Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 19, 1988)
Editorial xt ?Pailyi Nebraskan University of Nebraska-Lincoln Mike Rcillcy, Editor, 472 1761> Diana Johnson, Editorial Page Editor Jen Desclms, Managing Editor Cun Wagner, Associate News Editor Scott Harrah, Night News Editor Joan Rczae, Copy Desk Chief Joel Carlson, Columnist No peace on earth U.S.S.R., N. Korea called top violators The U.S. State Department’s annual report on human rights around the world is out, and it’s not a pretty sight. And, peculiarly enough, the United States is not listed among the violators. While there were positive changes in South Korea, North Korea continues to be the most serious rights violator anywhere. In its section on the Soviet Union, the report states that Soviet leader Mikiiail Gorbachev has made superficial, cosmetic changes, but fails to have made progress in the fundamentals. Although the number of So viet emigrants has increased, and films and movies more accu rately depict the Soviet Union, its prisons continue to be marked by malnutrition, hard labor, beat I ings, frequent illness and inade quate medical care, the report states. The report also found: • no progress toward respect for human rights was made in South Africa in 1987. • Nicaragua’s government was guilty of “significant human rights abuses” last year and failed to institute democratic refonus required by a regional peace plan signed last August. Charges of abuse by U.S.-backed resistance forces — as in previous years — were dismissed as undocu mented. • Afghanistan and Chile were other rights violators. As in any report, its validity and factual documentation must be questioned, or at least given a hard look. The situations de scribed in the report could cither be worse than they actually arc or they could stand at a higher level. Nonetheless, world peace is non existent. Holy teeth-rings, miraculous oils: TV preacher likes business title While taking a stroll, I saw the Rev. Hallelujah Jones hur rying along. I greeted him, but he angrily grabbed my arm and said: “I would appreciate it if you would stop referring to me by that title.” You mean Reverend? But you’re a TV clergyman. He adjusted his red lie and said: “I am much more than that. Remember, I am also a businessman.” That’s true. And how' arc your glow-in-thc-dark, windup life-size plastic front-lawn Nativity scenes going? “They did well during the Christ mas season, thank you.” And your personally blessed holy teething rings, guaranteed to ease the distress of infancy? “They’re a steady seller, despite the sinful efforts of family planners to shrink my market.” And how’s the demand for your miraculous oil, which will cure aches, pains, miseries as well as financial and domestic worries. “Splendid, especially since we began pointing out that if simmered with a touch of garlic, it also makes an excellent blessed pasta sauce.” All things considered, I have to concede that you arc a businessman. “And I would remind you that I am also a religious broadcaster, a title I also prefer.” Yes, I’ve watched your “Hallelu jah Happy Hour.” Does any other clergyman broadcast live from a sports theme bar? “No, I was the first to recognize and fill that spiritual void.” I’ve noticed that many members of your congregation nov speak in longues. “A few, but 1 must admit that some of it is the result of the happy hour.” Well, I’ve been impressed by the miraculous cures you've performed simply by laying hands on them. I’ve seen people who had been suffering terribly throwing aside their crutches and canes and shouting “hallclijah” because you’ve cured them of tennis elbows, inflamed rotator cuffs, lammed sottnall thumbs, jogger’s shin splints, athlete’s foot and jock itch. “Did you happen to sec the football player I cured of agonizing turf toe?” Yes, but 1 was even more stunned by the poor wretch who said that for 30 years, despite seeking help from countless experts, he was still plagued by achronic, incurable slice. Butalter you laid hands on his golf hag, he has been hitting the ball straight and long. “Most people don’t realizc that the slice is the work of Satan. By the way, I’m planning an instructional tape showing the relationship between praying and one-putting.” That should be a winner, bui I still don’t understand why you no longer want to he thought of as a TV preacher. “Unfortunately, it has taken on certain negative connotations in re cent years.” Because of the fuss about Jimmy and Tammy and Oral and some of the others? “Yr*s. And those in the media, most of whom arc agents of the Beast, would tar me wilh the same brush.” © 1988 Chicago Tribune Koyko is a columnist fur the Chicago Tribune. Readers speak out against anti-gay letter Attitude toward gays product of small mind This is a response to Jon Dewsbury (Letters, Feb. 16). I sense a bit of prejudice in your letter concerning homosexuality. Asking homosexuals to go back into the closet is like asking the blacks to go back to Africa be cause you don’t like their color. Or maybe you would ask all of the handi capped people to stay home because they disgust you. There are many different ways of life and relationships worldwide other than homosexuality. So wake up, Dewsbury, and open your eyes. The world doesn’t revolve around you. I’m not gay, but a few of my friends are. Although I don’t neces sarily approve of their lifestyle, they’re still my friends. I also have a brother who is confined to a wheel chair, and he also has to endure many narrow-minded altitudes such as yours. Everyone has a right to speak, and if you don’t want to hear it, don’t listen. Jonathon Driscoll senior engineering Lesbian gets calls about ‘immorality’ This is a response to Jon Dewsbury’s letter to the editor (Let ters, Feb. 16). It is very plain that you do not understand the nature of homosexuality. I did not choose to be a lesbian and become an outcast of society. It is extremely difficult to be a homosex ual and to have to put up with con stant messages from classmates, teachers, family, the media and more, telling us that we arc abnormal and don’t belong in society. If I could choose, I would choose the easy way out and be a heterosex ual . but I can ’ t choose. I am what I am and lam... attracted to women. I don’t understand how in a world in which mass murder, rape, political corruption, war and hunger are daily realities, love between two people— just because they happen to be of the t , ... . , . same sex — can be considered immoral and wrong. As for the issue of “natural,” do you think that airplanes which enable men (and women) to fly are “natu ral?” One could say that if humans were meant to fly, God would have given us wings. You might say that God gave humans the intelligence to be able to build such machines; therefore, they are “natural,” and I say that God gave some of us the special ability to love members of the same sex, even amidst tremendous social pressure not to. Pat Parker wrote a very poignant poem entitled “To All the Straights Who Don’t Mind Gays, But Wish They Weren’t So Blatant.” In it, she points out that the very heterosex uals who object to the visibility of gays and lesbians are the ones pushing heterosexuality on us with public shows of affection and constant talk about their boyfriends and girl friends. I close by quoting Pat Parker: “So, to all you straights, I’ll go back to the closet, if you go too, but 1 ’m polite, so after you.” Vicki Jedlicka senior fine art Ignorance, bigotry leads to homophobia We’re upset. We’re upset because of the irrational fear and hale due to ignorance and closed-mindedness that was recently displayed by Jon Dewsbury (Letters, Feb. 16) Unfor tunately, such ignorance is not un common. It is not just his homophobia that disturbs us, but also the realization of what this entails. First of all, such closed-minded attitudes arc usually displayed in other areas as well (such as prejudice against other minorities in our own society and any other culture which one fails to understand) and serve to perpetuate conflict. Let’s just hope that people like Dewsbury do not come into power; otherwise there will never be peace even within our own society. Second, Dewsbury claims that “the plain truth is that the vast major ity do not like homosexuals” and jumps to conclusions that homosexu ality is both immoral and unnatural and ought, therefore, to be sup pressed. Assuming that Dewsbury is the authority he claims to be about the opinion of the majority, we must ask what conclusion is properly drawn from this. Why ought we draw the conclusion that Dewsbury does — that homosexuals and, in general, any disliked group of persons ought to be suppressed — when history has time and lime again verified the more appropriate conclusion that “the masses are asses.” Nancy Slonncgcr graduate philosophy Rob Revock graduate philosophy Gays must determine morality individually In regard to die “enlightening” letter presented by Jon Dewsbury (Letters, Feb. 16): It is obvious that Dewsbury and those who share his attitude arc the ones that need en lightening. First, there is nothing unnatural about being a homosexual. This is documented by homosexual rela tionships in the animal kingdom as well as references to homosexual relationships throughout written his tory. No one yet knows the exact determinants of sexual orientation, but it is certain that having the same sex orientation is definitely natural. As for homosexuals being im moral, I find it difficult to accept that simply being what you are is im moral. As for passing judgment on what is or is not immoral, isn T that up to the individual or on the grounds of an universal morality? Isn’t that up to one’s own definition of God? As for the problems that arise of which you spoke, their problems are not coming from homosexuals, but from people like yourself with your ignorant, prejudicial and oppressive attitudes. It must be beyond your intellectual capacity to imagine and to try to understand what it must be like to live as someone different Irom yourself. It takes very little intellec tual effort to avoid and shun some thing you do not understand. Rodney Black senior psychology Coming out of closet requires determination This is in response to the letter written by Jon Dewsbury (Letters, Feb. 16) concerning homosexuals “coming out of the closet.” Dewsbury, you write that you would liketo“enlighten Rodney Bell and other homosexuals on why prob lems arise when they wish to go public in any way.” I’d like to know how you think you can “enlighten” a group of people as to why they have problems when you haven’t the laint csi idea what their problems are? Dewsbury, have you ever had to find the courage to accept something about yourself that was different from other people? Homosexuals are a minority and must find the courage and determina tion to simply be themselves. When they “come out of the c losct,” they ’ re not only accepting themselves for what they are, they’re telling other people 1 ike them that it is OK to be in the minority. They arc telling other homosexuals that they are not alone. You stated that you do not under stand why “homosexuals would rather have immoral and unnatural relationship with those of the same sex.” You also stated that the “vast majority docs not like homosexuals.” Please do not speak for everyone when you say that homosexual rela tionships are “immoral” and “un natural.” That is your opinion. Sec ond, when you say that the “vast majority’’does not like homosexuals, who do you mean? Do you mean the “majority ‘ of the people in this country? Do you mean the “major ity” of the people in Cercsco? I have respect for people who have the courage to stand up and say, “I’m different.” Dewsbury, “different” is not “bad”; it is simply “different.” I commend you, Dewsbury. It takes a lot of courage to admit that you re a male, Ircshman business major. I’m a surprised your last name isn’t “Doc.” Michelle L. Miller junior secondary education I l Letter on gays shows prejudiced undertones I in responding lo Jon Dewsbury (Leucis, Feb. 16) who wrote that homosexuals should stay in the closet. 1 seem to be a little contused by this. It appears to me that Judging from his harsh, prejudiced under tones, he would like all homosexuals to reveal their sexual preference to him so he can avoid them at all costs. I heartily sympathize with his posi tion because, God forbid, he might meet a homosexual on the University of Ncbraska-Lincoln campus that he would grow to know, likeand respect as a human being and a friend. Mary Pills freshman art Returning to ‘closet' won’t solve problem I would like to respond to a num ber of comments made by Jon Dewsbury in his letter to the editor (Letters, Feb. 16). Dewsbury’s letter exhibits a lack of understanding about homosexuality that, unfortu nately, is not uncommon. Dewsbury says he cannot under stand why homosexuals want to have “unnatural relationships with those of the same sex.” The fact of the matter is that there are many men and women for whom a sexual relation ship with someone of the opposite sex is equally unnatural and undesir able. Dewsbury’s contention that “things would be easier” if gays and lesbians were to go “back to the closet” ought to be disputed by both heterosexuals and homosexuals alike. The pain and dishonesty that result from having to hide or deny one's sexual orientation hinder our relationships with our friends, our families and our lovers. Dewsbury claims, “The vast ma jority do not like homosexuals.” I do not doubt that his attitude is shared by many. His antagonism is a reaction typical of those whe arc threatened by that which they have made no attempt to understand. Colleen Baade graduate student music i . Ml# f * M • ; « I I • < * ; * ' * * * * *