Quibbles ‘n’ bits
Condoms-candy combo sweet solution
For years, debate raged on this campus over the place
ment of condom dispensing machines in the residence
halls.
Much of the talk centered on the morality of offering to
residents — the majority of whom are unmarried teenagers —
I a device used in sexual intercourse.
To some people it seemed at best to be a recognition of a
“sad truth,” and at worst, a promotion of promiscuity amongst
the youth of this upstanding state. This is not California, for
God’s sake.
This year, the debate changed to how best to offer a resident
a discreet and easily accessible alternative to unsafe sex.
Condom-dispensing machines were denounced simply be
cause they didn’t work. Studies on other campuses proved that
nobody uses them.
| A new plan to be implemented calls for condoms, packaged
with educational material, to be dispensed from vending ma
chines already in the dorms. No costly and intrusive new ma
chines will be needed and shy students can appear as though
they are buying a Snickers.
Or lovelorn students buying Snickers could appear as
though they are buying condoms.
But whatever the appearance, it was refreshing to see the
condom dispensing issue advance from the blind and danger
ous denial of premarital sex to debate over effective implem
entation. Condoms and candy bare? It’s a sweet alternative to
pregnancy and disease.
— B.N.
Bill would stem smoking in boys' room
The days of smoking in the boys’room may be passing.
LB 130, sponsored by Sen. DiAnna Schimek of
Lincoln, would outlaw the sale of cigarettes from
vending machines. As any teenager nicotine addict knows,
getting smokes illegally for those under 18 is no problem.
Vending machines don’t ask for identification.
One argument for keeping vending machines is that kids
I will just have older kids buy the cigarettes for them. Using
that logic, beer should be sold in pop machines because older
kids will just buy alcohol for minors.
But as any teenage drinker knows, it’s a lot harder to ask
someone to buy than to buy for oneself.
Any bill that helps deter young people from a deadly habit
is a good one. LB 130 would be effective in doing just that.
— B.N.
A little dab will have to do you
"W T sually the Daily Nebraskan thinks the constitutionally
IJ guaranteed rights of freedom of speech and expression
totally rock.
But seriously, like, things can get out of hand. Hair spray
did in Broward County, Fla. And that’s why we’re psyched
that some middle school principals there have banned it in their
schools. Now they confiscate it on sight.
Some middle schoolers are pissed off, according to The Fort
Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel.
“I spend 30 minutes doing my hair. If you don’t get to spray
it to where it will hold, there’s no point in doing it in the
I morning before school,” eighth-grader Shelley Kuntzman said.
Get up 15 minutes early, Shelley, and dash on a double
dollop. You can't reapply between classes anymore.
Kuntzman may have big bangs, but don’t start making jokes
about depletion of the ozone layer over Fort Lauderdale — she
uses a non-aerosol spray, because it doesn’t hun the environ
ment.
Love your mother, er, daughter. Not.
— E.F.P.
Students suffer under ruling
On Feb. 27, a fatal blow was sus
tained by every racial and cultural
minority on this campus. The student
court, in its infinite wisdom, ruled
that Bylaws L and M were unconsti
tutional because they were discrimi
natory. I think it is ironic that the
court which came down with this
verdict consisted of all white justices.
The courts’ makeup is indicative of
student government. Minorities on
this campus have a very small voice
and arc continually forgotten and
ignored.
When the university sends out lit
erature to prospective students, the
information usually implies that the
university is a place where everyone
is welcome. My dealings w ith student
government have made me feel less
than welcome. This feeling is shared
by a large percentage of the racial
minorities.
Torry Garland
freshman
political science
Editor’s note: B^law L would cre
ate a racial affairs committee. By
law M would create a gay-lesbian
bisexual committee. The court ruled
the committees were unconstitu
tional because they included quo
tas.
pEMOCR^n^ N0WH16 ^
400 GRAB HIM FROM BEHINP ... I LL SOAP THE
CAMPAIGN BUTTONS ON HIM.
ERIC ASPENGREN
Victory no cause for pride
The war is over. The troops are
coming home and people are
beginning to take down their
yellow ribbons. President Bush is riding
a wave of popularity that is likely to
get him re-elected in ’92. And every
one is trying to get his or her two cents
in about what is going to happen next.
Saddam may fall. Iraq may collapse.
There may be a power vacuum.
But nobody’s talking, in a critical
manner, about what we just did.
Nobody’s talking about what the United
States and other countries just did in
the name of peace, freedom and
democracy.
We just utterly decimated a mili
tary that was, going into this war, the
fourth largest in the world. We did
this with relative impunity. Barely a
shot was fired from the other side.
Gen. Colin Powell made good on his
promise: “First we’re going to cut it
off. Then we’re going to kill it."
The U.S. public is happy that the
war is over and that the troops are
coming home. That’s fine.
But what is frightening is the sickly
sweet smell of national pride that is
coming along with the happiness. The
United States has very little to be
proud of right now.
We have, as a nation, been able to
destroy another nation, Iraq, knowing
full well that that country was already
in dire straits.
We have been able to get the rest
of the world to support our disgusting
act. We’ve done this by making deals
with people like the Soviet and Chi
nese governments.
But the only thing tangible — if it
even can be called that — is that the
United States has proven it has the
most powerful, efficient and danger
ous killing machine the planet has
ever seen. The United States, with
minimal support from “allies,” killed
an estimated 100,000 Iraqi soldiers
and lost 184 soldiers in the process.
And Bush has indicated that he w ill
not hesitate to do so again. So now
we’re king of the mountain. We've
succeeded in pushing or threatening
everyone else down.
We should not be happy about
this. The self-satisfied grin coming to
But nobody's talk
ing. in a critical
manner, about what
we iust did. No
body’s talking.
ghaut whql thy
United States and
other countries iust
did in the name of
Peace, freedom and
democracy.
people’s faces is like the grin that
comes to someone when he or she
kicks a dog. Yes, killing someone, or
having someone killed in one’s name,
can really give a strong sense of ac
complishment.
But that is not something that should
make our hearts swell with pride. It is
sick to be happy about and proud of a
violent act. And this has been vio
lence — violence on a massive scale,
in the name of peace, freedom and
according to President Bush—Chris
tian theological authority that he is —
God.
There is something disturbingly
hypocritical about Bush’s rhetoric.
He asks for God’s blessing for this
action but ignores God’s words in the
process. Bush wants to export free
dom and respect lor human dignity,
in God’s name, to the Middle East
and he proves it by killing 100,000
Arabs. What exactly are this man’s
priorities? Jesus did not mince words
on the issue. Nonviolence is not wa
tered down in the Gospels.
But Christians are not the only
ones who should question their ac
tions. Everyone in this country who
supported the war, supported the troops
or supported the president bears re
sponsibility. Anyone who wasn’t
opposed to the violence perpetrated
for their sake should be thinking about
what this means to them.
They cannot continue to hold the
idea that violence is right as long as
they are on the right side.
It is hard, if not impossible, to get
this point across in a column. Col
umns are written to state a point and
to prove it logically. But the impor
tance of the message of peace tran
scends logical proofs. One can only
strive to live the ideal.
Those who stood with the presi
dent in his war have to consider the
beliefs they hold and decide if they
are consistent.
How can those who oppose abor
tion think that war, the wholesale
killing of human beings, is any differ
ent? The same goes for the death
penalty. Killing does not change when
its context does.
The inconsistencies in individual
belief have had an effect on the poli
cies of nations for centuries. The sysiem
has been affected by individual choices.
The democracies, wilh popularly
chosen leaders, reflect this. So do the
people of authoritarian nations, by
allowing their leaders to stay in power.
The effect is enormous. Citizens,
by their action or inaction, allow their
leaders to order their children to kill
or be killed. It is not hard to imagine
what would happen if the people o!
the United States stood up and said,
“No more.”
That is what is needed. We cannot
wail until another war is upon us. We
must continue the protests that started
with this war. We must continue the
message that has kept the human race
from destroying itself already.
Aspengren is a freshman philosophy and
aesthetics major and a Daily Nebraskan col
umnist
-LETTER POLICY
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all
readers. Letters will be selected for
publication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and space
availability. The Daily Nebraskan
retains the right to edit letters.
Letters should be typewritten and
less than 500 words.
Anonymous submissions will not
be published. Letters should include
the author’s name, address, phone
number, year in school and group af
filiation, if any.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 14(X) R
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.