Newspaper Page Text
Page 4
THE MAROON TIGER
April, 1967
My Statement of Conscience Cont.
(CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3-COLUMN 31
a place in my life comparable to that
filled in others by orthodox belief in a
personal God. It is the Supreme Being
in whose spirit I seek to live and often
imposes duties superior to those arising
from human relationships as in the
present case.
In light of this fundamental religious
truth, I know that I must not kill or hurt
another person unjustly, and that I would
do so at my peril. It is for this reason
that I cannot join a military establish
ment which engages in unjustified kill
ing, torturing, and destruction. The
murder committed by a soldier is as
abhorrent to me as the killing of one
civilian by another. Nor could I partici
pate even indirectly in such killing, for
instance, as a medical assistant with
noncombatant status. I see little dif
ference between killing personally and
administering medical aid to a wounded
soldier so that he can more quickly re
sume his killing. I would regard any
type of connection with the Armed
Forces as complicity with a military
machine whose primary purposes are
evil and destruction.
On the other hand, I would not ob
ject to alternate service in a constructive
civilian capacity. I have done work of
this nature in the past and I would con
sider it consistent with my religious
beliefs and principles. I think that such
work would be useful to my country in
a constructive rather than a destructive
manner, and if I must serve I would
rather build than destroy.
I have been greatly influenced in
my thinking by the nonviolent-teachings
of Dr. Martin Luther King. Though Dr.
King focuses his attention primarily on
domestic problems, I have been forced
by conscience and circumstance to en
large my perspective. Although I have
been disturbed all along by America’s
participation in the Vietnamese civil
war, I never gave the situation much
thought until it became clear that Amer
ica was becoming an aggressor.
In February, 1965, I obtained infor
mation concerning conscientious objec
tion from a number of groups whose pur
pose is to help young men who are con
sidering the acquisition of the C.O.’s
classification. I went through a long
period of self searching and delibera
tion which was greatly affected when
America began her indiscriminate bomb
ing of North Viet Nam.
It is now very clear to me that I
could not conscientiously serve in the
Armed Forces in any capacity. The
course of the war since I have been ac
tively engaged in contemplating it — the
saturation bombing of civilian popula
tions, the napaiming of innocent men,
women, and children, the indiscriminate
burning of villages, the poisoning of
rice crops, the torture of prisoners —
has confirmed this conviction.
I believe in the use of force only
when (1) it is motivated by genuine love
and concern for the welfare of others;
(2) it is limited to the least possible
force necessary to accomplish the ob
jectives; (3) the persons against whom
the force is directed have other means
of redress as, for instance, the right to
fair trial; (4) it is directed only against
offending individuals, or those reasonab
ly believed to be offenders, and not in
discriminately against large groups of
people, innocent and guilty alike; (5) it
is used in the self-defense of people un
able to protect themselves; and (6) it
is clear that judicious use of some
force will prevent greater evil.
The current American campaign
against the Vietnamese appears to be
an example of a war which fails to meet
any of these conditions. It does not seem
to be motivated primarily by concern for
the Vietnamese people and nation, for
the daily destruction of both by Ameri
can airpower proves that our effort is
motivated by doctrinaire anticommunism
and excessive concern over the United
States’ reputation. It is not limited to
the least force necessary to accomplish
the objective — the bombing of North
Viet Nam has had virtually no effect on
the civil war in the South, but it is being
senselessly escalated nonetheless. Both
sides have killed and maimed many civil
ians. The United States obviously is not
fighting in self-defense, and its Saigon
ally bears at least as much responsibil
ity for the war as the Viet Cong, and
probably more. Finally, I cannot imagine
any result of our participation in the war
which would be a greater evil than that
which the war itself is inflicting on the
Vietnamese people.
Pray for peace,
Robert L. Terrell
NOTE: Undoubtedly there are thousands,
probably hundreds of thousands, of
students and non-students who have sent
iments which coincide with those ex
pressed in the letter above. Because
they feel that they are alone, most of
them will never speak out and therefore
declare their rights as Americans and
as human beings to decide when, where,
and under what circumstances they will
take the life of another person. We
the students of Morehouse are faced
with a golden opportunity to help the
people of Viet Nam, who are being
slaughtered like pigs. All that is re
quired of us is a little courage and some
sense of moral responsibility.
I suggest that we submit petitions
of conscientious objection to General
Lucius B. Hershey, Director of the Se
lective Service Committee; Secretary of
Defense Robert S. McNamara; President
Lyndon B. Johnson; and to our respective
local boards. By taking such action we
would probably inspire many student
bodies around the nation to do likewise,
inspire many non-students to do likewise,
and probably precipitate a groundswell of
humanitarian concern which could quick
ly and decisively end America’s partici
pation in Viet Nam.
GULF GRANTS
Gulf Oil Corporation donated $65,200
to 20 Negro colleges and universities,
including 17 members of the United Ne
gro College Fund, during 1966.
The total is almost double the an
nual amount of gifts to Negro schools
in the past years, according to Dr. Alex
ander Lewis, Gulf Senior Vice Presi
dent, who directs the company’s Aid to
Education program. He said the grants
were made directly to the colleges on a
merit basis.
Capital grants totalling $37,500
were made to six schools, including
$10,000 to Morehouse College, Atlanta;
$7,500 to Fisk University, Nashville;
and $5,000 each to Bishop College,
Dallas; Claflin University, Orangeburg,
S. C.; Hampton Institute, Hampton, Va.;
and Lane College, Jackson, Term.
Some $13,700 was distributed to in
dividual departments at seven schools:
Clark College, Atlanta, $2,500; Dillard
University, New Orleans, $1,000; Hamp
ton Institute, $2,500; Huston-Tillotson
College, Austin, Texas, $1,500; Phil
ander Smith College, Little Rock, Ark.,
$1,700; Talladega College, Talladega,
Ala., $2,500; and Xavier University,
New Orleans, $2,000.
Eight other schools shared $14,000
in unrestricted grants. Awarded $2,000
each were LeMoyne College, Memphis;
Livingstone College, Salisbury, N.C.;
Morris Brown College, Atlanta; Virginia
Union University, Richmond; Wilberforce
University, Wilberforce, Ohio; and Wiley
College, Marshall, Texas. Receiving
$1,000 grants were Lincoln University,
Lincoln, Pa., and Atlanta University.
Capital grants are made to help
schools improve their present facilities
or to build new ones. Departmental as
sistance grants aid in upgrading specific
programs within the schools, especially
those departments of interest to Gulf.
Unrestricted grants, as the term im
plies, help the college fill its special
needs and may be used for faculty sal
aries, capital improvements or any other
use.
We Have Pledged
Our Lives To Thee?
Milton Wilkins, Associate Editor
Morehouse has finally reached its
Centennial. The celebration and the ac
tivities are all but over, and, as usual,
enough jokes on the subject have been
created to fill a book: one hundred years
of tradition and no heat; one hundred
years of the second ice age; one hun
dred years completed and now Morehouse
moves into the 20th Century. All in all,
the year is a success. Morehouse has
finally received some much-needed fi
nancial strength. But what do the stu
dents have to say about it all?
The Centennial was a mementous
occasion. It marked something proud and
historical for this college. But still a
fundamental problem with the college re
mains. I’m not complaining about the
food, or even the lackadaisical attitude
the administration has toward sports.
What I consider the real problem with
this college is that the students, sup
posedly the prime objective of this in
stitution, do not exist. The now has
little precedence over the then. We live
in tradition, in the past glories of More
house, in the college presidents the col
lege has produced, the doctors, pro
fessors, lawyers. When we first arrived
at Morehouse we were instilled with this
tradition, and perhaps not knowing any
better, accepted it whole. I have no dis
respect for tradition as such, but the
point of the matter is that not once has
there ever been mention that it is up to
the student now to make this college
great. Each and every one of us now
makes and will make Morehouse what
ever it is or will be. What we have been
made to become is a part of Morehouse
and not, as we really are, Morehouse it
self.
In my opinion this school should
exist for the student and not the student
for the school. This is not Boot Camp or
a four-year pledging period for some
great Negro brotherhood. But when the
students finally protest conditions which
they believe to be a gross incongruity
with what college facilities should be,
what they receive are dismissals, re
fusals, threats, or “if you don’t like it,
transfer.” That really sounds like sin
cere interest in student welfare. For
instance, it’s not that the units were
cold this past winter; they’ve been cold
for years. Why haven’t they been im
proved over the twelve-odd years they’ve
been barely fighting off a breeze? Why
(CONTINUED ON PAGE 5-COLUMN 1)