100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

May 17, 1977 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1977-05-17

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Let's have
By JOHN TIIAYER If blacks can protest
ficials usage of the wor
In a fairly enlightened age, ger," and Indians can s
when people are concerned with cause a city emblem1
discrimination on the basis of them in a way they clai
race or sex, something also petuates prejudice against
needs to be said about existing and Jews have recourse
prejudices against new relig- crimination based on r#
ions. then I believe those fre
The Michigan Daily
Edited and managed by Students at the
University of Michigan
Tuesday, May 17, 1977
News Phone: 764-0552

the of-
d "nig-
ue be-
depicts
m per-
t them,
to dis-
eligion,
tedoms

Our reps' non-support
of a nafional bottle bill
You may recall a ballot issue last November, passed
by a two-to-one margin by voters, banning disposable
bottles within this state's borders.
Now, national bottle bill legislation has been intro-
daced into both houses of Congress. Incredibly enough,
only three of Michigan's 21 federal legislators strongly
favor the bill. They call themselves representatives?
Granted, on some issues these legislators cannot
truly know their constituents opinion. But opinion on
bottle bill legislation is clear. Michigan favors return-
ables,
The bill predictably faces stiff opposition. In order
to -survive the committee process, the bill would need
upwards of 70 co-sponsors.
But from a state which overwhelmingly agrees with
such legislation, only three co-sponsors have been found.
We applaud Carl Pursell (R-Ann Arbor), John Conyers
(D-Detroit), and Harold Sawyer (D-Grand Rapids), for
taking such a step.
The remaining 18 "representatives" have, to date,
paid little lip service to the bill, if not remained
totally uncommitted.' These persons, clearly, are not
representing their constituencies.
Michigan, Oregon and Vermont are. the only three
states in the union with bottle bill legislation. Massachu-
setts defeated similar legislation last November. In all
cases, the legislation was introduced as a possible meas-
ure to help ward off increasing pollution problems.
This is not an issue adaptable to Congressional "fence-
sitting" attitudes.
It is time for Michigan's representatives to wake
up and hear the voters' call. After all, we put them in
office to represent Michigan interests, didn't we?
TODAY'S STAFF:
NEWS: Lori Carruthers, Eileen Daley, Stu McConnell,
Ken Parsigian
EDITORIAL: Linda Willcox
ARTS: David Keeps
SPORTS: Scott Lewis
PHOTO: Christina Schneider

eedom
must also be extended to the
minority of new religions.
If the media were to speak
of homosexuals as "fags," of
blacks as "niggers," or Jews
as "kikes" in the same man-
ner it refers to members of the
Unification Church as "moon-
ies," some eyebrows would be
raised.
I was amazed Earl Butz was
actually forced to resign due to
public outcry upon hearing his
derogatory remarks about
blacks -- remarks he later pub-
licly withdrew. Yet, hundreds of
times I have, seen the media
use "cult" in reference to the
new minority religions.
It also surprises me no media
has investigated the Children
of God, Mare Krishna, Maharaji-
Ji or any of the new religions
to the same degree the Unifi-
cation Church has been investi-
gated. The public would be very
interested tu knusv bulb sides.
repnrters occasiunally go tu
jail in order to maintain sources
and fairly and accurately report
situations which exist. Why is
there no attention given to the
possible value and beauty of
these religions?
Perhaps it is because the me-
dia still needs to examine it-
self, as it may have fallen prey
to the greatest problem of re-
sponsible journalism: reporting
rumors as fact.
I studied occidental and ori-
ental philosophies in college,
finally concluding our society
has reached an impasse in
terms of its values. Who is to
say these new religions are not
providing a breakthrough des-
perately needed in our value sys-
tem?
A recent article in a Philadel-
phia newspaper advised youth
not to search or investigate new
or foreign ideas. The same arti-
cle also advised against looking
beyond the established norms

for a philosophy.
Obviously, the author does not
realize the value and reward of
searching. He is the type of,
person who never promotes in-
tellectual progress.
I believe in peoples' ability
to determine right from wrong
for themselves. I believe in
Man's ability to reason. And,
I do not think the new relig-
ions merit the fear attached
to them.
Rather, I think fearful peo-
ple, perhaps narrow - minded,
project that image onto any-
thing new, without discovering
what the new ideas really ex-
press.
Because a small number of
people, flunkout lawyers and
judges do not agree with the
inherent right to religious free-
dom, they have done what we

might expect: figured a way to
make money from it all. By
calling on parents of those de-
votees, organizing clandestine
meetings for the purpose of
taking large sums of money
to "help" the devotee away
from his religious persuasion,
such persons profit.
The parents are tle real vic-
tims in this, as they not only
show themselves to be real
dupes of these de-programmers,
but get soaked financially as
well.
People who freely choose a
religion should have the right to
be protected in America, even
if protection is needed against
their parents.
But until that happens, many
people wanting to live a relig-
ious life find it is not really
acceptable in America.

for me, too!

i

II

Letters to The Daily
S-i - laetrile

Contact your reps
Sen. Donald Riegle (Dem.), 1205 Dirksen Bldg., Washing-
ton, D.C. 20510
Sen. Robert Griffin (Rep.), 353 Russell Bldg., Capitol h11,
Washington, D.C. 20515.
Rep. Carl Pursell (Rep.), 1709 Longworth House Office Bldg.,
Washington, D.C. 20515.
Sen. Gilbert Bursley (Rep.), Senate, State Capitol Bldg.,
Lansing, MI 48933.
Rep. Perry Bullard (Dem.), House of Representatives, State
Capitol Bldg., Lansing, MI 48933.

To The Daily:.
The repressive S-4 bill is again being introduced
in Congress - this time under a "liberal" dis-
guise. Unfortunately, the Daily has fallen for the
deception, and prematurely endorsed the bill,
without really understanding the trickery in-
volved.
We don't need a "Criminal Code Reform Act";
its purpose is not to streamline "justice", but
rather to strengthen the hand of the police and
other law enforcement agencies, to curtail the
rights of defendants, and to plug the loopholes
which interfere with government prosecutions.
To achieve those regressive objectives, the
sponsors have included a few-empting reforms
dealing with marijuana, repeal of the Smith and
Logan acts, and slight reduction in-wiretap au-
thority. I agree with these reforms, but they can
be adopted as separate bills instead.
The Daily admits a few conservative amend-
ments could make the new bill almost as bad
as the old S-1. Why take the risk? If the new bill
passes, it will only ease and quicken the right-
wing campaign against Blacks and other minori-
ties, against women and gays, against political
activists and the whole working class.
Evidence of this is clear enough from the past
year's performance of the Supreme Court (capi-
tal punishment, search and seizure, etc.), from
grand jury abuses against Puerto Rican indepen-
dentistas, and dragnets against undocumented
aliens.
I hope the Daily changes its postion on S-i.
Meanwhile its opponents must again start to build
the massive coalitions that successfully defeated
the old S- last year.
- Phil Carroll

To The Daily:
Your editorial "Laetrile: Do or Die" neces-
sitates comment. Your conclusion "caveat em-
ptor" exposes lack of insight into "Cancer Psy-
chology" The cancer victim is often desperate
and unable to make objective decisions. Families
are riddled with guilt and more than willing to
donate their life savings toward what may be
perceived as hope. To legalize laetrile (or any
worthless drug) is to preclude the expertise of
organized medicine (which has already rather
thoroughly investigated this agent), and allows
political interest groups and unscrupulous per-
sons or agencies to profit at dreadful expense.
Have-you forgotten the manner in which Mich-
igan agencies handled the PBB issue? Have you
investigated health tragedies in other countries
subsequent to poor government controls (e.g. en-
terovioform q.v.)? Do you really understand the
laetrile issue, who supports it, and who stands
to profit from its proliferation? Such insight seems
essential prior to making suggestions in a public
forum, and would undoubtedly result in opposite
conclusions as expressed by the FDA, the Ameri-
can Cancer Society, AMA, and reputable phy-
sicians queried in nationwide hearings.
M. S. Cohen, M.D.,
Eli Gleibermann, M.D.,
Section of OsCology
Department of Medicina
University of Michigan
Medical Center

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan