view of a Southeast Asia Service Medal, commonly known as the Vietnam Service Medal. There aren't any shots of medals denoting service other conflicts since World War II.
If this is supposed to honor the Vietnam veterans, then say so. If it's strictly to honor those who fought, served and died in the Persian Gulf, then make the celebrations equal with the war — short.
We must honor all of our veterans, but do we need 12,000 tons of confliction more than 80 warplanes and a $12 billion cost? I think not. Let's keep it all in perspective and not get overshelled by our patriotism.
Patrick Brungardt is a Leavenworth senior master in political science.
KANSAN STAFF
MIKE BRASSFIELD
Editor
JENNIFER SCHULTZ Managing editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser
Editors
Editors
Campus/Sports...Chris Oster
Associate Campus...Amy Zamiierowiak
Photo Editor...Timothy Miller
Layout/Graphics...Katie Stader
Copy Chief...Chris Siron
CHRISTINE MUSSER Business manager
JENNIFER CLAXTON Director of Client Services
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
Dir of Special Projects...Ila Keeter
Production Manager...Leigh Taylor
Classified Manager...Jenny Buerkert
Regional Zone Manager...Kim Wallace
Retail Zone Managers...Colin Costello
Business Staff
Letters should be typed, 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 Knaus must include class and homework, or faculty or staff position.
Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be pho-
The Kansaan reserves the right to reject or edit edits, guest columns and cartoons. They can be maligned or brought to the Kansaan newroom, 111 Sawyer Flint Hall.
Loco Locals
LISTEN! I GAVE $20
LAST YEAR! I LIKE
WHAT GREATPEACE
DOES, BUT
I'M NOT MADE
OF MONEY!
HOWEVER, THINK OF WHAT YOUR
CONTROLLING GOES TO HARDS.
AND THINK OF THE ANIMALS!
OR-
WOULD YOU PREFER TO
KNOW HOW THEY FEEL WHEN
THEY ARE BEATEN
AAPARGH!
by Tom Michaud
ENvironmentAL INTEREST GROUPS HAVE GREAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM