r
June 17, 1986
Page 4
Daily Nebraskan
TP J
datona
Bob Asmussen, AVMor, 472 J 766
James Rogers, Editorial Page Editor
Kent Endacott, AVm'.s Editor
Jeff Korbelik, Associate News Editor
Jeff Apel, Sports AVitor
Nebraskan
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Charles Lieurance, t7,s Entertainment Editor
j
suit I
Court affirms DN's independence
The Daily Nebraskan is no
stranger to litigation. In its
most recent foray into the
morass of legalese, well settled
principles of First Amendment
laws were affirmed in respect to
a DN decision.
In the fall of 1984 and the
spring of 1985 two homosexuals
attempted to place advertise
ments in the paper requesting
homosexual roommates. The first
placement attempt specifically
asked for a lesbian roommate.
Other attempts simply were
homosexual "self-descriptions."
All ads were rejected by the DN
as discriminatory in their own
right. Even the more subtle ads
expressing "self-description"
were thought too obvious to
obviate the message "only homo
sexuals need apply."
The Publications Board sub
sequently affirmed the decision
although their action ulti
mately muddled the legal issues.
There have been a number of
cases involving school newspap
ers. The cases have invoked so
much litigation because they
involve attempts to exercise the
power of the purse and signifi
cant freedom of the press issues.
The issue looming in the cases is
"does the governmental institu
tion paying for the paper have a
right to control the content of
the paper?" While there is no
question that a private publisher
can control his own paper's edi
torial policy in the most dicta
torial and whimsical manner,
legal decisions have refused to
extend similar control the the
state vis-a-vis student newspapers.
Summarizing a number of cases,
Federal Judge Warren Urbom
Challenger investigation
Caution should guide future missions
With last week's report by the
special committee that investi
gated the Challenger explosion
came a new message to an impa
tient society space shouldn't
be exciting.
The seven deaths in the Chal
lenger accident told America
that space travel is a dangerous
business. To continue the Chal
lenger program or any space
missions for that matter, extreme
caution should be exercised.
The days of the high-pressure,
mentality have passed.
The primary concern from this
point can be nothing more than
that of the safety of the people
taking part in the missions.
Political pressures and the
fear of losing federal financial
support should never come into
play when a space mission is
under question. Would the Uni
ted States let President Reagan
get in a plane that had a bad
engine? No. The same answer
should be given when a question
arises in future shuttle missions.
Not that Challenger should be
grounded. The program is worth
while and has been a credit to
the United States. But, the morale
that the space shuttle raised in
aror paper
wrote: "Editorial freedom of
expression has consistently pre
vailed where various forms of
censorship were applied to stu
dent publications of state-supported
universities. A university
may not suspend an editor for
publishing controversial articles;
suppress objectionable material
from publication; withdraw or
reduce financial support because
of the newspaper's offensive
content; or regulate content to
assure the compliance of printed
materials with 'responsible free
dom of the press.' "
DN editorial decisions are as
protected from government in
terference as are the decisions
by private publishers. In fact, as
Urbom pointed out in his deci
sion, if the plaintiffs won the
case the "inevitable result" of
such a victory would be "the
usurpation of editorial discre
tion." Thus Urbom affirmed long
held First Amendment guaran
tees against the plaintiffs attack.
Additionally, Urbom affirmed
DN independence from the Pub
lications Board. In very strong
language he said, "The Univer
sity, acting through the Publica
tions Committee or otherwise,
could not have directed the Daily
Nebraskan not to publish the
advertisement had it chosen to
do so. Censorship of content
impermissibly would exist if the
University were to dictate what
the Daily Nebraskan could or
could not print."
All in all, Judge Urbom's deci
sion was sensible and traditional,
affirming the legitimacy of con
tinuing independence in all areas
of content.
this country was destroyed by
the January 28 accident.
The shuttle mission had be
come hum-drum for the people of
this country but that will cer
tainly no longer be the case. Now
the shuttle will be under the
close scrutiny of the United
States, and other countries as
well.
The thought of "good old
American know how" has been
challenged by the Challenger
failure. Perhaps the country had
deceived itself into a false sense
of security when it came to tech
nology. But, that false sense of
security was rocked by the Chal
lenger explosion.
Will the impatience of Ameri
can society allow a slow down in
space travel? Without the Chal
lenger accident it likely would
have not. But, hopefully, the loss
of seven lives will convince this
nation that the feeling that "the
show must go on" is not always
the best answer. If the shuttle
program is to get off the ground
again, it will have to do so with
the full patience and support of
the American public. A program
that has done so much for Amer
ican society deserves that courtesy.
Economic sanctions needled
U.S. should 'tighten screws' on white South African government
NBC News recently showed pic
tures of a pitched battle in South
Africa between radical "com
rades" and conservative vigilantes for
control of Crossroads, a squalid slum
near Capetown. Even aside from the
violence, the film was shocking. After
weeks of government denial that it was
provoking the bloody fighting, Ameri
can TV viewers could see the vigilantes
being escorted into Crossroads by the
police. Then the killing began.
The vigilantes were armed many
with machetes, some with pistols and a
few with rifles. With such firepower,
they carried the day. But the victory
was a temporary one for sure. With the
passage of time, and the spilling of
even more blood, the future almost cer
tainly belongs to the radicals. Maybe
when they take power, the United
States will finally stir itself from its
torpor and invoke economic sanctions.
In the meantime, the United States
reacts to Pretoria's violent behavior
with the sort of hollow condemnation
we reserve for Israeli spying. When it
comes to economic sanctions, the ad
ministration continues to say they
Republicans' Christian-dominated
platform evokes political mudslinging
Even though it's only June, elec
tion controversy is already heat
ing up.
Several weeks ago large numbers of
conservative Christians added several
planks to the Lancaster and Douglas
County Republican party platforms at
the biannual conventions. These planks
included strong pro-life and anti-pornography
language. Reactions to the ap
parently well-organized Christian effort
have ranged from acceptance of the
democratic result to those bordering
on paranoia.
In the former category, several Re
publican leaders have expressed sen
timents indicating that the "party reg
ulars" have no good reason to complain
about being aced out of some sought
for offices. These leaders point out that
the "regulars" were simply out-hustled
by the newcomers, and in politics, hus
tle is the name of the game.
In the absurdly paranoiac category
is the response of state Democratic
Chairman Tom Monaghan. In reflecting
the philosophy, "if you can't beat 'em,
slander 'em," Monaghan raised the red
herring of "extreme right-wing groups"
taking control of the Republican party
(as if he really cares about the health of
the party anyway). He demanded that
Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay
Orr "disavow these narrow interest
ideologies."
Monaghan's attack is actually cause
for more concern than the recent Chris
tian activity. On one hand, I don't think
that anybody involved in the recent
W- United States AV
would be counterproductive crip
pling the South African economy and,
thus, ensuring the ultimate victory of
radicals. What has not occurred to U.S.
policymakers but what is readily
apparent to South Africans is that
the lack of such sanctions sends a mes
sage. South Africa's blacks are looking
Richard
Cohen
for an answer to that age-old question:
Which side are you on? So far, our
answer is we are on everyone's side.
You need only spend a few minutes
with someone like the Rev. Allan Boe
sak, the anti-apartheid leader from
Capetown, to see how damaging this
kind of response is to long-term U.S.
interests. Ask him, as I recently did,
what the image of the United States is
in black South Africa and you are told
it "has never been as negative. You can
not mention the United States at a
Republican effort would disavow the
term "conservative": But Monaghan
liberally dosed his statement with the
use of the phrase "extreme right wing"
a phrase which coiyurs up images of
Nazis and KKK members. Yet obviously
a much broader spectrum of the Amer
ican public embraces the platform
planks added during the conventions
as a result of the Christian activity.
Monaghan's rhetoric is at root harm
ful to the democratic process: Name-
James
Roger
s
calling with highly emotional labels
shifts the focus of public debate from
the level of issues to the level of the
character of the individuals involved.
As a result, public debate becomes
skewed while emotions cloud peoples'
reason. Especially when dealing with
such weighty issues, all individuals
involved should make a concerted effort
to keep the debate centered upon the
issues. In this case Monaghan suc
cumbed to the temptation of the polit
ical mudslinger.
Nonetheless, the above comments
should not be taken to indicate that
those Christians involved handled them
selves in an optimal manner. While a
few issues recently have raised the
Christian political consciousness, pol
itical responsibility is not exhausted
v7
public meeting; you will be shouted
down." America, he said, is considered
Pretoria's pal: more interested in keep
ing South Africa a member in good
standing of the anti-Soviet alliance
than in championing the human rights
of the black majority.
In a recent speech, Secretary of
State George Shultz said that, when it
comes to South Africa, a concern for
human rights must take precedence.
But Shultz's voice does not carry into
the black townships of South Africa.
There, the personification of the Uni
ted States is Ronald Reagan, and his
values are well known. In his foreign
policy, what takes precedence is a con
tainment of the perceived Soviet threat,
and to that end he will sacrifice almost
all else.
Reagan, for instance, supports UNITA
guerrillas in Angola, even though their
patron in black Africa is white-ruled
South Africa. In Central America, he
mortgages our long-term interests to
bloody a pipsqueak of a regime in Nica
ragua. And in the Philippines, he de-
See COHEN on 5
when these few issues are addressed.
The American experience with Chris
tian involvement in politics is one that
is almost universally single-issue orien
ted. Even in the early years of the
republic, religious political involvement
was of a single issue nature: Abolition
and prohibition serve as the most
obvious examples of this tendency. The
result of this tradition is that little
lasting impact has been made by these
groups on the American political scene
after the, limited goal was reached.
European Christian political move
ments have typically been much more
integrative and holistic. The prime
example undoubtedly is Dutch Prime
Minister and theologian Abraham Kuy
perwho led the Calvinist-Catholic coa
lition in Holland in the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries. He was
firmly evangelical while avoiding the
narrowness of issue selection which
has characterized American religious
political involvement.
Other instances both modern and
more aged exist where Christians
brought forth entire world-views re
sponsibly to address the entire gambit
of issues before the public and con
tributed substantively and positively to
the Western political tradition. Ameri
can Christians need to take cues from
these movements and the thinkers
spawning them: In so doing they will
better be able to engage in a profound,
and true, Christian statecraft.
Rogers is a graduate student in law
and economics.