0 OPINION Page 4 Thursday, February 16, 1984 The Michigan Daily 0 Don't just roll over and play By Mike Buhler That's onesmall step for man; one giant leap for mankind. - Neil A. Armstrong July 20, 1969 These memorable words were ut- tered from the surface of the moon at the close of one of. our most radical decades. The '60s were a time of social upheaval, of question, 'concern, action, and change. Through amendments to the Constitution, and by Acts of Congress, a commitment was made to total equality under the law. And pressuring - and prodding were visionaries like Dr. Martin Luther King, President Robert Kennedy, Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, and Eldridge Cleaver. Each of these men had a vision of his own, and a group of followers committed to a special change in the :society at the time. Most of America seemed also to support these men, because their action precipitated the .changes in the law and attitudes which followed in their wake: The ban of Poll Taxes, Civil Rights Act of 1964, with- drawl of troops from Vietnam, lowering :of the Voting Age, and even the Credit Acts and pardoning of the Draft Dodgers in the '70s and relaxed at- titudes toward drugs and brassieres. The University was a very big part of some'of these changes. Protests and demonstrations here changed local policy as well. One of the biggest rights students of the Vietnam era won for us all is the establishment of, privacy. Then there was a, recognition that students were separate from their parents, and entitled to their own decisions, achievements and mistakes. The lowering of the voting age - effec- tively declaring 18-year-olds to be legal adults - emphasized and strengthened the policy. Suddenly our adulthood is !coming under fire, as those of rank in the University ponder the enactment of a non-academic code of conduct. The im- plementation of such a device has merit when applied to arsonists and rapists. The University could quickly remove them from campus, but so can the police. High crimes are already under the governance of the city and state law, and the code would only duplicate these statutes.Thus, the code would only be useful to the University when ap- plied to misdemeanor offences. Something as innocuous as a demon- stration could suddenly become loitering, and cause for censure. FROM DORMS to the Diag, hundreds heightened air of decorum; they should avoid molesting others and their property. But the code seeks to go beyond disciplining students while they are in school and ventures into the off campus sanctuaries of student organizations, including the Greek system, Co-Ops, and privately owned and organized groups with student members. Doesn't that put everyone under the watchful eye of the regents? It comes down to in loco parentis ver- sus self-determination. So much work was done by our predecessors to win for us the rights students now enjoy. They made waves a few years ago, and the tide is turning and could rush back. Our older brothers and sisters brought students to the Ann Arbor City Council, and fines of $5 for pot and alcohol violations, liberties that allow for protective experimentation and exhoneration from a parental eye. Enactment of the code, although it does have merit in concept,, could be devastating in application. If it is to be used only in certain, extraordinary cases, the language should read that way, and not seek to literally get us 'where we live. October 15, 1969, there was a national protest for a moratorium on the war in Vietnam. Classes at the University shut lead down, and 20,000 students capped the day of demonstration with a nighttime rally at the Stadium. A demonstration can be peaceful, and what it does' is demonstrate that a large group shares a certain opinion about something. If you feel that the code is not something you or your siblings should have to live with, why just mull over it or leave it up to a concerned few to approach the regents? What we need is a good demon- stration. Currently, we are allowed to gather on the Diag between-12 and 1, hook up loudspeakers, and hold a protest. Why doesn't MSA, in conjun- ction with RIHA, IFC, ICC, Panhel, and the college governments organize a demonstration, book Tom Hayden and anyone else they choose, and stage a rally on the Diag? Can't we all afford to miss a class one of these sunny days, gather in mass, and show that we care, with numbers, and not just wor- ds? Let's take another step in the direc- tion our predecessors did, and plant ourselves in the Diag - for just ohe hour - and show the administration that the code, as it now stands, is something we could live without. Buhler is a regular contributor to the Opinion Page. Photo courtesy of Bentley Historical Library A good demonstration of concern, like this one in '69, may be the best thing for showing the regents that students are mad as hell about the proposed code of non-academic conduct - and that they aren't going to take it any more.. of possible infractions of such a code can occur - more than the University could handle with any evenhandedness. The code would then become a device of selective enforcement - a very subjec- tive tool - and one that can potentially be used against administratively un- desirable upstart students. The University, with the code, wants jurisdiction over its students. When they are in classrooms and dorms, students should behave with a certain ,4 ; , ,-2 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Laban Vol. XCIV-No. 114 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 DAILY' Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Repealing discrimination UNIVERSITY President Harold Shapiro is taking belated steps toward a policy that would prohibit the University from discriminating on the basis of an individual's sexual' preference. But as important as these steps are, they are not enough. Since 1982, members of the gay and lesbian community have been calling for an official University anti- discrimination policy. It is only now, however, that, Shapiro is getting around to drawing up a statement from the administration. All of this dragging of feet comes largely as a result of the homosexual community's complacency. Gays and lesbians make up a silent minority on this campus whose views need to be heard more loudly than they now are. The administration has gotten away unchallenged by the very legitimate concerns of this group - specifically on the issue of discrimination. Recent attempts on the part of the Michigan Student Assembly to inform the gay community that they are being represented and that their views are important are, apart from being a commendable effort on the part of MSA, indicative of the gay com- am!!maxs ell- munity's reticence and lack of contact with student government. More is needed than just a policy statement from the administration. An amendment to the University's, bylaws should be approved guaran- teeing against discrimination on the grounds of sexual preference - the University already guarantees against discrimination on the grounds of age, sex, and religion. The only conceivable reason Shapiro would be hesitant to press the regents for such an amendment, is that he fears such a policy would interfere with military recruitment which openly discriminates on the basis of sexual preference. Those worries, however, should not stand in the way of rights that need to be unconditionally granted to homosexuals by the Univer- sity. It is the responsiblity of President Shapiro and the regents to establish protection against discrimination toward this significant segment of the community. It is also the responsibility of campus gays and lesbians, and all those concerned, to let it be known that they will stand for nothing less. LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Conduct code deserves more criticism f i ,,-' ' H' / . ,J ,,,\ ; '. 1 ,: J \ , \ i "1 , 4 a itk 't. ' ..ir. i . ' '1 1 { fit., To the Daily: I am becoming increasingly aware of a difference of opinion between the Daily and myself, as well as the other Michigan Student Assembly represen- tatives, concerning the proposed code of non-academic conduct. The Assembly is taking great ef- forts to objectively inform the student body of the code and its content, in spite of our open criticism. The Daily, while claiming impartiality, has con- tinually obscured and misrepresented the facts concer- ning this new proposal. I discussed these concerns with editors Bill Spindle and Barbara Misle last Wednesday when Daily accounts implicated the Assem- bly as being opposed to punish- ment for sexual attacks, thievery, vandalism, and arson. Spindle responded that the article had simply been carelessly rewritten. I am not so easily con- vinced about articles in Friday's edition, where I found blatant examples of intentional misin- formation. The code proposal published in Friday's Daily quietly omitted a. Tr nnl-lfC o1 f Ithe nonnrnnna m pletely ignored by the Daily) is much stronger. The major complaint against the proposed system is the broad range of powers given to the vice president of student services or his chosen representative. Drawing an analogy between a code violation hearing and a civil court case, the roles of in- vestigator, plaintiff, judge, and jury foreman are all filled by a single appointee (non-student) of the vice president. Furthermore, the vice president has the sole decision on appeal cases and ap- plications for readmission following suspension. Contrast this proposal with the current system where these roles are filled by another student and a committee of other students. Finally, the proposal system has several features distinctly dif- ferent from the American judicial system. First, the ad- ministrative appointee has broad powers to decide the ad- missability of evidence and BLOOM COUNTY testimony. Second, the accused does not have the right to attor- ney or counsel. Why, with two superior systems (the current University judicial system and the American system) to model, does the proposed system lack the fundamental features required of a fair judicial system? I can only conclude that the University Ad- ministration is less interested in a fair judiciary system than in a convenient vehicle for harassing dissidents. The Michigan Student Assembly recognizes these in- congruities and the ad- ministration has failed to offer satisfactory explanations for them. The Assembly therefore recommends that the entire proposal, the conduct code as well as the judiciary system, be rejected. Apparently, the Daily feels otherwise. I observe a glaring hypocrisy: In the past five years I have been a student here, I have witnessed several, occasions where the administration 'has censured the Daily for, questionable practices. In response, the Daily has proudly proclaimed that as an indepen- 'dent student rpublication, it is above this form of reproach. Is the Daily repenting its liberal past and accepting the cloak of administrative censorship? Or do you plan to maintain your right to free expression after having denied that right to others? I am saddened to see the Daily taking this position on the code of non-academic conduct and hope that neither of us will seriously regret it. Incidentally, please in- form your readers that further information regarding the proposal is available in the Michigan Student Assembly of- fices. -- James Schueler Engineering Sch. Representative Michigan Student Assembly February 11 by Berke Breathed 4 4 li i I 44 .l! t , J