Page 4-Saturday, January 28,1978-The Michigan Daily b td an atg Eighty-Eight Years of Editorial Freedom 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Vol. LXXXVIII, No. 98 News Phone: 764-0552 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Civil rghts for all Society adopts 'the finger' T HE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH is an easy tenet to defend when we can at least tolerate the speaker's views. But when that speaker is a group shose beliefs are as repugnant and wholly unacceptable as those of the American Nazi Party, even the staunchest civil libertarians are thrown into a quandary. Yesterday, the justices of the Illinois Supreme Court were faced with this dilemma, and they ruled that swastika-bearing Nazis have a right to march through Skokie, Ill., a predominantly Jewish suburb of Chicago. "The display of the swastika, as of- fensive to the principles of a free nation as the memories it recalls may be, is symbolic political speech inten- ded to convey to the public the beliefs of those who display it," the court said in an unsigned decision. We agree with the court's decision and its analysis of the situation. In 1919, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes explained that what the Constitution must protect is "not free thought for those, who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate." It is clear that Holmes' statement applies in this case, for even though we hate the views of the Nazi Party, its right to express them must be protec- ted. Those who oppose the march con- tend that because thousands of relatives of victims of the holocaust and many actual survivors are among Skokie's 40,500 Jewish residents, that they may be provoked into violence by the painful memories evoked by the sight of marching Nazis. But the principle of free speech can- not be compromised simply because of possible violent reactions. It is the premise upon which all other freedoms are based, and it must be protected at any cost. In many ways the situation in Skokie is analagous to Martin Luther King's civil rights march in Selma, Ala. in 1965. There, the vast majority of the population was opposed to the march, much as the majority of Skokie residents are opposed to the Nazi's march. In Selma, those who opposed the march argued that since the belief in black inferiority and segregation was so strongly felt in the hearts and minds of local whites, that the sight of < blacks marching would provoke a "violent response." In addition, many contended that the blacks simply didn't have the right to march. But the march was permitted, and the predic- ted violence did erupt, resulting in one death. While the two marches are vastly different, and while we do not intend to compare them on their relative merits, the arguments against them are similar. IMPLY STATED, the Nazis have the right to march in full uniform unless by so doing they deny others their rights. And while the march may well dredge up horrible memories, it does not directly impinge upon anyone's legal rights. It has also been argued that the Nazis are not planning the demon- stration because they desire free ex- pression, but rather are marching only to stir up trouble, and get publicity. But although this may well be true, it has no bearing on the Nazis' rights. The Constitution makes no stipulation for denying First Amendment rights because of speculations about an in- dividual's, or a group's, motives. It would be a dangerous precedent to set if the court were to dany someone the right to free speech because the justices suspected the person's motives. The Nazis have the right to march, but no one is required to pay any atten- tion to them, and this seems to us the, most appropriate course of action for Skokie residents. An organization as despicable and outrageous as the American Nazi Party does not deserve the satisfaction and respect of having anyone pay them heed. If indeed the Nazis' purpose in staging the march is to gain publicity, then the best policy would be not to honor their presence with any response whatsoever. tre tti -xo Tyr/. I ' "c ,..,,../ r 1 m.. f - w .'& &" '1 By HUGH A. MULLIGAN The Associated Press Hartford, Conn.-In one of those less than landmark decisions, but one that could point the way our society is headed, the Connecticut Superior Court'has ruled that giving someone the "digitus impudicus"-legal lingo for "the finger"-is not punishable as an obscenity. -The case involved a high school student, not necessarily a latin scholar, who wiped off the rear window of a school bus to deliver an upraised middle finger to a state trooper pulled up behind at an intersection. Smokey turned on his siren, pulled the bus over to the side of the road and made a collar, as they say down at headquarters, of the finger gesticulator who had been fingered by his classmates. The Court of Common Pleas convicted the youth of having made an obscene gesture. On appeal, the Superior Court overturned the decision unanimously, ruling that an obscene gesture had to be "erotic . . . and appeal to purient interest in sex," while the finger at most could only arouse anger, not "sexual desire." "Digitus impudicus" is Latin for lewd finger and reputed to have been the doomed gladiators' answer to Nero's thumbs down. The learned judges, however, noted that it was a disrespectful gesture of even more an- cient origin, citing the case of Diogenes, the fourth century B.C. cynic, who gave a digital uplift to the great orator Demosthenes. This put him almost two and a quarter milleniums ahead of Nelson D. Rockefeller, who similarly signaled his disapproval of platform oratory at the Republican convention in Kansas City a while back. - In England the upraised middle digit is known as the "Harvey Smith," after the great equestrian star of the same name who saluted the judges at a horse show with what ever af- ter he insisted was- a victory sign. A royal connotation also attaches itself to this im- perious if not imperial 'gesture' since Prince Philip, Prince. Charles and Princess Anne have all been thought to have greeted their subjects, especially photographers of the realm, with it on ceremonious occasions. Others associate the upraised middle finger with the game of tennis, a championship gesture favored by Jimmy Connors and Illie Nastase to signify their total unconcern for the pronouncements of the line judges. Often it is followed by rude noises from the galley, which in turn is treated to;further pan- tomime from the stars in the center court. At, Wimbledon such scenes are rarely followed. by cries of "good show, old chap." During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israeli paratroopers down on the Suez Canal front devised a double digital affront to their Egyp- tian enemies on the opposite bank. The ritual called for holding aloft the middle finger in vertical thrusts and then in horizontal jabs, followed by the instructions, in Hebrew: "that's for you, and that's for your .camel." The law is always a complex entity, and the Connecticut Superior Court decision fails to shed any light on whether the umpires erred in tossing Ted Williams out of a game one day up in Boston. More than a finger was in- volved. The Splendid Splinter had struck out with the bases loaded, an outrage thatwas greeted with an avalanche of boos and seat cushions from the Fenway Park bleacherites. Accord- ing to the evidence delivered by Red Smith, the world's most literate sports writer, "Williams responded with an ancient Roman gesture, reminiscent of a man with a par- ticularly pesky mosquito in the crook of his elbow, that included everyone from home plate to the right field foul flag." The umpires signaled him to the showers with wagging thumbs reminiscent of hysterical hitchhikers. In Sicily, where the Godfather was bap- tized, the body language so eloquently spoken by Williams is credited with keeping down unemployment among the island's gravediggers. Boston, the Hub of American culture, responded on that historic occasion with words unknown to Longfellow and Emerson until Mark Twain arrived fresh from the mining creeks. Or was it from Har- tford, where Twain later lived, not far from the courthouse? Anyhow, Twain would have had no trouble understanding what Ted Williams was trying to convey above the din. For all its fine Latin and deep scholarship into the Diogenes version of the silent rasp- berry, the Connecticut Superior court has yet to take a stand on what freedoms are at stake when a proponent, face to face with a deponent, attaches the tip of his thumb to the end of his own nose and begins playing the William Tell Overture on an imaginary flugel horn. Chief Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes, in a classic case, ruled that "the freedom of your fist ends where my nose begins." Perhaps it is time for the high court to consider guidelines for determining justice in cases where both nose and fist with inpointed thumb are property of the offending party. The moving finger writes but often says more when its message is conveyed in sign language. EDITORIAL STAFF ANN MARIE LIPINSKI JIM TOBIN Editors-in-chief GEORGE LOBSENZ.............. Managing Editor STU McCONNELL...... .. ...Managing Editor PATRICIA MONTEMURR.....Managing Editor KEN PARSIGIAN... .................Managing Editor BOB ROSENBAUM ...................Managing Editor LINDA WILLCOX................... ,.... Managing Editor MARGARET YAO... ....... ....Managing Editor SUSAN ADES JAY LEVIN Sunday Magazine Editors ELAINE FLETCHER TOM O'CONNELL Associate Magazine Editor. STAFF WRITERS: Susan Barry, Richard Berke, Brian Blan- chard, Michael Beckman, Lori Carruthers, Ken Chotiner, Eileen Daiey, Lisa Fisher, Denise Fox, Steve Gold, David. Goodman, Elisa Isaacson, Michael Jones, Lani Jordan, Janet Klein, Garth Kriewall, Gregg Krupa, Paula Lashinsky, Marty Levine, Dobilas Matunonis, Carolyn Morgan, DanCOberdorfer, Mark Parrent, Karen Paul, Stephen Pickover, Christopher. Potter, Martha Retallick, Keith Richburg, Diane Robinson, JulieRovner, Dennis Sabo, Annmnarie Schiavi, Paul Shapiro, It. J: Smith, Elizabeth! Slowik, Mike Taylor, Pauline Toole, Sue Warner, Jim Warren, Linda Willcox, Shelley Wolson, Tim Yagle, Mike Yellin, Barbara Zahs, Jim Zazakis Mark Anorews, Mike Gilford, RichardFoltman Weather Forecasters SPORTS STAFF KATHY HENNEGHAN..... .............Sports Editor TOM CAMERON ............. ..... Executive Sports Editor SCOTT LEWIS ........... ....Managing Sports Editor DON MacLACHLAN....... .....Associate Sports Editor JOHN NIEMEYER............... Contributing Sports Editor NIGHT EDITORS: Paul Campbell, Ernie Dunbar, Henry Engel- hardt, Jeff Frank, Gary Kicinski, Rick Maddock, Brian Mar- tin, Bob Miller, Brian Miller, Dave Renbarger, Cub Schwartz, Errol Shifman and Jamie Turner. Letters, to TheL A new respect for women township 20 To TheDaily: The decision handed down by the Michigan Supreme Court on Jan. 23 re the "Township 20" is extremely important from a Libertarian point of view in that it puts the burden of proof squarely where it belongs-on the government. The City Reg- istrar and the local court were quite willing to deny the 20 their Constitutional rights in order to cover the fact that the Gegis- trar had erred in registering these 20 to vote in a city election. This is not the first time that government has at- tempted to cover up by the use of such tactics-the Nixon years and the VA Nurses affair come to mind; and also one must not forget the words of (monroe County visiting)Judge, James Kelley, as quoted in Tuesday's Daily: I always won- dered about {asking the voters to tell), but that was the law, and if (the Supreme Court) wants to change it, I say fine." From the quote, it would seem that the judge could not care less whether or. not Constitutional rights were upheld. It is well for the 20 that the penalty for not* revealing how one voter was not being taken out and instantly shot ; ".- . .that was the law .. Thetreally unfortunate thing is that because of the laxity of the City Registrar's Office in not checking out in a proper manner the Corporation bound aries, the citizens in Ann Arbor may be forced to pay for another election if the court voids the Belcher/Wheeler elec tion. This is worthwhile remem bering when your tax bill or rent takes another jump cue to "city costs". Gs ..James R. Greenshields and was involved in personnel and policy issues, including Mr. Black's grade complaint, be- fore the Department. Mr. Black's letter contains a num- ber of errors which must be corrected. 1) Mr. Black's grade in prof. Samoff's course was based on his failure to meet the require- ments of the course. The Grade Complaint Committee of the Political Science Department and the LSA Administrative Board did not dispute the fact that Mr. Black had failed to meet the requirements of the course. 2) Mr. Black argues that Prof. Samoff "connived" with the Political Science Depart- ment to make the departmental grade complaint procedure a "whitewash." This is simply" untrue. Prof. Samoff was not involved in the selection of the' Grade Complaint Committee nor did he take part in their deliberations. He, like Mr. Black, Was at the beck and call: of the Committee. The Political Science Department grade complaint procedures are pur- posefully designed to keep fac- ulty members involved in a complaint at a distance. Mr. Black argues further that. the Grade Complaint Commit tee heard Prof. Samoff's case before they heard his com- plaint. Whatever the order may have been Prof. Samoff had nothing to do with it The, Committee set its own sched- ule. 3) Mr. Black makes a similar' argument about the LSA Ad- ministrative Board. Again, Prof. Samoff answered the call of the Board which followed its established procedure in set- ting its schedule. 4) Mr. Black states that the LSA Student Government con- demned both the Political Sci- 5) Mr Black contends that the Political Science Depart- ment sent Prof. Samoff to Africa 4ntil he (Mr. Black) graduated and the controversy surrounding his grade com- plaint subsided. In fact, Prof. Samoff's plans to go to Africa for an extended period of time following the 1972-73 academic year were announced prior to Mr. Black's filing of the grade complaint. 6) Mr. Black states that Prof. Samoff is arrogant, authoritar- ian and dogmatic. Mr. Black is certainly entitled to his opinion. Howeveriin the student evalua- tions collected in the years I was in the UGPSA students consistently rated Prof. Samoff one of tie best teachers in the Department. Finally, Mr. Black argues that students have nothing to gain or to lose from the out- come ofdisputes about which faculty members remain at the University and which do not. On the contrary, the question is of vital importance to students. The capabilities students de- velop toraise questions, think critically, and respond crea' tively toithe world before them depend in large part on the teachers who support, chal- lenge, nlid' share ideas with them. Students know better than others which faculty mem- bers are most able to do this. Consequently their input into tenure decisions is crucial to the maintenance of a good university.- Both the formal course evalu- ations administered by the Political SciencerDepartment and the informal records and letters of UGPSA show that, occasional disgruntled stu- dents nonwithstanding; Prof. Samoff i$ open, challenging, and supportiye of students and )aily.I clearly deserving of tenure. -Catherine Shaw (lfef in (sapolog y- To The Daily: In my capacity as a graduate of UM ('66 LSA; '76 Law), I wish to vigorously protest the treatment of women's sports at Michigan as reflected by the letter of Maureen O'Rourke that appeared in the Michigan Daily one Saturday, PJanuary 7, 1978. I am an avid supported of Michigan sports but feel that women should be treated equally in all respects regarding facilities, time, and officiating. I: sincerely hope Don Canham will issue a public apology to Michigan women with respect to this incident. It is indeed a shameful display of sexism and greed. -Pedro Galindo Nieto Crystal City, Texas mud bowl outrage To the Daily: I realize that this letter is very late, however, its printing now might further emphasize how repulsive (even at this late date) the; behavior of certain par-' ticipants wasduring the Frater nity-Sorority Mud Bowl Game was to many in attendance that day, The "cheap shot, chicken shit" slugging by . two or = three; provocateurs was really outrof place and ruined the spirit of a splendid new tradition on cam- pus. Many there would have liked to have; seen the culprits- whisked: away ,and used as varsity, blocking dummies and then returned to be publicly flogged and castrated., Truly,', their; pseudo-macho fisticuffs were: phoney and immature. rs Thank goodness the girls per- formed in a delightfully dignified, aggressive manner. -Donald W. Hramiec '62 T WAS NOT TOO long ago that news of a woman being raped or beaten would elicit no more than a nervous sigh or tsk-tsk from the average in- dividual. The abuse of women-and wives in particular-was considered just one of those unfortunate but, unavoidable quirks in our society. Things are changing. The emergence of women's rights organizations in recent years has altered the course of public thinking on problems faced by women in this society. Such a change has been seen dramatically in this state. in the way Michigan courts, and now legislators, have approached the abuse of females. Last fall, a Lansing court set a sub- stantial precedent when it found a women, Francine Hughes, temporarily insane and therefore innocent in the murder of her husband. The court ad- judicial decision by granting new provisions for battered wives and abused women in Michigan's Crime Victims Compensation Act. The state Senate this week approved a measure that would enable victims of wife-beating to collect up to $15,000 compensation for their suffering. Through the Crime Victims Act, per- sons injured in criminal assaults can apply to the state for reimbursement of lost wages and medical expenses. In another bill, the Senate approved the reimbursement of rape victims for the cost of medical exams required as evidence in criminal proceedings. Both bills now go to the state House for its decision. The recognition of wife-beating, rape and other abuses of women as "legitimate" crimes in our society,.