A.
4A
Tuesday, March 12, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
Out-of-state admissions should be more stringent
The State of Kansas finally has decided to raise the quality of education in its universities by voting for qualified admissions. Some are not happy with current proposals, namely Chancellor Robert Hemenway.
The Chancellor does not oppose qualified admissions but has trouble with present legislation. While eliminating open admissions, the legislation admits 10 percent of Kansas high school students who do not measure up to admissions standards. It does not do the same for out-of-state students. This stems from the legislature's correct assumption that those who have lived in the state for many years have paid taxes to it and have supported its educational institutions in many ways are owed some compensation.
Chancellor Hemenway wants a window for out-of-state students as well.
"It is not good policy to create a situation where no out-of-state applicants can get in if they do not measure up," Hemenway said. "I think it is very short-sighted. Every university needs some flexibility."
Hemenway notes that international students who are very bright yet have not mastered the English language would not be admitted, as they are likely to have
THE ISSUE:
Admissions policies
lower test scores. Others who have not had the Kansas Board of Regents' recommended curriculum also might not be admitted.
Now, out-of-state students who do not measure up are admitted.
The chancellor and his administration are wrong. As a public institution, this university draws its financing from this state. It is not financed by the United Nations or Colorado. Qualified admissions is about raising standards, not lowering them. In proposing a small window for everyone, the intent of the present legislation would be clouded.
"About a third of the student body comes from somewhere other than Kansas. Only 150 students were admitted last year that did not meet the current criteria," said David Shulenburger, vice chancellor for academic affairs. "I am not overwhelmingly concerned about the size of the window. Right now we only let about two percent of out-of-state applicants in if they can't meet the standard, and they are subjected to a committee for approval. I think it makes the whole place better if we let a few in."
TOM MOORE FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Regents owe students, faculty explanation for linear tuition
The linear tuition debate took another turn last week when the University Council announced it was sending a letter to the Board of Regents. Apparently, the Council did not take kindly to being excluded from the decision to implement the new tuition policy.
The council shouldn't be happy, either. The policy decision that was announced last spring during finals had been rumored but not really discussed among students. The consensus among many students and faculty was that the Regents pushed the decision through without our input and with little regard to any possible repercussions that may result.
The Student Senate now feels that, as the representatives of the students, it should have been more aware of the implications
THE ISSUE:
Linear tuition
that linear tuition would have on us. What is interesting is that there were no serious studies done on its effects or on what the student body's opinion was. Of course, this probably wouldn't have mattered to the Regents, but at least it would have been a diplomatic gesture.
Student Senate is sending a letter to the Regents explaining its objections to linear tuition. The reaction from Student Senate and the University Council should at least show the Board of Regents that students and faculty deserve a thorough explanation of why linear tuition was passed into effect without effective discussion on campus.
THOMAS PATTISON FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD.
Love is Love:
Gender shouldn't matter
Bu Todd Hiatt
Illustration by Shawn Trimble
Imagine for a moment that your spouse has been in a terrible accident. He/she has been rushed to the hospital and is in critical condition. His/her life is slowly slipping away. The family is there, crying and pacing and carrying on. But they don't approve of you, and it is their decision whether you can see your spouse. Although you are married, they refuse, and you watch your spouse die from the hallway. You are never able to hold his/her hand one last time. You are never able to say goodbye.
The situation may sound impossible, but it's a terrible reality if you and your spouse happen to be of the same gender. It doesn't matter that you have been together for years or that your wedding was sanctioned by your church. Under law, you cannot be married or enjoy any of the benefits of marriage if you are gay or lesbian.
The suffering caused by this discrimination bleeds into every part of the lives of homosexual couples. They do not enjoy the same tax benefits as heterosexual couples. And if one partner passes away, the remaining partner often is forced to fight the family for inheritance rights even if a will has been prepared.
As parents they are, of course, unfit. They cannot adopt, and they consistently lose their own children in custody battles. In one case, a murderer was declared more fit to raise a child than the child's lesbian mother.
For some reason our society has decided to place gay and lesbian love far below the love between a man and a woman. Somehow that love is not valid, and marriage is inconsiderable. If a gay, lesbian or bisexual couple makes the commitment to remain together until death do them part, they are in some way dirty, sinful and unfit to raise children.
ent. Genetics is the cause. No one sits down one day and decides to be gay. No one is traumatized into it by an unhappy childhood or influenced into it by a homosexual parent. Gay, lesbian or bisexual people don't choose their orientation any more than heterosexuals choose theirs. It simply is. What right then do we have to decide that another's genetics makes that person a second-class citizen? If there is some reason, what is it? Biblical authority? Our own skewed version of morality? Neither of those has a place in a country founded on the freedom of the individual. Neither is enough to compromise our individual liberty by imposing one's values on another. If you decide to rest your arguments on the Bible or your sense of morality, fine. But remember that God gave us the freedom of choice, and we have no right to take that away, short of protecting another from physical harm.
And it would appear that the University of Kansas and the city of Lawrence would agree. They have passed ordinances and regulations against discrimination based on sexual orientation, but their actions have not mirrored their words. The spouses of KU faculty are given many benefits: insurance coverage, reduced tuition, and the use of Robinson Center, to name a few. But partners of the same gender are entitled to nothing.
Watkins Memorial Health Center used to offer special deals to married students. Their spouses were eligible for insurance and could see a doctor for a reduced fee. But
basis of homosexual discrim imation, Watkins stopped offering any benefits whatsoever. Watkins didn't find a new insurance policy that would co ver all domes tic partnerships. For some reason, again unnamed, Watkins would rather offer nothing than extend the benefits to a same-sex couple.
Same-gender couples face enough obstacles as it is. Individually, each has to come to terms with being homosexual in a heterosexual world. Families of homosexuals often are not supportive. And communities don't offer much, either. As a couple, homosexuals cannot even hold hands in public without the conscious awareness of being looked down on. They face daily reminders of their difference, ranging from a mass media that either ignores or stereotypes them to an institutional discrimination that invalidates their love.
It is time we took steps to remedy that. We cannot allow our own intolerance to impinge the freedom of others or bar them from benefiting fully as a citizen of the United States. As a nation we claim to be the champion of individual liberty, but that is simply not reality. Maybe we can't change the United States, but we can change our corner of it. Support a
Our peer institutions have done far better than we have done. Both Colorado and Iowa have policies covering domestic partnerships. It is time we did, too. There is no room in this University for hypocrisy of this scale. If we are going to forbid discrimination on paper, we need to follow through with our actions.
domestic partnership policy at the Uni
versity. Invalidate hypocrisy and intolerance, not love.
University needs to fix recycling habits
As a student at the University of Kansas, I strongly encourage the University to take resolute measures to improve the recycling program presently on campus. Some students and faculty may feel that the system existing now is adequate. However, they may not be aware that the majority of recyclables the University will take are being dumped in landfills because there simply isn't enough accessibility of bins for recyclables such as papers. Some people also may not realize that only a small percentage of the total amount of waste paper on campus is being recycled.
This does not have to happen. By creating a comprehensive recycling program on campus, the University could reduce the amount of waste it generates by 50 percent. Unfortunately, the convenience of recycling paper — especially newspaper — is not made as easily available to students as aluminum cans. If the facilities to recycle these products are not there, the majority students are not reminded to recycle them or feel it is too difficult. Newspapers often end up strenuous about campus. There needs to be containers to recycle office papers and newspapers within many of the different buildings on campus.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
I recommend that the campus set recycled product purchases at a certain percentage and steadily increase this rate, as the University of Missouri has done successively. If you don't buy the recycled products, you are not recycling.
As prices on virgin paper products increase because of their limited supply, recycled products' cost decreases. By making paper recycling more accessible, the University and students alike would save money on shipping wastes to landfills. As room for sites of landfills is greatly limited, Lawrence also would be able to extend the life of its own landfill. The easier it is for the faculty, administration and students to recycle, the greater the profits for the University.
The University should be a leader of the community for developing positive habits and increasing awareness. Hopefully the University will see this as a chance to change for the better.
Michelle Kohns
Olathe freshman
All women are welcome to attend Women's Night
I want to thank Susanna Laib for her article on Feb. 15 entitled Special Night Offered for Women which highlighted Women's Night at the Hideaway, 106 North Park St., on Wednesday nights. However, to clarify some misconception, I want people to know that all women — whether lesbian, straight, bisexual or undecided — are invited and welcome to Women's Night.
I want to provided a space in which all women feel safe, comfortable and free to dance, talk and express themselves.
Sara Collas
Cleveland graduate student, disc jockey for Women's Night
KANSAN STAFF
ASHLEY MILLER
Editor
VIRGINIA MARGHEIM
Managing editor
ROBERT ALLEN
News editor
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
Editors
Campus...Joan Birk
Phillip Brownies
Editorial...Paul Todd
Features...Matt Hood
Tom Ribbley
Photo...Matt Flowerer
Graphics...Noah Miaser
Special coauthors Novelde Bommers
Illustration...Michaela Lehman
HEATHER NIERHAUS
Business manager
KONAN HAUSER
Retail sales manager
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUPP
Technology coordinator
Business Staff
Campus mgr ... Karen Gerch
Regional mgr ... Kelly Connelye
National mgr ... Mark Olsenk
Special Sections mgr ... Norm Blow
Production mgr ... Rachel Calhill
Marcell Veller
Marshall director
Public Relations dir. Angela Adanson
Creative director .. Ed Kowaldi
Classified mgr .. Stacey Weygarten
Internship/oop mgr .. T.J. Glark
HUBIE
YET UNDERWOUND TO OUR MAIDEN, THERE EXISTED AN UNDERGROUND RACE, WHO HATTED HER FACE, AND WINNED HER TO A BAD BACK PLACE (WITH HATE)
WHERE EVERYONE WAS BEAUT
TIFUL LIKE HER, AND LIFE
WAS BRAND / (TIM BROOKS)
By Greg Hardin