t Page 4--The Michigan Daily- Tuesday, March 10,1992 [ditior in ChIief 420 Maynard Street Ann Arbor, Michigan 48 109 764 - 0552 MATTiEW I). RENNIE Opinion Editors YAEL CITRO GEOFFREY EARLE AMITAVA MAZUMDAR Edited and Managed by Students at the University of Michigan Unsigned editorials represent a majority ref the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. FRMtit:I~JI)~I[i Iformed consent In the future a woman in Michigan who seeks an abortion may be patronized and told to "take some time and think about it." Last Thursday the Michigan House passed a bill which requires women seeking an abortion to wait 24 hours after getting information about abortion risks and alter- natives to make their decision. The version of the bill most recently passed is a supposed "victory" for abortion rights advocates because it does not require women to view magni- fied pictures of a developing fetus, as mandated by an earlier version of the bill. The House version of the bill, in addition to mandating the 24-hour waiting period, would require private doctors to give women seeking abortions a brochure from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo- gists. The brochure contains no pictures. However, this version of the bill is no cause for celebration. This detail, though seemingly minor, fundamentally infringes on women's rights. The assumption behind this piece of legislation is that women are incapable of making informed, rational decisions: they need outside help or influence when deciding whether to have an abortion. Proponents of the measure claim that it is nec- essary on grounds that abortion is "stressful." But the state does not require waiting periods for other, far more dangerous medical procedures. They don't or paternalism? really mean that abortion is stressful, they mean that abortion is wrong. The bill masquerades as benevolent paternalism - which is insulting enough - when it is actually another attempt to intimidate women into adopting their position on abortion. Additionally, this legislation would apply only to private physicians. Public clinics are already barred from even discussing abortions. It does not just discriminate against poor women, it discrimi- nates against all women equally. It further intrudes into the doctor-patient relationship, and falsely assumes doctors normally would not explain the procedure. The bill is more pointed at the decision-making process of abortion than at abortion itself. Some pro-choice legislators say it merely constitutes informed consent. This paternalistic notion of in- formed consent seems to be more accepted in this context only because it is directed at women. The real issue involving abortion is a question of independence. Can women be freely allowed to make a decision about their lives and their bodies completely free from coercion? This bill in effect says no; women alone cannot make a informed, responsible decisions. With or without pictures, the assumptions about women in this bill are overtly insulting. CAN N A R L L(,.,." -. - rANbTHb T AaSPENSEiJ r/e". 00 /r .--r\c- 0 -- 7 \7 <7 - - *- * .... ..1 . ..*****"CT...* .. . *.* . e".' . .111.-.... ."as" .".hhr: "r.: ~~~.^.4.^..........,.....,. "tt"r ii..,}{.{,... , .'~~"* * .'."-:.......- H o x ts t.* ,usto of . a. Homosexuality isn't a question of morality Castrating the Eighth Amendment 'Fast Friday, a Texas State District Court judge X.LJgranted Steve Allen Butler his request that he be surgically castrated rather than serve a life sentence for the aggravated sexual assault of a 13- year-old girl. The decision, handed down by Judge Michael McSpadden, is ludicrous and dangerous, and warrants immediate reversal. The obvious faultiness of the ruling is two-fold. First, surgical amputation of the testicles is clearly cruel andunusual punishment, andis prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. Sec- ondly, this punishment embraces an excessively simplistic interpretation of rape by treating it as an act of sex, rather than an act of violence, power and misogyny. Our Constitution forbids cruel and unusual pun- ishment, which includes all forms of corporal punishment. Many would argue that this is a fair punishment because Allen consented to receive a corporal punishment. To the contrary, because Allen opted for castration rather than a life sen- tence in prison, he was effectively coerced into accepting castration. Being coerced into a cruel and unusual punishment is equally unconstitu- tional as being sentenced to a cruel and unusual punishment. The other glaring problem with Judge McSpadden's ruling is that it treats the complex social problem of rape as a simple biological disorder. Sexual assault and battery stems from our society, which tacitly endorses male domination of women. Rape is not caused simply by male testes, as this ruling suggests. Conversely, removing a man's testicles does not prevent him from raping someone. Rapists regularly employ a variety of their different body parts to violate their victims. Moreover, in some circumstances it is possible for a man to achieve an erection even after castration. Punishing a rapist with castration is analogous to punishing a murderer by taking away his or her gun. While castration may have complicated physi- cal and psychological effects, it does not necessar- ily punish the heart and mind of the person who committed the crime. Judge McSpadden says that he advocates cas- tration because he does not believe that jail sen- tences reform rapists. While McSpadden may be correct in this analysis, he has overlooked the possibility of instituting legitimate programs of criminal rehabilitation for rapists in the prison system. Besides the obvious legal problems with the ruling in the Allen case, castration raises important questions about state sponsored eugenics. In the past, states have sterilized mentally retarded people and felons convicted of crimes involving "moral turpitude."'Generally, the SupremeCourthas over- ruled such policies. If necessary, the court should be called upon to overturn McSpadden's decision, since the government has no right to interfere with the genetic makeup of the population. To the Daily: This is in response to the two letters from Tuesday, March 3 ("Human morality," by Howard Scully and "Animal's don't prove morality," by Charis Hunt). Both are perpetuating the myth that being gay is a decision or a choice. That leads you into the argument that it is either moral or amoral. It is none of the three. No one chooses to be gay. They are born that way. It isn't good. It isn't bad - it just is. While I didn't choose to be gay, I am not ashamed of it and am quite comfortable with myself and my sexuality. What the letters you were It's not hard to recycle To the Daily: A few days ago, I was eating lunch in the MUG with a friend. There were a lot of paper bags and cups and dirty napkins at the table from the people who were there before us. There were also some newspapers. A few minutes after we sat down, a MUG employee asked us to hand over all the newspapers, which he promptly tossed in his basket. Not ten feet away was located a newspaper recycling bin. I asked if he was throwing them away; when he said he was, I asked for them back and told him that I would recycle them. Just about anything can be recycled; call Recycle Ann Arbor at 971-9676 for more information. I have four messages: To those who already recycle: good job! To those organizations with money on campus: please install more containers like the ones in the lobby of the MUG (near the ticket office) that collect trash, glass, paper and newspapers. To those who want to recycle but feel it takes too much time: you can do it ... after awhile, it becomes second nature and you won't want to throw things away. To those who absolutely refuse to recycle: I hope all your tombstones are built on landfills. Lee Bowbeer LSA senior responding to and what huge amounts of research indicate, is that homosexuality is natural and normal, even though only a minority of the population is gay. It is not a disease or a mental disorder. Homosexuality has been documented throughout all of history and in every nation in the world. Scientists are now discovering that there are biological causes behind being gay. By pointing out that homo- sexuality occurs in species other than man these scientists are not trying to put people's sexuality on an animal level. They are trying to prove that it is natural and normal. This is not a moral or socio-political agenda. It is a biological one. This leads to the argument that it is all a part of your Creator's natural order. For all of the quoting of the Bible that your have done you seem to have left something out. Doesn't the Bible claim that God created humans in his own image? If that is the case, then some portion of your God is gay. Also, be careful how closely you accept "God's word," after all it was set down by human hands - hands sometimes prone to error. Kevin Cardani Rackham graduate student Many concerned by alcoholism To the Daily: As members of the Alcohol and Other Drug Peer Education Program, we feel compelled to respond to your editorial ("MSA Unaware of Alcohol Realities," 2/ 11/92). It is unfortunate that you have chosen to trivialize this important issue in order to bolster a political campaign against the Conserva- tive Coalition. While it is cer- tainly true that there are those who advocate legal and moral sanctions in response to public health problems, to imply that anyone who promotes discussion about such health issues is attempting to "dictate their puritanical morality on the rest of camupus" is inappropriate and irresponsible. In truth, many students on campus are negatively impacted by the abuse of alcohol and other substances. By a two-to-one margin, students identify alcohol abuse as the single most signifi- cant student health problem, followed by sexually transmitted diseases. In a survey conducted by the University Health Service in 1991, over 55 percent of the respondents felt that the abuse of alcohol was a major problem on campus; 55 percent said that their own or others' use of alcohol/ other substances had negatively impacted their family relation- ships; 23 percent said that their use of alcohol had interfered with their academic performance; 16 percent felt that they were at risk for developing a problem with alcohol or other substances. It is well-documented that alcohol is a co-factor in almost all sexual assaults and other acts of violence that occur on college campuses. Editorials like the one printed by the Daily on Feb. 11 under- mine efforts to recognize and discuss the effects of excessive use of alcohol on the lives of thousands of students. Education around this issue does not have to be preachy, prohibitionist or sanction-oriented. Rather than limit students' civil liverties, the Alcohol and Other Drug Peer Education Program attempts to increase personal freedom by providing information and generating honest discussion. We invite Daily staff members who write about alcohol and other substances to attend one of our peer education programs in order to gain some insight into the issues as they are trulyviewed by students. Liz Tannec Kathryn Foley Carolyn Brandt Chung Ha Lonnie Bennett Alcohol and Other Drug Pee Education Program Bush ignores human rights, again T ast Wednesday, President Bush once again .LUdemonstrated his narrow, irrational policy toward China. He vetoed legislation that would put restrictions on China's most-favored nation-trad- ing (MFN) status. The House is expected to over- ride the veto, but the Senate is likely to fall short of the needed two-thirds majority. To date, Bush maintains a perfect record of 25 vetoes without an override. The current bill would require the president to certify improvement in China's record on human rights, trade disputes, and arms proliferation to restore MFN. China has shown disregard for the public outcry against its policies concerning these issues, causing President Bush's China policy to lose support in Congress. China's MFN status will be up for renewal in June. China's use of criminal slave-labor camps to produce their exports provides a clear example in favor of such restrictions. Accepting China's ac- tions is not in the best interest of the United States for reasons of morality in addition to international security. The Chinese government opened fire on hun- dreds of unarmed students and civilians in Tiananmen Square in June of 1989. Since then, China has not improved its human rights record. Many pro-democracy supporters remain impris- oned and have not been tried. Economically, the United States has a substantial trade deficit with China and many charge them with unfair trade policies. Recent intelligence reports discovered Chi- nese violations of international nuclear arms pro- liferation agreements. They have reportedly sold large amounts chemicals needed for nuclear-mis- sile productions to developing countries in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Bush also sup- ports lifting sanctions on U.S. technology. They were imposed against China for their reckless proliferation policy which obviously has not changed. In fact, Bush has tacitly supported China's action in every instance. He refused to grant Chi- nese students studying in the United States- an extension of their visas following the 1989 crack- down. In January, he met with Li Peng, the "butcher of Beijing," which strengthened his footing on the world stage. President Bush has had the opportunity to enact his policies toward China, despite a Democratic Congress. Still, China has made no effort to com- ply with U.S. concerns. If President Bush cared at all about human-rights issues, he would realize his policies are not working. . .......*................ti...rJ.. . ."J.J:r. "" Diego Rivera meets John Engler "Irony" is one of those words that's hard to pin down. To my immense frustration, when I try to define irony, I find myself using the word "ironic" within my definition. While I may have a hard time defining irony, I know when I've encountered it. A few weeks ago I realized something very ironic. I drove from Ann Arbor to Detroit via route 94. You by Matt Adler r. r ti the Detroit Institute of Arts. My favorite thing at the Institute of Arts is the Detroit Industry frescoes, by Diego Rivera. Rivera, a Mexican Communist, painted the grandi- ose murals in 1932. The paintings cover all four walls of a sun-lit court at the heart of the museum. To stand in the court is to stand inside Rivera's mind; inside his perception of Detroit in the 1930s. Rivera captures both the beauty and the horror of the American auto industry in its prime. This is a Marxist's view of quintessential corporatism and manifest capitalism. The main features of the court are the two enormous murals on the north and south walls. The machinery and the technology portrayed in these murals is poignantly sensual. The factory workers appear to be moving economic and social structure. Hazy, soaring lines draw the links between automotive manufactur- ing and industries such as agricul- ture, chemistry, medicine, and arms production. The obvious interdependence is essentially a warning. It's a warning from Rivera that as remarkable as the American auto industry may seem, if a single leak should ever open, the whole damn will tumble down. If Rivera were alive today, he'd probably say that loosing our competitive edge to Japan was the leak that broke the damn. So here we are in the present. In hindsight, Rivera could not have been more right. As any unemployed person in Michigan can tell you, there is a huge danger in making an entire state's economy dependent on one industry. And what's so ironic about all Nuts and Bolts 'RE Wtt.R' t 1L~ttEY. 71. TT N emy by Judd Winick HJO(. BOUT A NZ TEAc f & S~tJLOFC~qtE--AE5 can learn a lot about the state of Michigan just by making this trip. The highway itself is a minefield of potholes. Each crater stands as a perverse monument to the state's decrepit economy and shrinking tax base. Alongside the ~WITYCO RIN& E. mc,.'MAI I.~LAX? ' IM&1S 56iN@ DOWM ~, ~ 3I'M I NAr vJA1~D~ _ AA #I