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.

October 16, 1992 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1992-10-16

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

Page 4-The Michigan Daily- Friday, October 16,1992

G1bE Swtgatn itailg

420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
764-0552

Editor in Chief
MATI'IIEW D. RENNIE
Opinion Editors
YAEL CITRO
GEOFFREY EARLE
AMITAVA MAZUMDAR

Edited and Managed
by Students at the
University of Michigan

Unsigned editorials represent a mjority of the Daily's Editorial Board.
All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily.
Regents flee A to debate code

Despite the fact that the University has
neglected to address many key criticisms of
its code, administrators hastily cranked out a final
draft Wednesday in order to put the code on the
agenda of the regents' annual Flint meeting. In an
unusual reordering of a meeting schedule that is
usually set in stone, the regents decided to hold
their entire meeting in Flint, and cancelled the
scheduled morning session to be held in Ann
Arbor.
Only students who travelled to Flint had the
opportunity to address the regents, and only stu-
dents with close ties to the administration had their
hands on the final draft of the code before the
meeting. When the code came up for discussion,
though not for a vote, the regents divided along
party lines.
The Republicans favored delaying any discus-
sion of the code until they could return to Ann
Arbor. The Democrats, however, insisted on ram-
ming through the discussion so that the adminis-
tration could implement the code immediately.
This faction tried to bypass student concerns, and
should be condemned for its reckless behavior.
That the code was to come up at the Flint
meeting is reprehensible to begin with. After all, it
is Ann Arbor students whom the code will affect.
For the past two months, the administration has
been sending out copies of the code and conduct-
ing surveys and forums, ostensibly to educate the
community about the code. But what is the point of
educating the community if the regents planned to
discuss the code behind its back? What is the point
ofholding public comments in a community where
the public is neither concerned, informed, or af-
fected by the code?
Moreover, the code still contains many defi-
ciencies which must be addressed. David Schwartz,
president of the campus chapter of the American
Civil Liberties Union, has proposed a public de-

fender system that would extend the same right of
counsel to the accused already offered to the ac-
cuser under the current code. Currently, an accuser
can bring a case through a third party, such as an
administrator, but the accused must represent them-
selves.
Furthermore, MSARep. Robert Van Houweling
has recognized that the code does not include a
system for amendments, which leaves the docu-
ment open to administrative manipulation.
A few highly motivated students have fought
hard to moderate the code. If the administration can
simply amend out these reforms a few years later,
their efforts will have gone for naught. Van
Houweling has proposed an amendment procedure
that would involve MSA, and would give students
some influence over the process.
Yet the final draft of the code contains neither of
these thoughtful provisions. Moreover, the admin-
istration has yet to answer the abundance of criti-
cism that its code is overbroad, and prohibits crimes
that are illegal under state law anyway.
And the draft still has notable flaws. Last week,
the Daily criticized thelast code draft for punishing
some crimes - such as sexual assault and harass-
ment - world wide, while punishing others, like
murder, only if committed in Ann Arbor.
Rather than giving up the role of holding stu-
dents accountable for their actions regardless of
where they occur, the University simply added
murder to the list. This wasn't exactly what we had
in mind.
Clearly the code has serious problems. Add to
that the fact that literally every comment voiced at
all three public hearings was negative, and that the
administration has refused to put the code up to a
student vote. Considering this, there is no good
reason for any regent to push for enactment of the
code at this time, no matter where they hide their
meeting.

I WHY IS 7T-11 So
CONFUS(NG? I'VE RES-F ASSUREDFELLAS:
SEEN TrIE "COSSy" THE EPRESI[)ENT A/V) / ARE
rt-IING-!okAY... "DOWN WITH" Th E
"HOMEY"-COZ> PRo&L-EMS OF TNr INNER,
FAIiLI A R...C1TIES' YO() )Ij
-
-4
Ile
ISSUE.S FORUM
Read it,_know it, join the debate_______
The great divide: Pro-choice vs. Pro-life
For over three decades the issue of abortion has been in the political, religious and social spotlights. No one
is immune from taking a stand because the issue permeates every segment of society. Does a woman have the
right to choose to abort her fetus? Or, is aborting a fetus synonymous with murder. However, the issue goes
much deeper than this. What about federalfunding to help women obtain abortions? Should the government be
involved in this area of women's lives? What is the relevance to religious arguments to the debate? Are there
clear answers to any of these questions?

0

Legal gambling has its costs

Rights of the fetus
by Bridget Hamilton-
Why does the pro-life population
oppose abortion? We oppose it be-
cause of the basic fact that abortion
kills a human being. A separate life
since the moment of conception, the
fetus ("little one" or "baby" in Latin)
has its own complete genetic make-
up. The heart has been beating since
the 18th or 21st day of development.
The EEG tracings of the fetus' brain
have been recorded at less than six
weeks gestation. From the time that
abortions begin - almost never ear-
lier than five weeks of fetal develop-
ment -- the fetus' head, eyes, heart,
arms and legs are clearly recogniz-
able. If you question this, take a look
at fetal development in any biology
textbook. Better yet, get hold of a
photograph of an aborted baby.
Not only does abortion kill a baby,
it exploits women. The Alan
Guttmacher Institute, a research group
for Planned Parenthood, found in a
1991 study that 91 percent of post-
abortal women have had one or more
symptoms of Post Abortion Syndrome
(PAS), ranging from anxiety and guilt
to suicidal tendencies.

need to be protected
Abortion does not help women,
and no woman needs an abortion,
regardless of what the multi-million
dollar abortion industry tells them.
The abortion industry tells a pack of
lies to women. It tells women that

The abortion industry tells a pack of lies to
women. It tells women that they must choose
between a family and a career, between moth-
erhood and personhood. Women should not
have to and do not need to make these choices.

they expect and demand for them-
selves. They resent the value of a
woman being based on whether a man
wants her, but then determine the value
of an unborn child upon his or her
"wantedness."

A vid gamblers no longer have to travel all the
way to Las Vegas, Atlantic City or to the
Mississippi river boats to satisfy their urges. By
December 1993, legalized gambling will be avail-
able across the border in Windsor, Ontario. Resi-
dents in Windsor and metropolitan Detroit should
be aware, however, that gambling communities,
especially poorer ones, disproportionately pay the
price.
In 1988, Detroit tried to legalize gambling by
adopting the "Atlantic City model" and allowing
dozens of casinos and hotels to set-up shop. This
plan failed because many people believed that the
casino economy would deviate from the city's
historic economic structure. In addition, many
residents feared that casinos would drive away
business that disdained the sleazy environment
that often goes hand in hand with gambling. Now
Ontario is faced with a similar scenario as it tests
a model casino.
It is likely that the casino will exact ahigh social
cost for the people who live in the surrounding
areas. As is usually the case, the increased avail-
ability of crap tables and one-armed bandits will
have the greatest effect on those most susceptible
to such addictions: the unemployed, the poor and
the frustrated.
Gambling makes little economic sense for de-
pressed areas. The gambling industry creates noth-

ing; the net effect of gambling is simply to redis-
tribute money, primarily from the generally poor
customers to the lowlifes and gangsters who own
the establishments and local government which
gets its cut through taxes. Thus gambling repre-
sents a new tax of the most regressive kind.
Currently, Ontario will allow the new casinos to
operate for a one-year trial period, after which the
province will judge the success of the project.
Residents of Ontario and Detroit should be just as
willing to re-examine gambling legalization. It
may not be worth the money.

H)T I M:E

- ' ,_
: . .
s- ," . ,. ht ,
- BL1N{
" '- GAM
r, y-
r
.; , Y .
._..-
i

a,
0
O
U
2
0

The Iraqgate story unfolds

Hamilton is the Students for Life
Co-chair.
Freedom of choice
by Amy Kushner
On the television a news clip
shows scenes from a recent attempt to
blockade a women's health clinic.
Men and women from the anti-choice
movement stand and kneel around
the building, trying to stop women
from seeking assistance inside. Then
the camera swings around and I see
the men and women there who are
trying to keep the clinic open. I read
their signs - Abortion on demand
and without apology.
The clip left me feeling as I al-
ways do when I see such episodes. I.
am glad that there are many women
and men who are actively seeking to
protect the freedom of choice, but I
am also scared that there are still
people so vehemently opposed to al-
lowing women this choice.
To me, a woman's freedom to
choose is an obvious and inalienable
right. Yet at this moment, when we
should be celebrating 20 years of
choice in America, we are still bat-
tling to keep abortion a safe and legal
option.
For a long time, abortion was ille-
gal. This did not stop women from
wanting to obtain abortions. Many
people breathed a sigh of relief at the
Supreme Court's 1972 Roe vs. Wade
decision, but the freedom to choose
that this decision brought about has
since been methodologically dimin-
ished. The decision to cut off federal
funding for abortion and the institu-
Kushner is an LSA senior.

they must choose between a family
and a career, between motherhood
and personhood. Women should not
have to and do not need to make these
choices.
The pro-abortionists, or so called
"pro-choicers," say that women are
strong and capable and then claim
that when pregnant, a woman has no
other choice but to kill her child. This
is not "pro-choice" and it is certainly
not "pro-woman." Women are ca-
pable of dealing with crisis situations
responsibly; the "pro-choice"faction
denies that.
Furthermore, women in favor of
abortion are hypocritical in that they
deny the prebom the same rights that
belongs to each and
tion of the 24-hour waiting period
has restricted access to abortion for
many women facing economic diffi-
culties. Those females under the age
of 18 find their choice limited by the
increased appearance of the paren-
tal-consent law. And often, women
are made to feel that they must justify
their desire to seek and abortion, as if
by not producing children they are
The pro-choice move-
ment does not seek
to make choices for
women, rather the
movement respects
and assists women in
any choice they
make.
somehow failing in their "womanly"
duties.
In the United States right now
women with poor economic status,
who are disproportionately women
of color, have the most difficulty
gaining access to abortion.
We live in a country where we are
expected to know how to protect our-
selves against unwanted pregnancies,
yet attempts to bring education about
sex and birth control to schools are
met with anger and resistance.
We live in a country where some
groups seek to take the freedom of
choice away from women, but do
nothing to guarantee that the children
bornout ofacrisis pregnancy will get
the long-term economic and emo-

In addition, the pro-abortion men-
tality is as prejudice as that of the
salve owners and the Nazis. Black
slaves and Jews were considered
"property" and "subhuman" respec-
tively. The discrimination of these
groups based upon such physical traits
as skin color or race is no different
than the physical prejudice against the
preborn based upon their size.
It may be good to remember the
words of our Constitution during the
upcoming election. We may look at
the issue differently when we recall
that all people are created (not "born")
equal and granted certain inalienable
rights, the first and most basic of these
being the right to life.
every woman
tional support they need.
"Every child a wanted child."This
is the credo of the pro-choice move-
ment. The strongest accusations of
the anti-choice movement is that the
people who.are pro-choice advocate
abortion as the only option to an un-
planned pregnancy. This accusation
is blatantly false.
Pro-choice means being pro-alter-
native --all alternatives. It is the pro-
choice movement which educates
women on birth control. It is the pro-
choice movement which counsels
women on all their options, including
single parenthood, adoption or termi-
nation of the pregnancy.
The pro-choice movement does
not seek to make choices for women,
rather the movement respects and as-
sists women in any choice they make.
Abortion is not the answer for every
person facing an unwanted pregnancy,
but the freedom to have that choice is
a personal and imperative right.
Last June the U.S. Supreme Court
was one vote away from overturning
the Roe vs. Wade decision. In the
upcoming election we need to vote in
ways which show we are against the
rollback of the right to choose, a move
backwards which President Bush
wholeheartedly supports.
On November 3 we need to voice
our support for safeguarding all
women's right to choose. In doing this
we will move towards getting the is-
sue of abortion out of the political
arena and placing it - without apol-
ogy -back into the hands of women,
where it belongs.

0

D uring his .inaugural address four years ago,
President George Bush made a Carter-esque
pledge, promising to keep his new administration
free from even the appearance of impropriety or
scandal. Today, however, the Bush administration
may be rivaling its predecessor in corruption and
abuse of power.
In the endorsement editorials on Monday, the
Daily itemized the Bush administration's laundry
list of unethical, of not illegal, behavior. The list
included the illegal transfer of grain credits to Iraq,
which Saddam Hussein used to strengthen his
military might.
Now the administration has compounded that
initial error to include the FBI and CIA's attempt to
withhold evidence from a federal court. Moreover,
Attorney General William Barr has wrongfully
refused a congressional call for a special prosecu-
tor to investigate the charges of FBI and CIA
interference in the Iraqgate case.

Still, at this point the details of the subterfuge
are peripheral to the primary issue: the actual
cover-up attempt. CIA officials submitted incom-
plete documents to the Atlanta court investigating
the BNL case. In response to the unraveling scan-
dal, Barr (whom columnist William Safire calls
"Cover-up General") ordered an FBI investigation
of the CIA. The concept that such an investigation
could get to the bottom of the scandal is ridiculous,
since both organizations are clearly involved.
Furthermore, Barr also called for the investiga-
tion of FBI chief William Sessions for tax evasion
and free-loading (apparently, Sessions made long-
distance phone calls and plane trips at the tax
payers' expense). Chair of the Senate Intelligence
Committee Sen. David Boren (D-Okla.) suspects
this comparatively irrelevant investigation is a
smoke screen to protect those involved in Iraqgate.
Fearing a scandal that could worsen his chance
for re-election, the president has effectively dis-

qU"a m -'t

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan