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