a6 OPINION Tuesday, November 29, 1988 Page 4 4 - 4 The Michigan Daily 6 Ee £ idiunIatitQa Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Objectivity is a relative issue Vol. IC, No.57 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Swo man] t w ;THE HIGH LY VISIBLE attempts by anti -abortionists to bodily block the entrances of women's clinics have re- ceived plenty of media exposure in the last 'month. But even more serious challenges to women's reproductive rights are quietly playing themselves out in the courts. In one case, the U.S. Supreme Court recently affirmed an Indiana court's ruling that denied a husband the right to stop his wife's abortion. Just about the same time, the U.S. Justice Department filed an amicus curiae brief asking the Court to overturn a federal appeals court's decision striking down a Mis- souri abortion statute. In the Indiana case, Erin Andrew Conn attempted to prevent his es- tranged wife from having an abortion. A state trial court judge issued a temporary restraining order stopping Mrs. Conn's ability to have an abor- tion. However, in accordance with the previous Court decisions of Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth (1976), the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that Conn had no standing to stop his wife's abortion since the state lacks the power to regulate abortion during the fjrst trimester of a woman's pregnancy And therefore cannot require spousal pconsent. Mr. Conn then appealed the decision :to the Supreme Court which affirmed the Indiana court's ruling without an opinion; not enlarging or detracting the scope of constitutional protection for women in matters of spousal consent. This case magnifies the current de- bate over abortion. It attempts to re- strict women's reproductive decisions by appealing to a husband's preroga- tive of decision-making in marriage. Because his wife's pregnancy was only six weeks old, Mr. Conn clearly did not have standing to file a temporary restraining order since Roe and Dan- forth laid down the framework for 4 vomen to make decisions of abortion independent from state intrusion. However, the' husband's attempt demonstrates the growing controversy over abortion. By appealing to his legal position as a husband, he perpetuated misconceptions of the role of women in S choice By Victoria Baecher In recent weeks the Daily's commitment to objective news coverage has been called into question by several different individu- als, including the famous U.S. media ty- coon/regent, Philip Power. While a con- cern for objective news coverage is truly commendable, it's necessary to ask if these people can really be serious, and if so, sane. In a nation where the major me- dia are so reluctant to present information that seriously conflicts with the govern- ment line, can any honest person actually be concerned about the Daily's objectiv- ity? For example, one would have no diffi- culty finding references to such terrorist U.S. client states as El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, where the mili- tary-death squads make sure the votes One of the individuals never existed and the other had no knowledge of his reported murder.) This pro-government bias in re- porting international news is so extensive and obvious that it is hard to believe that any careful reader could have failed to de- tect it. The coverage of domestic news is no better. The economy is covered entirely from the perspective of the wealthy. The economic news is filled with stories of successful businesspeople, corporate take- overs, and rumors of corporate takeovers. Strikes, layoffs, and wage-cuts receive only passing attention when discussed at all. Even in presenting a general economic outlook the media can be counted on to give optimistic accounts based on the prosperity of the rich, ignoring the fact that real wages for the bulk of the popula- tion have been declining for fifteen years. the realm of marriage contracts. Women are not nor ought to be considered subservient to their hus- bands' whims. A husband cannot con- trol, by legal adjudication, his wife's decisions of reproduction. This misconception of a husband- wife role still pervades present state criminal codes. For instance, many states, still retain inter-spousal immu- nity clauses in their sexual assault or rape statutes using the traditional ratio- nale that women are merely chattel or property in the legal interpretation of a marriage contract. In the Missouri case before the Court, the Justice Department's filing of a friend-of-the-court brief in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services is nei- ther novel nor surprising. The Justice Department often enters briefs in favor of whichever position they feel neces- sary to support, and the Reagan ad- ministration doesn't hesitate to oppose the Court's ruling on abortion. In Webster, a federal appeals court struck down a Missouri law as uncon- stitutional because it infringed on a women's decision to have an abortion. The Missouri law declared that human life begins at conception, barred the use of public funds to encourage or counsel a woman to have an abortion, and re- quired that abortions after the first trimester of a pregnancy to be done in hospitals. This statute flies in the face of the Court's reasoning in Roe. In Roe v. Wade, Justice Harry Blackmun, writing for the majority, in- validated state statutes proscribing abortion in circumstances other than exceptional cases. Blackmun based his decision on the fact that women have the fundamental right to make decisions regarding their bodies. The bottom line of any statute pro- hibiting abortion is that women who choose to have an abortion will have to risk her life by going to unqualified, unlicensed physicians. However, this reason by itself does not justify the le- gality of abortion. The right of privacy in matters of decisions affecting one's own destiny and the right to make decisions of contraception or abortion are "implicit" in the concept of "ordered liberty." In fact almost any pro-U.S. government can be assured that their human rights abuses will be downplayed if not altogether ignored in the U.S. media.' notion that the working class and poor people should bear the burden of deficit reduction ignores the obvious truth, that the huge deficits came about almost en- tirely as a result of Reagan's military build-up and his huge tax cuts to the rich. In other words, people around the country are being thrown out on the streets, denied food and medical care, and having their social security taken away from them in order to finance multi-million dollar tax breaks to rich slobs like Tom Monaghan and our friend Philip Power. You won't find this arithmetic truth appearing often in the mainstream media. The total decadence and corruption of the media is perhaps best illustrated by the media conference in Chicago attended by a number of Daily reporters. Recent times have provided endless scandals deserving serious investigation. Among these are the links of the Reagan-Bush 1980 campaign team to Khomeni that might have led to a deal to keep U.S. hostages in Iran until after the election; the evidence of illegal CIA interference in U.S. domestic politics by propagandizing through the media; the Bush-Noreiga drug links; the North plan to suspend the constitution and install martial law.to curb dissent; the list could be extended considerably. With all these areas of corruption and criminality in the Reagan administration there should be ample material for serious investigative reporting. Yet, when the distinguished journalists chose a keynote speaker to lec- ture them on the art of investigative jour- nalism, they looked elsewhere. They de- cided to ask the journalist who took on the perilous task of following Gary Hart to determine who he was having sex with. Clowns like these certainly have noth- ing to teach the Daily or anyone else. When the mainstream media is no longer dominated by crass opportunists desper- ately seeking to ingratiate themselves to those in power, we will concern ourselves with the alleged lack of objectivity in the Daily.. 0 4 come out right, as "democracies" in any major media organ. In fact almost any pro- U.S. government can be assured that their human rights abuses will be downplayed if not altogether ignored in the U.S. media. The media also obligingly gives detailed accounts of human rights transgressions of governments or guerilla armies not allied to the U.S. even when it has to invent them. (The New York Times recently re- ported the brutal murder of two civilians by the guerillas fighting to overthrow the U.S.-backed government of El Salvador. Victoria Baecher is a former University student. Just to make sure that working people here don't get ideas about how they can improve their situation, papers like the The New York Times routinely print dis- claimers when reporting on countries such as Sweden. They feel obligated to include in their "news" coverage some claim to the effectthat the policies that have brought such prosperity to the average citizen in countries with more developed social welfare systems could not possibly work in the United States. When it comes to the federal budget deficit, the media always finds responsible experts who issue solemn sermons about how we'll have to raise taxes and cut so- cial spending or "tighten our belts." The 40 .~........................................................................................ ..................................................... ..................................................... ..................................................... ................................................ ..............1111 I: .............. Letters to the editor ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 'Enough is enough' To the Daily: I see a dangerous trend in your newspaper. Throughout this term, Jews have had to suffer through the barrage of discriminatory accusations and myths which your Opinion Page has chosen to publish. Well, enough is enough. The Opinion Page policy states that in the printing of letters and editorials, the facts must be correct and non-dis- criminatory. Not only is the Daily guilty of violating this principle in their own editori- als, but it is also guilty of violating it by printing in- flammatory, baiting letters from the public. For example, on November 1, the Daily editorial entitled "Kahane ban token," concern- ing Israel, calls Zionism racist. Furthermore, you call all Zionists racists. Isn't discrimi- nating against a group of peo- ple itself racist? Aren't the Jews allowed a homeland just like everyone else? By calling all Zionists racists you are dis- criminating against Jews, be- cause Zionism is the dream for a Jewish homeland. If the Jews are denied a homeland, this is discrimination against Jews. If desiring a homeland is racist, then the whole world must be racist, including yourselves. The term "homeland" implies that a distinct group of people, be it French, Canadian, or in- deed Jewish, is always wel- come there. Zionism itself be- came a mass movement pri- marily as a result of Jewish persecution in Europe. Israel is the Jewish homeland just as France is the French homeland. It is not "racist. In this same editorial, you quote Jabotinsky, a Zionist, as representing the mainstream of use their ideas to represent the ideas of the whole. That is equivalent to stating that Abu Nidal represents the main- stream Palestinian - which is thankfully not the case. Check the facts. It is my hope that blatant lies and Jew-baiting come to a stop. It is the Daily's respon- sibility not to print it, as their policy states. Only then can the University community truly flourish. -Alan J. Woronoff November 17 Review anti- Christian To the Daily: In the name of toleration and respect, the Daily has a policy against racist, sexist, and ho- mophobic writing. If it was genuine in its commitment to these princi- ples, then it should also apply them to writing that was con- temptuous and disrespectful to Christianity. Yet it doesn't. An example of this is the review of Tartuffe on Novem- ber 21. After a subtitle that says "inventive Tartuffe mocks modern evangelism," it says, "so now we have an evangelist, hypocrisy, religion, and lust all of which obviously go hand in hand." Especially to a fair and tolerant mind, it is not obvious at all that an evangelist, hypocrisy, religion, and lust go hand in hand. My objection is not an in- stance of inability to take a joke or criticism. (The abuses of certain evangelists are de- plorable, and steps shouldbe taken to stop them.) It is sim- ply a matter of respect and consistency. Daily's apology for Dean Baker's article on the Opinion page on November 16. The Holocaust is exploited cheaply to attack - you guessed it - the Jews, the Jews and the Jews. Not one word is uttered about the recent genocide of Iraqi citizens by their own government, using real poison gas and killing thousands of Kurdish men, women and chil- dren in one village in one night. When it comes to this act of genocide, the Daily ap- pears to have joined the estab- lishment papers in keeping quiet. No, not even racism in South Africa is being compared to Nazi racism. "Zionism is racism" and only Zionists are compared to Nazis. What a great way to blame the vic- tims. Just for historical perspec- tive, let me point out a few facts. The Jews of Germany and Austria were loyal citizens. They fought for their countries in World War I. They certainly did not support the enemies of their country. They did not re- volt and they did not support organizations sworn to destroy their country. They did not fire- bomb Christian school buses. They did not throw rocks at the police. They did not even demonstrate. And they certainly did not declare Berlin or Vienna to be the capital of a Jewish state. They were content to leave Germany or Austria pen- niless but alive. Six million Jews never got this chance. I recommend the Daily staff visit the gas ovens in Auschwitz. Apologies may then be necessary. -Raoul Kopelman November 16 Daily idiots, 'not racists this intentionally? Of course not, especially when the party in question, Student Rights, is endorsed by the Daily. So let's stop accusing the Daily of racism and sexism just because of a few mistaken details, and see the Daily staff for what they are, a bunch of bumbling idiots who don't un- derstand what "responsible journalism" means, not racist hypocrites. -Sean O'Connor November 16 Report off- campus incidents To the Daily: In response to the article, "Policy doesn't cover Greeks," (Daily, 11/3/88) I would like to correct a misconception concerning reporting com- plaints fo discrimination and discriminatory harassment. First, it is accurate that the policy does not allow the Uni- versity to discipline an individual who commits a dis- criminatory act in an off-cam- pus setting unless the act interferes with a person's par- ticipation in a University- sponsored activity. However, it is not accurate, as the article implies, that incidents that oc- cur off-campus should not be reported. Incidents of discrimi- nation or harassment that occur off-campus should still be re- ported for two major reasons: - Steps can and will be taken to try to resolve the problem. While it is accurate that as the Policy Administrator, I do not have any "official" disciplinary authority over what happens off-campus, informal resolu- tion of incidents can still oc- cur. . A further reason to report incidents that occur off-campus is that such reports might en- 4 I ' , i I, ; y~a . (.. I r 3'i , ! aai i' " 'l L 1 i ( . 1 1 t_ . t = .s ."ur ",,snr r A . -..&- - . . - -- A - - ..%- - - i