Newspaper Page Text
I
i
4 • The Red and Black • Tuesday, October 23, 1990
OPINIONS
QUOTABLE
"in the driver's education classes, we taught our nighi school
kids what to do In the front seat of a car. We also need to teach
them what to do in the back seat of a ca '- „. h| t ,
■ ^ Minor while teaching a UGA nisxory ciass.
The Red & Black
Established 1893—Incorporated 1980
An independent student neu tpaper not affiliated with the University of Georgia
Robert Todd/Editor-in-Chief
Jennifer Rampey/Managing Editor
David Johnston/Opinions Editor
■ EDITORIALS
Thumbs down
Atlanta’s Channel 11 (WXIA) has been doing a
telephone “opinion poll” of viewers for several years
now.
Last night, for example, following the debate
between gubernatorial candidates Johnny Isakson and
Zell Miller, two numbers flashed across the screen.
Viewers could call one number if they felt Isakson
“won” the debate and another number if they thought
Miller “won.”
The problem is that one person could sit at his/her
phone and dial one of the two numbers over and over
again. In fact, campaigns typically set phone bank
operations up to distort the results of these polls.
It’s bad enough when these surveys are used to
answer questions like, “Should Jessica Hahn have
posed for Playboy?” or “Should Donald Trump marry
Marla Maples?” But when important political or social
issues are involved, they are downright dangerous.
The bottom line is that the results are worthless.
They mean nothing. To report them — as WXIA usually
does in its nightly newscast — is to distort the news.
But WXIA takes it even farther — arrogantly
announcing to viewers that it will pass the results on to
both campaigns.
These polls warp reality because the results give
the impression they represent the true opinion of the
masses. For example, a telephone poll might report
that 80 percent of the people like chicken soup, but
what it doesn’t report is that only 10 people in a
community of 1 million bothered to call.
There are many broadcast news shows, and even
some newspapers, which use this garbage for
promotion. But these “polls” have no place in
responsible journalism and we encourage viewers and
readers not to participate in them. And for Heaven’s
sake, don’t put any faith in them.
Good luck
The new University Roundtable certainly shows
some promise. However we hope the organizers don’t
restrict participation to the point where the forums
themselves suffer.
If the point of the the Roundtable is to promote
open and diverse discusion, then why have any
limitations on membership at all? Restricting the grade
point averages of members and limiting the
membership contradicts the goals of the organization.
The only prerequisite for participation in the
forums should be a desire to participate. By opening
the Roundtable to any interested party, the Roundtable
stays an arena for free thought and discussion rather
than a platform for resume fluff.
Additionally, student participation shouldn’t be
dictated by faculty and community participation. By
the same token, faculty and community participation
shouldn’t be dictated by students.Again, participation
based on desire not quotas.
We challenge the Roundtable to take on topics
relevant to this community and then work to
implement reforms. If it doesn’t, then the Roundtable is
just the stuff resumes are fluffed with.
Other organizations on this campus have become
very involved in the exchange of ideas. The mark of
sucessful and even significant groups are that they do
more than just talk.
The Demosthenean Society sponsors campus-wide
political debates and voter awareness forums. The
College Republicans and Young Democrats work to
educate and register voters, while sponsoring political
speakers. Students for Environmental Awareness
challenges the University community to save the
Earth.
University Roundtable, it’s up to you to do the
same. The University anxiously awaits your efforts.
Good luck.
STAFF
NEWS: 543-1809
Naw* I01a>: umiV Wlihm
Ipwta 14*tat Randy Waltar
Intartatwnarrt Idttor. Coiaan Brook*
Aaaociata Nawt (01 at a. Oara Mclaod, f i a bath
Oraddy
ftatrt P*g# Copy E01a»; C-a* H**i*r
feat4* Copy I«lota: Chn* CioM*. Sharon BarvOov
Kym Tamfcourm* Margarat Watton
UOA Today/ Wo* (ana* naa Kandaii
**<*o I0tar: Mana day
CMaf Pfcatofaphai Tracy Stanbarg
Oraphlc* C0tar Staphan Moroak
•UR Writar* Owrnn Brunt, lynn Barfiaid. Ai
Diaon. Patrick Flanigan. Chn* Onmaa, Lane* H*im*,
M>chaa< Mclaod Dan Rooi. Sand-a
Staph*"* Dana wNta, Stacay Mciraoah
•porta Writar Cnh Schrndt
Tranda I0t*». Mana tdoarda
A a at at ant Tranda MNar: Staphan.* Snath
■atwaan Tha Hadgaa *Mor Davd Pac*
Aaaiataot Satwaan ill* Hadgaa (0tar: |n« (Urbar
Cartaaniat: M,k* Moray
•dMattal Aaaiatant: Da* Do a Vargaa
Opinion* oapraaaad * Tha Bad and Slack othar than
unaignad addon* * *r* th* optmona of tha «mt*r* of
•tgnad columns and net nocaaaanly tho«* of Tn* Pad
and Black Pub >g Company Inc Alt right*
raaarvad. Bar* m* by parmaaton of tn* aotor*
ADVERTISING: 543-1791
Studont Man agar a: Knchai!* H0u0*ni. S**n fag*n
A4v*riiaing Aaaiatant a:
Nikj Girardaau. Mad*i*<na Wii*on
• onior Advartlalng Bapraaantathaa:
Alan Motcorrp, ton Thurman
Advartialng Rapraaantatlva*: M<cha*i Bloom, wanar
Cod. J*t* fingar. j*ff tatham, Mauraan Muagrova.
Alicia Nickia*. Kim Richard*. Tad Rook*. Kaiiy Tyi*r.
ToungSun Tun
Aaaiatant (dttartal Production Man agar
Cn*tma T*ir>dt
Production StaR: Andy Ard, Staphania Cnalar,
Sara Eaaaa. Laura En*dr«h. Lonn Marah, Stacy
Stanbarg. Michaii* wagon
Oanard Manager Marry Montevideo
Advartialng Ot roe tar. Robm Stonar
OMca Manager: Mary Straub
Pro*uctlon Manager Manana Martin
Claadtad/Raaaptlealat: Suaan Andaraon
Croon Manager Suaan Oavia
Clerical Nancy 0«rt*
Th# Rad and Slack ia pubiahad Tuatday through
Friday fail though aprtng quartara and each Thyraday
during aummar quarter *r-th th* aicaptione of
holiday* and aiam panoda, by Tha Rad and Black
Pubiiahing Company Inc a nonprofit camput
nawapapar not affluatad with th* Univ*r»ity of
Georgia. 123 N iackaon St. Alhana Ga 30601.
Third data poauga paid at Athan*. G* Subacnpuon
rat* 130 par y*ar
Here we go again: Barnard on budgets
Here we go again. Congress was in session
through the weekend working on the same is
sues that should have been resolved months
ago. Why is this happening?
Without being partisan, the process should
have begun with the president’s budget pro
posal in January. But the president’s proposal
contained such unrealistic projections as to in
flation, interest rates, growth rates, etc. that it
was not considered by either the House or the
Senate.
Then the budgets passed by the House and
Senate were so disparate, that we didn’t event
try to reconcile the differences. Instead we went
straight to a “Budget Summit" organized be
tween the administration and the Congress. So
we’re back at the drawing board.
Is it really that hard to address the budget
crisis? Some members in Congress — who are
rarely consulted, and left out of the process
until the votes are counted — feel there are so
lutions better than what’s been offered us thus
far.
Yes, we do have a budget crisis. But how
would we resolve it if it were personal? We
would cut our standard of living until we have
the revenues sufficient to meet our additional
needs.
I believe that the public is willing to make
the sacrifices necessary to balance the budget
over a reasonable period of time — but they are
more willing to do it by reducing government
spending — than by raising taxes.
Our problem is that the leadership of Con
gress is really not listening to the public — and
even to some of the rank and file members such
as myself.
I want my constituents to know how I feel,
and why I have continued to vote against the
proposals that have been offered thus far.
After the endless labor of summit, we were
presented with a child so ugly its own mother
couldn’t love it. The final package was the
product of only a dozen negotiators — the other
500 members of the House and Senate were
kept in the dark until hours before the vote.
The budget summit agreement had a steep
gas tax hike, additional taxes on cigarettes and
alcohol, a new tax on luxury items, and a host of
other “user fees” which mean taxes to most of
us. In addition, it cut $60 billion out of Medi
care while leaving other federal programs un
touched. That’s not budget fairness to me.
So I voted against it, along with the majority
of mv colleagues in the House. That triggered
the first weekend marathon in which we were
able to pass a skeleton budget with the skin and
meat to be added by the committees.
The next major budget vote was on a bill
known as reconciliation. This legislation imple
ments the revenue increases and entitlement
cuts of the budget resolution. This was even
more objectionable because it contained in
creased income taxes on all brackets. While it
was widely hailed as a tax hike for the rich, in
reality it had a quietly-inserted provision which
allowed the bracket creep of the 1970s to re
turn. . ,.. ,. , .
And the total tax hike was even higher than
in the budget summit agreement. This is
clearly unacceptable to the constituents of the
10th District — and indeed the nation. I have
gotten that message. I don’t know why the lead
ership hasn’t.
So what is the answer to our budget woes?
Well, we know there will be no deficit reduction
without pain. But we can and we should find
ways to spread that pain around.
For example, this year alone I voted for a
dozen across-the-board cuts to spending bills.
In my 14 years in Congress, I have supported
close to a hundred of these cuts. I think ev
eryone can understand and shoulder eaual
cuts. If we had been freezing spending, holding
the programs to the past year’s levels, all along
we wouldn’t be scrambling around at the elev
enth hour trying to cut $40 billion out of the
deficit.
Further, we could pass an amendment to the
Constitution requiring a balanced budget —
something even Congress couldn’t squeak out
of. As a longtime supporter of such legislation ,
I was bitterly disappointed by the House’s
narrow defeat of such a measure a few months
ago.
Or we could enact another piece of legislation
I have cosponsored which would create a Chief
Financial Officer for the government and sim
ilar officers in each agency to keep a watchful
eye on waste, fraud and abuse.
What I cannot support is balancing the
budget through ever-increasing tax hikes.
When a family is running short of money, it
cuts out unnecessary spending and searches its
finances for waste.
What works for the rest of America would
work for Congress. We must roll up our sleeves,
do the work we were elected for, and balance
the budget once and for all.
Doug Barnard Jr. is the incumbent Democratic
congressman from Georgia's tenth congres
sional district. The tenth district is composed of
14 counties including Clarke, Elbert, Columbia,
McDuffie, Madison, Morgan, Oconee, Ogle
thorpe, Richmond and a portion of Gwinnett.
Church forgetting non-violence of Christ
Original Christians were not as blind to the
obvious as we are today. Early Christians paid
a terrible price at the hands of both Jews and
Romans for their refusal to engage in homicidal
violence. In fact, they survived three separate
intensive efforts of extermination by the
Roman government with an ethic of nonviolent
love.
The crisis in the Middle East has raised more
than oil prices. Indeed, the events of these past
months have raised American patriotism
throughout the country. US flags are being
bought and unfurled at record rates. Letters
and supplies for overseas soldiers are rushing
in faster than they can be sent out. Ribbons are
flying from car antennas around the state. Red,
white, and blue are the colors of the day. As the
evening news seems to reinforce, patriotism is
on the rise. Everyone seems to support this
“necessary evil" in the Middle East, including
the Christian Church.
Recently, while traveling along the east coast
in route to New Hampshire, I witnessed this
“Christian" patriotism. You need not go far,
however, to see what I’m talking about. Boards,
outside many churches today, have a new mes
sage — "God bless our troops,” “Good luck to
our GIs," “God bless the USA,” etc. Of course,
these churches are not alone in their patriotic
support for our military intervention in the
Middle East. You can see similar expressions
posted outside small and large schools and
businesses throughout the state.
The Christian Church, however, must be pin
pointed here because its founder explicitly told
nis followers to keep “hands ofP’ the instru
ments of violence. Something serious is at stake
here. The United States, comprised largely of
Roman Catholics and Protestants is fully pre
pared to enter wholeheartedly into war with
Iraq. And what is the voice of the Christian
Church — “God bless our soldiers, God bless
our country." Is this support for the military
build-up in Saudi Arabia valid Christianity?
The church has been overlooking something
of critical importance for nearly 1700 years.
Church leaders and laity have become consis
tently oblivious to the obvious; namely, that
David
Goode
♦
Jesus did not teach nor did He justify or con
done the use of homicidal violence by His fol
lowers. Non-violent love of friend and enemy is
arguably the clearest of New Testament teach
ings. Yet, the voice of Christianity today seems
to be steering 180 degrees in the opposite direc
tion.
Original Christians saw the blatent incom
patibility between Jesus’ new commandment to
‘love one another as I have loved you” and hom
icide. For example, the Apostolic Tradition of
Hippolytus (215 A.D.) reads: ‘The soldier (who
becomes a Christian).. shall not kill anyone. If
ordered to do bo he shall not carry out the order
... If he does not accept this let him be dis
missed (from the Christian community)..The
catechumen or believer who wishes to become a
soldier shall be dismissed (from the Christian
community). In the first 300 years of Chris
tianity, there was no confusion that the Chris
tian was a pacifist. The question asked by
Christians closest to Jesus in history was: what
would Jesus have done? Since, they could not
imagine Jesus participating in the carnage of
homicide, they could not themselves partici
pate.
After the Roman Envperor Constantine (d.
337 AD) converted to Christianity, however,
there was a gradual withering away of our ad
herence to Jesus’ teachings of nonviolence and
love of enemies. In the centuries closest to
Jesus in history, one could not be a Christian
and serve in the military. But, after Con
stantine, one could not be in the military unless
However, religiously-legitamized Christian
homicide did not end with Constantine. Vio
lence became normal, indeed a noble part of ac
ceptable Christian life. The first of the just war
theories made its debut in the Church by 368
AD. Centuries later, Orthodox and Catholics
began to savage each other. Before long, the
total extermination practices of the Crusndes
got under way. Soon, the 600 year horror of bur
ning Jews and heretics commenced. By the
1500’s, Protestants and Catholics began tea
ring each others lives apart in Europe. By the
twentieth century, Christians around the world
entered wholeheartedly into the indiscriminate
butchery of industrial war. And, today it seems
Christians are fully prepared to continue this
1700 year history of calling evil good.
If the church continues down the road of jus
tified violence, is it not continuing a history of
self-deception? The self-deceiver is one who
persuades him/herself to believe contrary to the
evidence in order to evade, somehow, unplea
sant and unwanted truths. Perhaps the modern
church obstinately refuses to teach of the non
violent Jesus because there is something un
bearably distressing to be seen — namely, a
1700 year history of calling evil good.
It may not be that Christian churches and
schools actively attack Jesus’ nonviolent tea
chings;^ is rather that they kill them by calcu
lated indifference. We spend more time reading
between the actual lines of the Gospel. The
message to the younger generation is clear:
what is not emphasized is not worth em
phasizing.
0. n this campus alone we have scores of
Christian groups and churches. Yet, where is
the voice speaking out against the military
presence in the Middle East? Why the silence?
If a sociological group founded on the teachings
of love for enemies and forgiveness seventy
times seven times is not speaking up on this
issue, who is? Early Christians paid a high
v° r their refusal to engage in war. Are
Christians today willing to do tne same?
David Goode is a senior social work major