0 4A - Thursday, January 15, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com E-MAIL ROSE AT ROSEJAFF@UMICH.EDU L I74 ft igan al Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position oftthe Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views ofttheir authors. Setting the record straight RIAA policy change is long overdue and better for students here are a lot of things you could do with $3,000. You could pay rent for a semester or two. You could buy a lifetime supply of Insomnia cookies. But the last thing you'd want to do is settle a lawsuit. At least this is less of a worry now that the Recording Industry Association of America has announced it's finished going after individuals for their Internet file-sharing. And while it should never have taken so long for the RIAA to abandon this awful practice, the policy change is good news for students, who bore the financial brunt of the RIAA's lawsuit campaign. ROSE JAFFE - aRAPFc. The wrong reverend 0 * 6 Since 2003, the RIAA has been target- ing users who illegally download music with lawsuits, and it's favorite target was busy college students. The lawsuits typi- cally increased right before finals so that students would be less likely to spend the time and effort needed to take the RIAA to court. Because dealing with a calculus final and an attorney in the same week isn't exactly ideal, most students chose to settle out of court with the RIAA for about $3,000 per case. The RIAA has admitted to specifically targeting college students because more than half of students file-share. But it's easy to see that another good reason is that going after people without the time or resources to fight back is the easiest way to make a quick buck. More than 60 Univer- sity of Michigan students had to hand over their cash. But just last month, the RIAA decided on a new strategy that would move away from handling individual cases itself, instead relying on Internet service providers to enforce rules against illegal file-sharing. Under this policy, if your provider finds you engaging in illegal downloading, the RIAA will be notified, you'll be warned and then. your Internet may be slowed or stopped. While this new strategy is a more reason- able way of handling illegal downloading, it's puzzling that it took the RIAA five years to realize its method was flawed. It's also quite clear that its motivation was probably not compassion for the prosecuted indi- viduals, but rather the storm of bad press the RIAA received for targeting individu- als like young people, a poor single mom and a dead person. Hopefully, with the new policy in place, the RIAA will concentrate its efforts against more serious file-sharing threats. Just because the penalties have lessened doesn't mean students should increase their illegal downloading. Downloading copyrighted music without paying for it is still illegal, and that's because of an impor- tant need to defend the intellectual prop- erty rights of the artists who created these songs. The new policy does, however, rep- resent a fairer way of addressing students' illegal actions. And the RIAA certainly isn't off the hook. While relying on ISPs to track activity is a much more responsible solution for dealing with illegal downloading, it has been made clear that this policy could be amended for the RIAA to once again file lawsuits against anyone it wishes. But with any hope, college students have written their last bigcheck to the RIAA. arack Obama and reverends just don't mix. I've been amazed that Obama's contro- versial selection of Rev. Rick War- ren to deliver the invocation at this month's inaugura- tion has.been such a recurring con- versation topic. This issue boils down to one ques- ROSE tion: should Rick AFRIYIE Warren remain the invocation speaker or should Obama rescind the invitation? The notion of tolerance is being used to justify both sides' opinions. On one hand, an editorial that ran in the Detroit Free Press (Pomp and Poi- gnancy, 01/04/2009) described War- ren's inclusion as "proving that the American tent can be large enough for nearly anyone." But some argue that tolerance should be a criterion for inclusion in the inauguration, meaning that someone who has used his religious platform to discriminate against homosexuals doesn't quite pass the tolerance test. In the previous election cycle, the LGBT community endured grievous marital and adoption restrictions, and more than 40 states now restrict LGBT marriage in some way through bans or laws. If you've been reading the news lately, you may think that it's no secret where Warren stands on this issue, but I'm not so sure. An interview with Beliefnet.com epito- mizes why some want Obama to choose another pastor. In this inter- view, Warren makes the conclusion that marital incest, polygamy and "an older guy marrying a child" is equiva- lent to same-sex marriage. The notion that two consenting, homosexual adults and an older man who preys on children are the same is understandably appalling. How- ever, this came as no surprise to me considering that sexual policies sup- ported en masse by Warren and his conservative ilk are in accordance with the sexual value system that University professor Gayle Rubin identified in her 1984 essay, "Think- ing Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality." She states, "According to this system, sexuality that is 'good,' 'normal,' and 'natural' should ideally be heterosexual, mari- tal, monogamous, reproductive, non- commercial... coupled, relational, within the same generation." This is the rationale that has made stalemates of abortion and gay marriage issues and has restricted contraception and adolescent sex education. Anything from marital or child sexual abuse to gay marriage is equally transgressive in the eyes of line-towing conservatives because it deviates fromthis "vision"- which is Rev. Rick Warren's professed belief. Butwhatsurprisedme isthatbefore he made this gay-marriage, older- guy marrying-a-child comparison, he asserted that he believes in "full equal rights for everyone in America," including partnership benefits. In truth, Warren may share a lot with some evangelicals, Christian fundamentalists and secularists who have various reasons for opposing gay marriage. But Warren's anti-equal marriage stance and his declaration favoring equal rights for all means that he also shares something funda- mental with every democratic con- tender for the presidency this past election cycle, including Obama. As it stands right now, we live in a country where many believe it is politically unsafe to publicly support equal marriage, which explains the suspicious unanimity amongst every presidential contender this past sea- son. But unfortunately, it's also costly to have dissenting opinions from one's political group. And perhaps this business of disagreeing agreeably presents an opportunity for Obama to impart a lesson about inclusion. It's also reasonable to speculate that appointing Rick Warren as the invocation speaker is a way to mollify conservatives now for what is yet to come. When Barack Obama was con- tending for the presidency, he vowed that passing the Freedom of Choice Act was the first thing he would do as president. This is a policy measure that would ensure that every woman had a fundamental right to choose birth or an abortion. The 36th anni- versary of Roe v. Wade is two days after the inauguration, and editorials are being written daily from conser- vatives who are anxious that Obama will stand by his word. Why Rick Warren shouldn't deliver the invocation Obama's recent choice to appoint Gene Robinson, an openly gay Epis- copal Bishop, to deliver the invoca- tion this Sunday mitigates some of the blow that Rick Warren's Tues- day invocation appointment dealt the queer community. Howlever, I still cannot stand behind Warren as the invocation speaker. Warren has abused his mantle in the public arena to a degree that is reprehensible. To assert that child abuse is akin to sexu- al relations between same-sex adults isn't just offensive - it also raises the question of his ability to deliver a national message that respects both the gay and straight of our country. Someone who has a question like that looming over his head should not have the privilege of addressing the nation at the most televised inaugu- ration of our lifetime. Rose Afriyie is the Daily's sex and relationships columnist. She can be reached at sariyie@umich.edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:S Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu. i CAMPUS DEBATES THE CONFLICT IN GAZA - -------------- STUDENTS ALLIED FOR FREEDOM AND EQUALITY1 1 AMERICAN MOVEMENT FOR ISRAEL IT An appeal for human rights Israel's defensive mission Last month, Israel launched a massive air strike on various infrastructural targets in the Gaza Strip. On January 3, Israel continued its assault on Gaza with a wide-scale ground incursion that included several thousand members of Israel's reserve military forces. Israelhastwicerefused adiplomatic conclusiontothe hostilities, instead claiming to seek a more "durable" solution to Hamas' rocket fire into southern Israel. In the process of attempting to realize this "durable" solution, Israel has managed to terrorize Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinians, killing more than 1,000 people - including 315 children. According to many in the pro-Israel community, the current offensive is a direct response to increased rocket fire from Hamas following the expiration of a ceasefire on December 19. By claiming its actions are "self-defense," Israel has yet again succeeded in mis- leading the international community and completely ignoring the historical context of Israel's 41-year-old military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In order to justify its current bombardment and 18-month siege of the Gaza Strip, Israel presents itself as the blameless victim of rocket attacks from crazed, anti-Semitic Muslim terrorists seeking to disrupt Israel's democracy and way of life. This distorted perception of the Palestinian resistance movement is largely uncontested by many in the international community and therefore affords Israel the opportu- nity to economically, politically, and militarily inca- pacitate both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. While Israeli officials claim they are targeting Hamas "militants," it is clear the current offensive has affected every man, woman and child in Gaza. On January 6, scores of women and children seeking refuge at a United Nations school were slaughtered when two tank shells exploded outside the building. This is particularly appalling considering the United Nations regularly provides Israel with its exact loca- tion. The next day, UN officials denied Israel's claim that militants were operating near the school when it was shelled. In order to realize a just and lasting peace, we must ask questions that address the root of this con- flict. Classic anti-Semitism or an intrinsic hatred of Israel cannot explain Hamas' rocket fire into towns in southern Israel. Many view Hamas' actions as a response to Israel's history of aggression and occupa- tion that has included the forced dispossession and expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians in 1948, the occu- pation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip since 1967, the systematicexpropriationofPalestinianlandsthrough settlement construction, expansion and home demo- lition, humiliation Palestinians face under a brutal occupation that regularly subjects Palestinians to curfews, illegal detention, political assassinations, military incursions, checkpoints and an inability to exercise social and political autonomy. The question here is not the justifiability of rocket attacks out of Gaza, the question is what compels someone to shoot homemade rockets at Israeli civilians in Sderot and Ashkelon? By subjecting the Palestinians in Gaza to disproportionate and particularly savage forms of collective punishment, Israel continues to per- petuate the seemingly intractable nature of the conflict. Contrary to Israeli For- W hat is the na eign Minister Tzipi Liv- between the ni's claim that "there is no humanitarian crisis in the Israelis whatC Gaza Strip," the people of Gaza are suffering from a the fighting in devastating humanitari- an disaster. Since January both sides ach 2006, Israel has imposed a series of economic and social blockades on the Gaza Strip - including the current 18-month-old siege - that have resulted in soaring unemployment rates, poverty, and food, fuel and medical shortages. As a result of Israel's current land invasion, nearly 250,000 people are without electricity and running water and hospitals are overflowing with patients seeking urgent medical care. Israel cannot ignore its human rights violations against the Palestinians for muchlonger. Regrettably, any ceasefire is destined for failure as long as Israel and the international community refuse to examine the core of the conflict. Any lasting peace requires Israel's recognition of the Palestinians' right to exist freely, either as citizens of a sovereign Palestinian state or as co-citizens with Israelis under a secular, one-state democracy. Andrew Dalack and Bre Arder are the co-chairs of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality. Itu P; ca G ie As news channels flash through images of suffer- ing Palestinians, it's challenging for those of us on the other side of the world to understand the Israeli Defense Force's actions ir the Gaza Strip. While conditions in Gaza continue to worsen, Israel's war against Hamas continues. As we all mourn the loss of human life, it's important for us to examine the reasoning and strategy behind Israel's defensive mission. In 2005, Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza, removed settlements throughout the area and took a crucial step toward establishing a Pal- estinian state. In January of the next year, the Palestinian people demo- cratically elected Hamas to a majority in the Pales- tinian legislature. Prom- ising better healthcare, are of the conflict education, jobs and less alestinians and corruption, Hamas pro- vided an enticing option in be done to stop to Palestinian people in need. xaza and how can Once Hamas took power, the party's actions 've lasting peace? proved that the plight of its constituency was less important than radically denying Israel's right to exist. Instead of investing in the vital infrastructure that the people of Gaza need and deserve, Hamas focused on acquiring rockets to fire at Israeli civil- ians and digging tunnels to smuggle weapons from Egypt. Hamas's illogical set of priorities has left the Palestinian people with a leadership unwilling to guide them in a progressive or peaceful direction. Over 7,000 rockets launched from Gaza have fall- en on Israeli soil in the three years since the Israeli disengagement. These rockets are not fired at mili- tary bases or weapon depots, but at schools, homes and marketplaces. These actions cannot be consid- ered an attempt to reach a peaceful resolution. For years, Israel has tried a variety of nonviolent methods to combat Hamas's violence. After a six- month ceasefire that Hamas continually disregard- ed, Israel must now address the needs of its citizens. When President-elect Barack Obama visted Sderot, the Israeli city closest to Gaza and most affected by the ongoing rocket attacks, he said, "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I would do everything to stop that and would expect Israel to do the same thing." The people of Sderot and the other 500,000. Israelis in range of Hamas's rockets should no lon- ger undergo the emotional and physical trauma of having to find refuge in bomb shelters 10 to 15 times per day. Thankfully, few civilians have been killed during these constant, random rocket assaults on civilians. But the low Israeli death toll does not make Hamas's actions any less belligerent or terrifying. Israel has consciously done its best to prevent the deaths of civilians. The IDF specifically targets locations Hamas has used to store weapons or fire upon Israelis. Before it bombs a location, the IDF drops leaflets and sometimes calls civilians to ask innocent bystanders to leave the area for their own safety. Unfortunately, Hamas hides behind civilians, using human shields to raise the death toll in the ongoing public relations battle to accentuate Pal- estinian suffering for world approval. What sort of government monopolizes the pain of its people to further a destructive ideology? The delivery of humanitarian relief to the affect- ed civilians in Gaza remains an important issue to Israel and the rest of the world. Hundreds of supply trucks have been brought through Israeli border crossings, including medical supplies, blood units, medicine, and basic food commodities. Whether or not these supplies are properly distributed to civil- ians depends on Hamas as the governing body of Gaza. Three years ago, Israel spent millions of dol- lars removing its citizens and troops from Gaza in an effort to further the peace process. Today, it is forced to reenter the region in order to protect the basic living conditions of its citizens. The goal of a two-state solution inspired by August 2005's dis- engagement has been deterred by years of rocket attacks and recent explosions of violence, but cannot be forsaken. We encourage the Michigan community to con- tinue to hope for a peaceful solution with an end to the violence on both sides of the border. Rachel Goldstein is the chair of American Movement for Israel and Daniel Neumann is the AMI Treasurer. 'A 4 .