4 Monday, December 2, 1996 OPINION UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN VIEWPOINT Prostitution plan ignores reason industry thrives In an effort to reduce prostitution in the Kansas City metropolitan area, Northland City Councilwoman Teresa Loar proposed a city ordinance that would publicize the names of people convicted of participating in prostitution, soliciting prostitutes or engaging in indecent exposure. The plan would allow the city to broadcast the names of people involved in prostitution-related crimes on its local-access channel, Channel 25. The concept is based on the idea that if society shames people involved in prostitution, they will leave the trade or not purchase prostitution services. Humiliation is something society already does quite well. What it doesn't do well is examining the root causes of prostitution or other societal ills and attempt to solve those core problems. This plan completely ignores the real reason prostitution exists in the United States, as well as in the Kansas City metropolitan area. People do not become prostitutes because they believe they are entering a noble profession. They become prostitutes to make money. Simple economics tells a person with a family to feed that a minimum wage job at a burger stand isn't going to cut it. In desperation, without the skills, education or essential items, such as interview suits or transportation to attain higher-paying jobs, these people choose to do the only thing they know how to do: prostitute themselves. A real economic solution would reduce the number of prostitutes on the street. People should be held legally accountable for their actions. But this plan will do little to reduce prostitution. NICOLE KENNEDY FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD Anti-smoking program targets those short of breath, brains "Stay positive." "Take a deep breath." "Use eating as a substitute." These are just a few tips from the caring American Cancer Society on how to quit your evil addict. Society on how to quit your evil addiction to the stuff that kills — cigarettes. According to the Food and Drug Administration, if you don't start smoking before the age of 18, you're safe. If you do, then you're written off as one of those stinky fools headed for oblivion. If you'd like to quit, then be prepared to be treated as the mental equivalent of a slow fourth-grader. One of the reasons to stop smoking mentioned in the American Cancer Society's anti-smoking program, "The Great American Smokeout Pledge," concludes with the moronic slogan, "And because it's just not cool." In its latest effort to eradicate youthful experimentation with cigarettes, the cancer society wants to make high school students take the aforementioned pledge. Yet the same society that wants teens to believe it isn't cool to smoke makes movies in which "cool" actors light up. So does anyone really think a superficial slogan will work? "I think these programs are generally 20 to 30 percent effective," said Julie Francis, a health educator at Watkins. "They can't help everyone, but they do help some people." These programs seem silly because they are silly. Society must first stop sending teens mixed messages about smoking. Smoking can kill — true. But boredom and mediocrity are just as lethal. "The Great American Smoke-out" sounds like a barbecue. TOM MOORE 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 Campus Succanne Lodge Jason Strait Amy McVeay Editorial John Collar Nicole Kennedy Features Alison Wren Bill Petulaul Associate sports Carthy Foster Online editor David L. Teaska Photo Rich Devinell Graphics Nosh Musser Articles Andy Patterson Special sections Amy McVeay Wine Debbie Staine 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 mgr ... Mark Olmak Regional mgr ... Dennis Haupt Assistant Retail mgr ... Dana Contento National mgr ... Krista Nye Marketing director ... Melinda McIntosh Production mgr ... Denko Capo Lisa Quobbeman Marketing director .. Eric Johnson Creative director .. Deanmond Lavelle Sales director .. James Holmes Mass Impact mgr .. Dena Placioste Internet mgr .. Steve Sangor LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Jeff MacNellv/ CHICAGO TRIBUNE Columnist belittles students' opinions I am writing this letter in response to Andy Obermueller's brilliantly written column in the Nov. 19 edition of the Kansan. First of all, the column starts out with Obermueller wondering where these people get the "free time to write about" such "paltry" ideas. He spends three paragraphs musing about the inherent stupidity of this. Then, he closes by telling the propagandists to "get off campus and quit vandalizing my walking space." His walking space. The space that he walks on. This is what has gotten Obermueller so fired up that he has taken the time to write an entire column. I think you understand my point. If Obermueller objects to people taking such a condescending attitude toward him, why doesn't he do the exact same thing in his column? Furthermore, Obermueller states that the people writing on the sidewalk shouldn't "assume they hold such moral high ground that they can tell that it is right or wrong to eat meat." My point is this: I don't feel it is appropriate for a person such as Obermueller to lambaste and belittle the views and beliefs of other people. One more thing. Memo to Obermueller: Get a grip, get a life and change your major if this is the best you can do. It is an abuse of his position as a writer and quite frankly, irresponsible of the editorial staff that gave the approval to run the column. You guys should know better, but I suppose sometimes when you have nothing else to run, you go with whatever you have. Stop expressing your opinion about things that you feel are wrong when they ARE NOT! People do not need to be subjected to other people's strong opinions in order to sway them from doing what they want (free agency). I am a senior in the School of Business and have been at the University of Kansas now for three years. I have seen and heard many liberal things while at KU, but today I think that I just had enough. Brian EnglandLenexa senior Michael Schmitt wrote about turkey's being victimized in today's Kansan. I think that he has some right to express his feelings, but enough is enough about vegetarianism. Enough is enough from vegetarians Gave animals to us for our consumption, and he said that "it is good." We have our free agency to choose whether we want to eat meat, but leave it at that. Let us decide what we think is wrong, but MEATIS NOT bad to eat! Granted, animal cruelty may be pushing it, but leave that judgment up to God. Stop pushing opinions down our throats. Thank You. Matt Dutcher Lawrence senior Sidewalk chalk war is beyond control I am writing in regard to the recent war that has been taking place on the sidewalks around Wescoe Hall. The war, for lack of a better title, opposes KU's two powerhouses: the mammal killers and the passive vegetarians. Slogans like "Don't be cruel to animals — tell them how good they taste" and a remake of Nike's slogan, "Just eat-em," make me wonder what kind of insipid people are walking around campus. These sidewalk chalk charades need to stop, especially when the topics are as controversial as animal rights. Every individual is different. Whether I choose to play with animals or eat them is my decision. I will surely not alter my views because I read it on a sidewalk. Besides the message they send, these chalk remarks are ruining our campus. It's like walking in downtown New York and looking at all of the graffiti. The topic of meat vs. no meat is an ongoing battle and one that people must agree to disagree on. All individuals have a right to believe in whatever they choose. The rest of us must respect that. There is no way that a sidewalk statement, written by people who aren't worth the cost of the chalk they use, is going to change my opinion. If people truly believe in this cause, maybe they should find alternative methods to express their ideas. In the future, I wish our "starving" sidewalk artists would stick to a pencil and paper and may the best win. Also, on a more personal note, animals are key ingredients in any family and therefore should be given proper respect. Animal rights issue is worth discussing Devin Amato Overland Park sophomore While I certainly respect Andy Obermueller's right to hold and express his own opinions, I feel that a few things should be said in regard to his recent column. First of all, I'm sure I'm not alone in finding several of Obermueller's comments off the mark. Obviously, the people who were writing the messages did not feel that their ideas were "patry." Apparently, Obermueler feels that the issue of animal consumption is hardly worth discussing, for he goes on to say, "consider how boring their lives must be to have time to ponder whether what people eat is morally wrong." Again, I'm probably not alone in saying that trying to figure out wrong from right is a considerably (or at least it should be) important endeavor. Comments like these make me wonder just what people are doing in their spare time. "I didn't have a problem with the anti-divorce messages last year," Obermueller writes in his next paragraph. "Something could have happened in these people's lives ... which could cause them to turn into activists." So does this mean that in order for someone to be dedicated to a particular cause something bad first must happen to them—that people need something negative to cause activity? I suspect not. Surely I can be opposed to, say, murder without having lost a family member or friend in such a way. Furthermore, I don't see how messages written in chalk can merit some sort of "militant vegetarianism." I will agree that much of the chalk-writing on campus rarely rises above some sort of childish one-upmanship, though I won't condemn anyone for participating. And if we are to allow comments like "if they're against meat, then they shouldn't eat it," then how about "if you you're against murder, then you shouldn't do it" or "if you're against stealing, then don't take what is not yours?" Or better still, "if you don't like what is written on the sidewalk, then don't read it." Brian Cleveland St. Louis senior Sidewalk scribblers committed to issue I am writing in response to Andy Obermuereller's column about the sidewalk messages about vegetarianism. I hardly consider an issue that deals with morality, the environment and health as simply a paltry idea. It's unfortunate that the only way some people become aware of an issue is through messages scribbled on the sidewalk. However, it caused several discussions on the subject. I only wish most students could have as much passion for something like the "propagandists." I don't feel that Obermueller or anyone has the right to judge someone's convictions as a waste of time. I feel sorry for anyone who gets upset about sidewalk scribbles. I read messages all the time that cause me to wonder about the author's free time. These places are usually the bathroom and in the Kansan. Stephanie Archuleta Shawnee senior Kansan staff often deserves more credit than it receives An anonymous letter to the editor once asked me, rather viciously and sarcastically, how I could be proud of the Kansan and its staff. First I'd like to thank those who Gripes and praise regarding the Kansan show up here frequently. After a semester of willingness to print these items, it's time I had the opportunity to air my feelings about our newspaper. for sport or without good reason. took time to praise the Kansan because many people only contact us when they are angry enough. When we do something right, we like to know so that we can continue to do what makes readers happy. Contrary to popular belief, we don't enjoy offending and angering people Sometimes staff members wonder why we run so much of the negative criticism. My best answer is that if we expect to have rights to freedom of speech, our readers should enjoy those same rights. The idea that freedom of the press belongs only to those who have one does not mean that newspapers are unaccountable for what they print. We are an outlet in which students and faculty can and should be heard. And that is true even when criticism is directed at the newspaper. Much of that criticism revolves around stories that deal with international issues or crime items. The brunt of comments I receive about international issues is that we are taking one side of the issue and ignoring the others. Sometimes people think that if we don't tell the story only from their side, we are somehow discriminating against them. Not true. We try to be fair, and that means including as many viewpoints as we can and letting the readers decide for themselves. Crime items generate accusations that we aren't telling the whole story, that the arresting officer was not interviewed and that victims' names were included or left out. Often the information we get comes directly from police records because involved parties won't discuss the details. The police departments will comment to the press only through spokesmen, who are not arresting officers. What's in the police record — the public record — is fair game for us to write about. My advice is to stay out of police records if you don't want to be included in newspapers' crime items. Our policy is to leave out victims' names, especially in sexual assault cases, unless those victims express an interest in talking about what happened to them. Someone suggested once that we call ourselves an exercise in journalism. That would not be accurate. To suggest that we aren't professionals is untrue. We are students and professionals. We do what professional papers do every day. The difference is that we do it on a college campus. And we don't get paid as well. But we decide our own content, we design and edit our own pages, we take our own photos and we get feedback after the paper has been printed — just like a professional newspaper. How can I be proud of the Kansan and its staff? It's easy. I work with people who are dedicated to what they do. Many of us spend at least 40 hours a week here, in addition to carrying full-time class schedules. At least 14,000 people see our work. When students in other disciplines make mistakes or write something that others dislike, it usually happens before a much smaller group of people and perhaps only in front of a professor. How can I be proud of a newspaper and a staff that tackles tough topics such as crime and international issues, knowing that they could be criticized for their work by a large group of people? How can I be proud of a staff that works almost every day for an entire semester that already is packed with classes, while also trying to maintain relationships with friends and family and private lives all their own? How can I be proud of them? It couldn't be easier. I couldn't be prouder. Amanda Traughton is an Overland Park senior in Journalism.