Editorial— Nebraskan University ot Nebraska-Lincoln Mike Reilley, Editor, 472-1766 Jeanne Bourne, Editorial Page Editor Jen Deselms, Managing Editor Mike Hooper, Associate News,Editor Scott Harrah, Night News Editor \ Joan Rezac, Copy Desk Chief Linda Hartmann, Wire Editor Law holds little water Liquor law is paradixical for local bars A rule in Nebraska’s liquor laws provides a loophole that seems to contradict the purpose of the law. According to the present mul tiple drink act, a drink means “a container containing no more than 1 1/2 fluid ounces of the same spirits.” It does not regulate containers containing 1 1/2 fluid ounces of several different liquors. The controversy started last week when Lincoln police ordered Duffy’s Tavern to stop serving its fishbowl drinks. The fishbowls contain the equivalent of six regu lar-sized drinks. The tavern’s pol icy was to serve fishbowls only to groups of two or more. At a State Liquor Control Commission meeting Thursday, Reynold McMecn, part-owner and manager of Duffy’s Tavern, said the commission should clarify the rule. The rule doesn’t make provi sions for “group” drinks. It doesn’t make sense to allow large drinks that contain several types of alcohol but not allow those drinks that have only one kind. The State Liquor Control Commission rcCDTffmendcd elimi nating the rule that prohibits the sale of large drinks. A final hearing is scheduled for Jan. 13. Meanwhile, large drinks that contain more than one kind of alcohol arc still available — and they’re potentially more potent than those now prohibited. AMA decision only noble The American Medical Association released new guidelines Thursday dealing with the treatment of AIDS patients. The Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs said it is unethical for doctors to refuse patients who arc infected with the AIDS virus. This is a very noble proclama tion. Unfortunately, the AMA is acting like a dog with dentures — its statement has no “bite” to it. I The A MA has no legal authority to enforce these guidelines. It shows good intentions, hut in a society where poor people are refused medical attention because they aren’t able to pay, it means very little. The council also urged doctors w ho have the AIDS virus to refrain from activity “that creates a risk of transmission of the disease to oth ers.” In a Washington Post article last w-cck, Dr. Nancy Dickey, a council member, said, “This makes it dear''If there is a chance you can pass on the virus, you have no place operating on a patient.” This is an issue the AM A might have more power in enforcing. It also reassures patients w ho may be hesitant to opt for non-emergency surgery. AIDS testing is still personal choice Mandatory tests at work hurt employees hy invading privacy Employees at the Eastern Ne braska Community Office of Retardation have been told they must comply with a fright ening precedent. Mandatory AIDS testing. A report on Omaha’s KMTV channel 3 said employees who di rectly work with the mentally re tarded are required to take an AIDS antibody test. But office administra tors aren’t. That has incensed em ployees who believe everyone at the office should be tested — not just certain workers. Scott Harrah Jackie Stoysich, an employee at the office, wrote the Omaha World Herald about the testing. Stoysich wrote: “Some employees may test positive for the disease, just as em ployees of restaurants, hospitals and department stores would be if they were required to be tested. If I am to be tested, the clients should also be tested. I have the right to know that they arc AIDS-free. Why not test the high-school kids who make my ham burgers at Burger King? Let’s also test everyone at my doctor’s office, including the secretary and the clean ing man. And don’t forget my hair dresser and paperboy.” Stoysich closed her letter with a cogent message about the futility of mandatory testing: “1 thought AIDS was contracted through intimate sex ual contact and sharing needles, not casual contact.” Mandatory AIDS testing, like drug testing, unjustly invades the privacy of an employee. Unless an employee is having sex at work and spreading the virus to co-workers, it’s unnecessary. A person’s AIDS anti body status is simply none of the employer’s business. In a medical environment, there’s a slight possibility of transmission through blood, but proper precau tions and a little common sense can obliterate that risk. Syringes with a plastic guard on the needle are now used in hospitals to avoid transmis sion through a pricked finger. Until recently, the infamous Northwest Airlines banned AIDS victims, including employees, from scheduled (lights. Vociferous pro tests from AIDS education groups forced the Minneapolis-based carrier to change its policy. The same thing must be said to employers. The work world is no place for an AIDS witch hunt. If an employee tests positive, word will surely get out in the office and the person will face either termination from paranoid supervisors or dis crimination and scorn from col leagues. Since the virus is often dormant for '.wo to five years or more, an em 0 oyce in perfect health who is carry 1 '» the virus shouldn’t have to face tit t fear a positive test result can briii;. AIDS has most definitely hit the Midwest. There have been only a handful of deaths in Lincoln, so far, and the statistics are slightly higher in Omaha. More than 30 people have tested positive in Lancaster County alone, according to reports from the AIDS counseling and testing site in Lincoln. But those people volunteered to take the test. Currently, a person can be tested for free and use an assumed name to assure anonymity. We must make sure that freedom continues. It’s probably only a matter of lime before insurance companies require an AIDS test before a policy can be issued. AIDS might force many insur ance companies to fold if they don’t require tests. But in the workplace, one’s pri vacy and dignity must be preserved. An employee carry ing the AIDS virus is tantamount to a pregnant woman. Like a pregnant woman, AIDS carri ers have a certain amount of time in which they arc able to perform their d ut ics normal I y. Employers don ’ t ask all women to take pregnancy tests just because they arc female, so they shouldn’t ask everybody to take AIDS tests just because they are sus ceptible humans. AIDS is a personal matter. Em ployers have no right to force people to make a decision about their per sonal health. Many who believe they’ve been infected avoid the test simply because they don't want to know if they’regoing todic. An AIDS test is a metaphorical way of looking into a crystal ball at the future. And we must remember that it is the individuals who must decide il they want to be gypsies gazing into that ball — not an employer, the, government or anyone else. ■ llarrah is a senior news-edito- I rial and English major and a Daily I Nebraskan night news editor. Readers denounce abortion, DN revie w, roach critics I Letters Reasons for abortion self-centered excuses This Idler is in response lo the abortion issue that has raised so much attention lately in the Daily Nebras kan. First off, allow me to slate clearly my position on abortion and why 1 have this conviction. I stand on the premise that conception is when life begins. One cannot effectively argue that life begins when a child is able to live and function away from any motherly support. The reason this is ineffective is threefold: — Life then becomes a function of technology and medicine. — The definition of life is not definable from one person to another or from one culture to another. — Babies cannot function on their own. Certainly, one who stands on the argument that life begins when achild is able to live on his or her own is merely reaching for a way to justify that which has no reasonable grounds for justification. Life isn’t something that fluctuates like export demand for U.S. beef. It cither is or it isn’t. In addition, I believe this thinking sets the stage for further irrational justifi cations that would appear to be well steeped in our current materialistic self-centered culture: justification of the elimination of babies with defects and the elimination ofcldcrly whoarc “no longer usel ul to society.” The list wouldn't necessarily stop there. Equally, one cannot effectively argue that life begins before conccp lion. II something exists, then it has gone beyond the potentiality ol exist ing. If something couldcxist if certain events happen, then it doesn’t exist before those event* happen. Even though sperm and eggs arc living tissue, they arc still not unique life until they unite. Go back with me to the day each of us was born and ask yourself hon estly: Barring an abortion, wasn’t that day written in stone nine months prior? Something that is now a cer tainty , barring interference, no longer has a potential of ndtoccurring. What difference docsthc day you were bom have from the day you grew of three feet in height? Both were inevitable barring physical harm, and both could not have occurred unless conception or life started the process. The fact that women have to go through considerably large amounts of social, physical and emotional traiyna is not a proper foundation by which to make the decision on legal ized abortion. Nor should the deci sion be based on the expected quality of the life or of the cost/bcncfit to society. (One can effectively argue about the social-economic damage abortion is causing.) The ground by which to make a stand on the legalization of abortion is: When docs life start. Because if life starts at conception, then abortion is no different than first-degree mur der. None. oLthe other arguments seem to outweigh the incredible so cial atrocity of taking human life is mass quantities. From the position of the followers of Jesus Christ, of which I am one, if is a known fact dial Jesus did more and is doing more to break through barriers concerning women’s rights as individuals than all the liberators of our modern day. He did it with a loving, caring heart and it was walked out in his everyday affairs. I feel very much assured the biblical stand on abortion is not designed to lock women intocagcs with noescape. It is grounded in a clear, perfect under standing of who we are as humans and what is right for us and what is wrong for us. Kyle Sliegert graduate agricultural economics Roaches do not bug food service worker As a student employee and patron of the Harper food service, I am ex tremely angered by the stories and letters recently published in the Daily Nebraskan concerning roaches. In the year that I have worked in the kitchen, I admit that I have seen roaches — three on three occasions. To me, this is not alarming. In a kitchen of its size, or any size, it would not be feasible to think it would possibly remain roach-free. I ask Nancy Bauman, Michelle Ebadi and Jeffery R. Psola — the three people who have voiced their complaints against the food service — if their kitchens arc so clean that they’ve never had any problems with bugs. I think it is highly unlikely. As for the food, it would be more than impossible to prepare foods to everyone’s liking because of the vol ume of students being served. Granted, the foexi is not just like Grandma’s, but Granny never cooked for 1,100 people, cither. So if the f many other bands that can say that. If people want to dance to cover tunes, let them. If people want alter native music, let them have it. But don’t knock them for their decisions. Brady Wiebcck manager Chesterfield. Bottom sley and Potts R.E.M. for listening; not a ‘spiritual’ event I don’t know what Kevin Cowan expected when he went to sec R.E.M. the other night, but I went to hear good music. I’m 5-foot-4 and sat 21 rows back from the stage. I couldn’t see or care what Michael Stipe was wearing or the light show and could barely sec the slide-show backdrop when I stood on my chair. But, oh God, could I hear. And what beautiful sounds I heard. We danced in a frenzy to “Pretty Persuasion” and rocked to “Crazy,” definitely the highlight of the show. “Moral Kiosk” was a pleas ant surprise early on in the show that swept me away. So what they didn’t play “Radio Free Europe”? It was just an oversight to tick off people like Kevin. The only weight created by the commercial market comes from people who are jealous the whole world loves their favorite band. So, what were you expecting, Kevin? A spiritual awakening, maybe? Not me, buddy. I was there to dance. Carrie Rau sophomore language arts