The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, January 28, 1976, Page page 4, Image 4

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Wednesday, january 28, 1976
page 4
daily nebraskan
ralpn by ton wheeler
umr dow suppose
MlAX, EfflE, MSt&L
mzm is illegal my
CAtfT 00 WTMt TO US.
1 1 x mm.
yoJ soucArs
letters to
the edito
Dear editpr:
ixcasuiiauic men may vinti vu me uumiuh ui hiuu-
ion. Still, the belief that abortion is murder finds support
in both the Graeco-Roman and the Judaeo-Christian tradi
tion and thi belief has been reinforced by the discoveries
of modern biology, especially genetics. It is therefore
quite outrageous and unfair for Dr. Weston to characterize
anti-abortionists as "ill-advised, ill-informed and close
minded people incapable of being dynamic" and to lump
them together with the oppocnets of sex education (Jan.
The pro-abortionists are certainly as guilty of trying to
impose their personal moral (or amoral) views on the
public as the anti-abortionists, and it is high time their
own "undynamic" attitudes (with respect to the nature
and the rights of the fetus) be exposed. I note, however,
thst in the four pas?! d?votd to this subject, the Daily
Nebraska has not seen fit to present the other side.
R.D. Stock
Dear editor:
In reference to Michael Lang's guest opinion, (D. N.
Soapbox, Thurs., Jan. 22), may 1 say the question "Is
abortion the taking of human life?" is one which may
never be answered since the absolute definitions of what is
"human" and what is "life" are continually questioned by
philosophers, scientists, theologians and the general popu
lace in all nations, all cultures. ,
The morality of abortion may not be a matter of legis
lation. It belongs to the realm of the individual con
science. If abortions are made illegal, then many are
forced to shape their philosophy and religion to the
dictates of others. If abortions are legal, not one woman is
forced to go against her beliefs. No one is forced into
having an abortion. I strongly feel that it must remain a
choice. '
Deaf editor:
Friday, while in the Union, t signed a peition to keep
T)r. Boyd and Dr. Wenburg.of the Speech Department, at
UNL. It seems they didn't get tenure and uniessthey are
successful in appealing the decision, they will "have to
leave. The rationale for not giving these men tenure 1$ that
they haven't written enough published papers. '
You don't have to write a paper to be a good teacher, '
arid these men are good teachers ;
Students should be encouraged to sign the petition. '
- Name Withheld '
' Consider the dilemma of legions of patient
UNL residence hall dwellers. .
Five years ago; just after former Chancellor
James Zumberge took over, he was. faced with a
prolonged dispute over visitation in residence
Later that year, Margaret Mead told UNL
students that they should spend their time trying
to achieve greater things than expanded alcohol
and visitation rights.
Since then residence hall visitation has evolved
into the current option system, allowing for
floors with no visitation hours, zero to eight
visitation hours, zero to fourteen hours and 24
hours a day for graduate students.
In those five years, coeducational living was
expanded and the Associated Living program at
Abel Hall was developed.
Not bad for five years.
Or is it? '
The latest round of proposed changes for
residence hall life emerged last week from
Housing Policy Committee (HPC) and Council on
Student Life (CSL) perusal, now somewhat
scarred but ready to be kicked up the university
bureaucratic ladder to the regents. ,.(: "
How did it finally look? A proposal supporting
24-hour visitation was passed but a plan for
alternate room co-ed living, was mixed.
, Alcohol consumption and possession was again
put on the drawing board and passed by both
groups. As always, these proposals give wide
latitude for those who demand a more conserva
tive lifestyle. ' '.
It's too bad that UNL students and faculty
groups didn't give their wholehearted support
to all the proposals of the Differentiated Housing
Task Force. , . .
Careful study and long hours had gone into
that report and the objections raised, ranging'
from questioning, the need for coeducational
floors to citing invasion of privacy under 24-hour
visitation, were beside the point.
There is no need. But there is room for a
Choice of living arrangements comes to respon
sible adults. Adults who choose to attend college
should have the same choice regarding living
accomodations as adults anywhere else.
And that is what university students are
adults, both legally and socially.
One CSL member pointed to this very fact
when he said: "This is not an abstract right. The
university ought to be offering to students the
rights and responsibilities of adults, as an option.'
It seems inconsequential to quibble about in
vasion of privacy for someone who wants to live
in an environment with 24-hour visitation.
Social realities' demand that students be given
the choice they deserve or they will bend the
rules to 'accomodate their lifestyles. Unenforce
able rules become meaningless.
Too much time for too many years has been
given over to arguing about student rights in resi-
dence halls.
Decisions allowing the choice for all, from
most restricted to most open, is the choice that
responsible students deserve.
- ' Vince Boucher
word! Legislature merits praise
unheard! for anti-abortion resolution
By Del Gustafson
On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court dis-
covered that "meaningful life" begins in the American'
fetus six-or seven-months after conception.
Last Thursday, the national debate over abortion
reached the Nebraska Legislature in the form of a resolu
tion urging the U.S. Congress to propose the "Right-to-Life"
constitutional amendment. It safely can be inferred
from discussion on the resolution that the logical imper
atives of the abortion question soar over the heads of a
few Nebraska legislators. n
It seems obvious that the abortion debate should re
volve around one question and one question alcne-h the
fetus a human life? If it is a human life, it is entitled to
the protection of the state, regardless of the mental "
anguish, physical pain, or economic strain development of
the fetus may put upon the mother. A civilized man
hardly would argue that parents be allowed to terminate
their baby's life when facing the most extreme hardship.
Likewise, if the fetus differs from the baby only in
development and not in kind, it should not be abused. If,
however, the fetus is not human (for it cannot be denied
that it possesses life) then it may not be accorded the pro
tection of the state.
At the Legislature, however, grossly irrelevant argu
ments were expounded in defense of abortion. State Sens.
Ernest Chambers of Omaha and Shirley Marsh of Lincoln
argued that even if abortion is illegal, abortions will con-tir.ue-they
are "a fact of life"-therefore, abortion should
remain legal and the state should not, as Sen. Marsh so
eloquently put it, "send abortion underground for the
The utterance of the truism that abortions are a fact of
life is wholly irrelevant. It is a fact of life that human
beings loot, pillage and rape despite laws to the contrary;
but I never realized their continued existence was an argu
ment for legalization. I always leaned toward the opposite
conclusion that since such atrocites continued, it would
be the state's duty to strengthen its just instruments of re
pression to end them.
Nevertheless, man does not know if the genetic com
position of the mature adult is complete as conception.
On .the basis of such knowledge, the fetus should, in a
society which purports to value human life, be granted a
right-to-life until the proponents of abortion can prove
the fetus is not a human life. . . . -
Nice guy Ford soaks poor
with new bone-drv budaet
By Arthur Hoppe
The prestigious National Union for Tax Sanity is
wildly enthusiastic about Mr. Ford's lean new $394 billion
budget. r -
"At last a President has openly adopted the wise fiscal
Eolicy we. have been urging for years," says Executive
tfrector Homer T. Pettibone, "s03k the poor.
Pettibone noted that most'of the $28 billion Mr. Ford
trimmed from the budget affected only the old, the sick,
the young, the hungry, the uneducated, the crippled, the
jobless and other undesirable elements of society. ,
These savings, he said, will allow every decent Amer
ican to enjoy a tax cut-particularly every decccnt Amer
ican who is either a corporation or earns more than
$10,000 a year. y ,
Hasn't worked
"Ever since Congress passed the graduated income tax
in 1913," Pettibone said, "political demogogaes have been
demanding that the government soak the rich. It simply
hasn't worked. V
"For one thing, the rich can afford tax lawyers and
accountants who are twice as smart as the Congressmen
who write the tax laws. Therefore, any attempt to soak
the rich merely results in more billions of tax dollars that
aren't paid. ( No wonder we have such a budget deficit.
- "Secondly, there are far more poor people than rich
pcpla and their numbers are increasing every' day. If we
m fcurUing fof taxpayers, surely, -wo should hunt where
th 'garha is most plentiful. And isn't it mare equitable to
take a dollar from a million taxpayers rather than a
million from one millionaire?
"Thirdly, it would be foolhardy to give more money to
the poor in times of recession and unemployment. They
would merely fritter it away on food, clothing and shelter.
The rich, however, will spend It on cars, swimming pools,
croquet sets and the kind of material possessions that
create jobs. , , .
"Lastly, do we really wish to penalize success and re
ward failure? What has poverty ever done for America?
' Rk:h have made country
It is the rich and the rich alone who have made this
country what it is today. It is the rich who built our rail
roads, our conglomerates and our defense arsenal. And if
finished"5"'1 Whcn they 8tarted, they were when they
Y ".But Mr' Ford has beer the first President to see clear
' jh old, the sick, the young, the hungry, the un
eaucated, the crippled and the jobless are a drain on our
sources arid a burdea on our economy. Mr. Ford has
wisely acted to reduce that burden by what he rightly de
people major tumlnS Post for the American
' ' i?!?1? coultn't be a better description of his new
policy to soak the poor." . .
'thu !ltibonf. tecmcd urPHsed when isked If lie didn't feel
this new poky was perhaps a bit hesrtlejs.
FJ1?W ?Td it be heartless?" he asked incredulously.
lS?lkfl0W- Hfl Ford i real nice, guy."