4 4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, March 12, 2004 OPINION 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 opinion..michigandaily.com tothedaily@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JORDAN SCHRADER Editor in Chief JASON Z. PESICK Editorial Page Editor NOTABLE QUOTABLE We have succeeded in infiltrating the heart of crusader Europe and struck one of the bases of the crusader alliance." a- Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. ~imu 1 1 SAM BUTLER THE SOAPBOX 'U-1S Rd1.es 0P F-ngaemenf+ xPlicn 4r, vv-e 4OXactns vnYki 4P"Qh 0 ire A ...._..? Curb v i Ientce.>" acc k ~a5inon ~ 9chdr v e6 4 I J -An excerpt from an e-mail received by a London-based Arabic newspaper, al-Quds al-Arabi, regarding the train bombings in Spain, as reported yesterday by washingtonpost.com. O'Reilly not so ludicrous SOWMYA KRISHNAMURTHY AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM Well Bill O'Reilly is at it again. Fox News's patron saint of morality and host of "The O'Reilly Factor" is continuing his tirade against rap music and the rapper Ludacris, who recently inked an endorsement deal with beer giant Anheuser- Busch. According to O'Reilly, Ludacris's brand of "gangsta rap" (a highly dated term, by the way) contains violent and misogynistic lyrics that debase young people; Anheuser-Busch should follow Pepsi's lead and sack the rapper as their pitch man. As an aficionado of rap and ardent O'Reilly condemner, it pains me to agree with his argu- ment. The lyrical and visual content of Luda and most mainstream rap is disgraceful. It's entrenched in a "money, hoes, clothes" mentali- ty; the bigger the name brands, the more numer- ous the bullet holes, the fewer the clothes on the girls - these are the benchmarks of success in rap. Content has little effect upon most people legally able to purchase explicit records, because they have already matured and formulated their own values, but the same does not hold for developing and especially misguided youth. Children idolize rappers and emulate their lingo, style and attitude. This can be especially detri- mental if there is a lack of adult guidance to dif- ferentiate rap fiction from reality and if rap behavior is acceptable in society. I was appalled at this year's K-grams Kids-Fair when a fifth grader approached me with the word "PIMP" proudly written in magic marker on his cheek. I asked him if he knew the word's meaning, to which he replied, "It means I get all the girls." All this occurred while a sexually suggestive Lil' Kim and 50 Cent track played in the back- ground. Perhaps there was no connection between the two, the little boy could just as easi- ly have heard the term on the playground or tele- vision, yet the fact that he prided himself on the same negative behavior being reinforced by the song is a little disconcerting. Creatively and morally, rap needs changes. Sadly, heavyweights within hip hop who have the power to address the issue, like Russell Simmons, are quick to sidestep the problem by labeling O'Reilly as "racist" and attributing harsh lyrics to the harsh realities of urban life. And who can blame them? Exploiting social maladies like crack, gangs and educational disparities have made many individuals in hip-hop tremendously wealthy. Sure, mainstream rap presents a very narrow definition of minori- ties, glorifying crime and prison life and perpetuating the stereotypical image of the angry, hyper-sexualized black male, but who wants to burst the billion-dollar bubble? O'Reilly's harangue is not without fault though; its singling out of Ludacris over other equally guilty stars appears to be more of a personal vendetta than anything, but this quickness to defend the rapper is an essential problem in our society. Whether they are right or wrong, certain celebrities are always given the assumption of correct- ness, a perpetual "get out of jail" card. Even when undoubtedly guilty, we give them slaps on the wrists and numerous chances to redeem themselves (a luxury not afforded to the common folk). Bad celebrity behavior is not just con- doned, but encouraged. Due to the disgusting- ly growing tabloid industry and our general propensity to live vicariously through the lives of our favorite stars, celebrities are rewarded for breaking the rules. Hollywood, for instance, is exceedingly forgiving, with count- less celebrities using their bad-boy/girl images as benefits. Actors like Mark Wahlberg and Hugh Grant have both made unsavory life decisions - Wahlberg was arrested for beat- ing two Vietnamese men and making racist comments towards schoolchildren, and Grant was caught soliciting a prostitute - and still landed A-list movie roles. Actress Halle Berry was involved in a misdemeanor hit-and-run incident and then won an Academy Award. Criminal behavior can stigmatize and institu- tionalize the common person, but the famous utilize rap sheets as resume bullet points, adding edge and depth to their careers. This distorted view holds true for profes- sional athletes and musicians too. Even with several legal run-ins, basketball player Allen Iverson has a lifetime shoe contract with Reebok, likely due to the "streetwise edge" his image brings to the company. Singer R. Kelly, despite facing 14 counts of child pornography, was even nominated for a NAACP Image Award this year. I wonder what kind of image the NAACP was trying to propagate with that accolade. Stars need to be knocked off their pedestals and given a healthy dose of reality. We all make mistakes, and celebrity snafus are no exception, but one cannot be granted free range because of the intangible label of fame. If legal and moral standards are set by society, then everyone, regardless of whether a Ludacris or a nobody, should be held accountable for their words and actions. Krishnamurthy can be reached at sowymak@uinich edu Don't mess with the Constitution LOUIE MEIZLISH As MEIZLISH SEES IT ne of the most disingenuous argu- ments put forth by those supporting (state and 4 ffederal) constitutional amendments banning gay marriage is that out-of- control "activist judges" and local officials are try- ing to redefine marriage. In essence, they are saying that, through anar- chy, these zealots will get what they want unless responsible folks like President Bush do something NOW. On Feb. 24, as we all know, Bush pro- claimed his support for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. In his own words: Some activist judges and local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage. In Massachusetts, four judges on the highest court have indicated they will order the issuance of marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender in May of this year. In San Francisco, city officials have issued thousands of marriage licenses to people of the same gender, contrary to the California family code. That code, which clearly defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman, was approved overwhelmingly by the voters of California. A county in New Mex- ico has also issued marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender. And unless action is taken, we can expect more arbitrary court decisions, more litigation, more defiance of the law by local officials, all of which adds to uncertainty. There are numerous holes in the presi- dent's argument. 1) As Bush made his speech, the Califor- nia governor and attorney general were suing the City of San Francisco to stop licensing gay marriages and presumably to nullify any marriage certificates already granted to gay couples. Just yesterday, the California Supreme Court ordered Mayor Gavin New- som to stop issuing the licenses, though, to be fair, the court has not yet ruled on the legality of his actions. 2) If they disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling, Massachusetts leg- islators, and its voters, can amend the state constitution and thus reverse the court rul- ing. It looks as if they will. 3) The New Mexico incident was over almost as soon as it began. After receiving an opinion from the state attorney general that same-sex marriages would be "invalid under the state law," the Sandoval County clerk withdrew her offer to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and had an aide inform the recently wed couples that their marriages were invalid. Also of note: After a modest demonstra- tion in Detroit urging the Wayne County clerk to issue gay marriage licenses, Michi- gan Attorney General Mike Cox wrote to county clerks that issuing the licenses would be against Michigan law. Any clerks who do so will face injunctions and/or lawsuits, he said. You know how many have tried? None. Nevertheless, some conservatives still argue that the federal amendment is neces- sary. All evidence to the contrary, they say the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 might not be enough to prevent states from having to recognize same-sex marriages licensed by other states - which is what they fear, that all 50 states will have to recognize one state's gay marriages. Still, the fact remains that in its eight years of existence, the federal DOMA has not been struck down and states are under no obligation to recognize other states' mar- riages. In fact, the issue has never come up. The president has said in the past that states should decide for themselves whether or not to recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions. Congress should heed his advice from earlier and not interfere. A fed- eral amendment is not necessary. The sys- tem is working. Let states legislate their own morals. ox's ruling, which is the law unless overturned by a court, is a good thing. Issuance of gay-marriage licenses by any clerk would no doubt provoke a lawsuit, which would eventually work its way up to the state Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, which has final say. The Supreme Court, with a 5-2 Republican majority, would almost cer- tainly hold the Michigan DOMA constitu- tional, thus establishing Michigan judicial precedent as opposing gay marriage. That would be a bad thing. Supporters of gay marriage - or even civil unions - would be well advised to hold back until one of the conservative state jus- tices steps down from the court. Another Democrat on the court would slim the GOP majority to one. And one of the Republicans, Elizabeth Weaver, has demonstrated a Sandra Day O'Connor-like streak, especially since her fellow justices didn't support her for another term as chief justice three years ago. Hold your breath. Meizlish can be reached at meizlish@umich.edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 4 Horowitz ad extreme, a disservice to pro-Israeli students at University TO THE DAILY: In his letter, (Anti-Arab discrimination is unfair propaganda, 03/11/04) Adi Peshkess wrote that he was "appalled" to see the advertisement concerning the Middle East in to defend itself isn't even comparable to reli- gious fundamentalist homophobia. But let's get to the point. The main issue is that the publishers of the article had no place getting involved in our campus poli- tics. Pro-Israel students and faculty members have the responsibility of countering anti- Israel propaganda on campus by presenting a unified voice in support of Israel and demo- cratic institutions, a responsibility shared by neither David Horowitz nor Ronald Stackler. mining student attempts at Israel advocacy and giving the pro-Israel, as well as conser- vative groups on campus, a bad name. How some middle-aged guy who is unaffiliated with the University has any business writing responses to the Daily's editorialists or telling us pro-Israel students how to do our job is beyond me. MATTHEW WOLFE LSA freshman I: 1 - 4 m~t~fTTOI~ea~Ix un ainuuia ii Qu- g