The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, February 19, 1979, Page page 4, Image 4
page 4 daily nebraskan monday, february 19, 1979 n fDOraSJDli?DI 2) No matter what daddy tells you, there is an Easter Bunny9 judge If Wayne Felron of Springfield, Mass., doesn't shape up, hell have to stop seeing his kids. The 35-year-old fireman doesn't beat his daughters (aged seven and four) or take them to X-rated movies or encourage them to neglect their studies. What he does is read the Bible to them. Judge Frank Placzek of Hampden County Probate Court says he'll have to stop it. Otherwise, no more visiting rights. Felton and his 32-year-old former wife were divorced last year after a two-year separation. Both had been members of the Congregationalist church. William raspberry Felton subsequently remarried and joined the Jehovah's Witnesses, and that's what got him into trouble. According to the children's mother, who was granted custody, Felton started using his court -ordered visitation periods to read the Bible to his daughters and talk with them about religion. Nor was that his only sin. Confusing "He was (also) confusing them by telling them there was no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, no Tooth Fairy, and I had told them there was," Diane Felton said. It must have been confusing, all right, but I'm not quite certain whether it's the business of the court. It's hard to imagine the basis for Judge Placzek's interference. Confusion alone could hardly have been the rationale. Else, what would his honor do about all the children of in tact marriages whose parents hold differing religious beliefs? Perhaps he considered Felton 's teachings unwarranted interference in their upbringing. But is it interference for a parent to teach his children what he deeply believes to be the Truth? Ludicrous Could it be that the judge is a Congregationalist? Or a believer in the Tooth Fairy, et al? The whole affair might strike you as ludicrous-unless the beliefs involved are your own. If they are, you have to wonder at the audacity of the probate judge. In many ways, the judge's actions are an even more basic infringement than in the case of Chad Green, the three-year-old leukemia victim whose parents were order ed to stop treating him with laetrile. In the leukemia affair, also a Massachusetts case, the parents were on the same side. Their fight was with the medical authorities, who insisted they knew best. The court agreed with the medical authorities. Better equipped But medicine is a matter of science, and it might be argued that scientists are better equipped to make medical judgments, even when the patient's parents believe other wise. But religion is not a question for the experts to decide. It is profoundly personal matter, involving beliefs, not objective truth discoverable through the adversary processes of the courts. I suppose it may have been in the judge's mind that the granting of custody carries with it the authority to deter mine what religious beliefs will be taught. Still, I think he would have been better advised to wash his hands of the dispute. Certainly there is the possibility that the children might be confused as a result of their parent's religious dispute. But they might have been equally confused if one parent had been a liberal and the other a conservative. Possibility Moreover, there is at least the theoretical possibility that the parental difference of opinion might lead less to confusion than to the ability of the children to form their own judgments, to develop their own religious faith. Judge Placzek, by buying into the dispute, may have thought he was only protecting the legal rights of the parent who had won custody of the children. In fact, he was establishing a particular religion. It is fair to wonder whether he would have made the same judicial ruling if he had been a Jehovah's Witness. It is a question Judge Placzek might well have asked himself. Copyright 1979, The Washington Post Company Perfectionists, please apply No newspaper is without its critics. And the Daily Nebraskan, like any other, getc its fair share of criticism. Aside from the normal, day-to-day criticism from assorted and sundry groups on this campus concerning our coverage or lack of it the Daily Nebraskan also hears from "experts." Sometimes these so-called experts call us on the telephone. The general rule of thumb is "the more vociferous the criticism, the less likely the critic will identify him-or-herself." Anonymous phone calls criticizing our daily product have the least credibility. If the caller refuses to give us his or her name, we assume the call is a figment of our imagination and totally ignore the criticism. The same goes for unsigned letters. These are immediately placed in the circular file under "G"-for garbage. We take more seriously those criticisms which come with a name. We welcome con structive criticism, whether it concerns grammar or good taste, misquotes or misspell ings. Sometimes we even follow sound advice from well-meaning people. Journalism is literature for the masses. A journalist doesn't have the luxury of working long periods of time on his product, like an artist or an author. He has to find as much information as possible, present that inform ation to his readers, all in a matter of hours. This is not an apology for mistakes. This is simply a reason for their existence. So, to those critics out there who find us lacking in basic language skills, who think they can do a better job of covering and reporting the news, we urge that they come and apply for a job at the Daily Nebraskan. To those who seek perfection, we suggest they look up the word in a dictionary. They're fooling themselves if they believe it's attainable. Parents'Day conception clouded over with partial truths As any graduating senior can tell you, UNL is a classic example of Murphy's Law: if anything can possibly go wrong around here, it will. When it comes to Parents' Day, however. Murphy was an optimist. For those of you who haven't read your tuition state ment, Parents' Day is set for April 27 and 28, a date chosen mainly because it coincided with the Spring Red White football game. gibson This means the event will conflict with the last minute typing of papers and completion of reading assignments which always accompanies the weekend before dead week. It also mean; that Parents' Day will conflict with the residence halk "Spring Things." More importantly, it means that Chancellor Roy Young was slightly perturbed last week after he was told that the Red-White game is actually scheduled for May 5, not April 27. Spring practices Unless the game is moved up a week-as it may well be despite the havoc it would play with spring practices-Parents' Day won't be the same. The administration thought of the game as a major attraction, as if contrary to pop ular opinion, UNL's reputation as the Harvard of the Plains was not expected to attract many parents. Other weekend events face equally vexing, though per haps more intentional, problems. A maingoal of Parents' Day was to allow parents to attend classes so they could gauge the quality of education their offspring pays for. Teachers, however, have been told that they need not let parents in their classrooms. In addition, the schedule virtually insures that few, if any, parents will visit even one class. Friday 8:30 and 9:30 ajn. classes will not start and the Honors Convoca students, who are the most likely to take their parents to class, will take them to the convocation instead. Open classes But there will be open classes and academic discussions tions will be held at 10:30 ajn., so that UNL's top after the convocation ends-for three percent of UNL stu dents who make it to class on Friday afternoons. And, as for those parents who have to work on Friday, Saturday will offer such academic events as a pancake feed and a gymnastics meet. Actually, the idea of Parents' Day as a "report to the stockholders" (students included) was a good one, and student governments leaders approved it in April. But they did not approve the plans developed exclusively by the administration plans which turn this 'report' into a show-and-tell. After all, how much can a football game tell parents about the quality of their offspring's education? How will a gymnastic meet tell parents that the College of Engineering and Business are drastically short of money and teachers? Any why should parents be limited to attending just one day of classes and seeing just a few teachers? Why not give them a chance to observe UNL's "reputation for undergraduate excellence" in every class, with every teacher? It could be done. All it would take is a teacher evalua tion handbook, written by responsible students and pub lished by the administration. Indeed, such handbooks are in use at several other schools, including Harvard (our 'adopted' sister school), where the administration even pays for it. But the odds of such a handbook at Nebraska are about the same as a voting student regent. And thus the problems of Parents' Day-substantial, yet not insurmountable. Much depends on whether ASUN abandons its neutrality and demands that parents be told the full truth, not just the partial truth, as the price for student cooperation. But much more depends on the administration, which alone will decide just how much truth about UNL's high tuition, low teachers' salaries, poor advising, overcrowded colleges and 'non-political' speakers would be included in this "Report to the Stockholders." 6 fiEud dlufi!? I would like to take the opportunity to compliment Michael Gibson on his brilliant analysis of the tactics of YAF. The analogy of the 1950's Communist witch hunt was a particularly good one. Further, I think it is interest ing to point out the hallmarks of current "Communist" propaganda (despite the fact that there is no such thing as a truly Communist state at this point in time) are similar to the tactics of the YAF -cheap innuendoes, false, analogies, false dilemmas, "half-truth," and just plain bare-faced lies. In addition to this, I have noticed that generally speak ing, voluntary associations with the word "freedom" in their name has a tendency to protect what they perceive as "their freedom at the expense of the freedom of others." For instance, on the speaker issue, I find it very interesting that when Gerald Ford and William F. Buckley were here, not a word of complaint was heard from the YAF. However, when Jane Fonda, an individual admired by many for her courageous stand against injustices, spoke here, the YAF went wild. The speaker program during this period of time was well balanced, but the YAF decided we shouldn't have to pay (through student fees) to hear her speak, despite the fact that they seemed to think it was okay for us to pay to hear Mr. Ford and Mr. Buckley. Whatever happened to freedom of the speech, the right to choose one's political ideology and to listen to repre sentatives of that ideology? The only conclusion I can come up with is that the YAF is not interested in true freedom, but only their "freedom" to deny others a true freedom of choice, through simplistic inflammatory appeals to emotion and fear-a tactic elevated to a fine art by one Mr. Adolph Hitler. Tom Youngblood Sociology sophomore The critics respond It is unfortunate that, in the face of criticism, the Daily Nebraskan 's only reply is an attempt to discredit the critic. True, Deborah A. VanDerslice's letter (Feb. 14) is no example of literary excellence. This does not, however, relieve the Daily Nebraskan of the burden of her charges. Continued on Page 5