Opinion
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln *
Chris llopfensperger..Editor, 472-1766
Dionne Searcey.Opinion Page Editor
Kris Karnopp.Managing Editor
Alan Phelps. .Wire Editor
Wendy Navratil.,.Writing Coach
Stacey McKenzie.Senior Reporter
Jeremy Fitzpatrick....Columnist
--I-1
Promises, promises
Voters shouldn’t trust Bush’s no-tax vow
President Bush has once again made a promise he will never
keep.
Bush renewed his no-new-taxes vow Wednesday,
pledging he would not raise taxes again, “ever.”
Some people will say anything to win.
“I went along with one Democratic tax increase,” he said, “and
I’m not going to do it again. Ever. Ever.”
Absolutely, positively, never ever ever, no way, huh-uh.
After breaking his most well-known campaign pledge last time
around, the president expects taxpayers to believe him now.
Bush revealed a re-packaged economic plan yesterday that
suggests a 1 percent across-the-board tax cut.
Don’t fall for it.
George Stephanopoulos, Clinton’s campaign communications
director, best summed up the plan.
“Promises, promises,” he said. “Four years ago he promised no
new taxes and 30 million jobs and what we got was no new jobs
and more than 30 new taxes.”
Consider a worst-case scenario: Bush wins in November.
A renewed Bush presidency would be no different. ~
As the economy would continue to plunge and the deficit
continue to swell, Bush would have few other places to turn but
taxpayers’ pockctbooks.
Bush’s only other alternative to raising taxes would be slashing
social bcncfiLs.
That move would lake away the very purpose for paying taxes.
Bush has given voters no more reason to trust in his campaign
rhetoric this lime around than he did the last time.
Never say never again, George.
Canada sets example
(J.S. lags in homosexual couples’ rights
Our neighbors up north arc paying attention.
Americans should take notice of the broader recognition
Canada has given to gay and lesbian couples.
The Ontario, Canada, government received orders (Sept. 1) to
extend survivor benefits to the partners of gay and lesbian govern
ment employees.
In 1991, the Ontario provincial government extended health
and dental insurance coverage to the partners of employees in
same-sex relationships.
Some companies in the good ol’ U.S. of A. already extend
similar benefits to workers with same-sex partners.
Companies that do not extend similar benefits should. It is only
fair that same-sex partners of workers be granted the same ben
efits as the partners of heterosexual workers.
These rights should include the right of people in same-sex
relationships to show their love for and commitment to each other
by marrying.
Our society’s definition of marriage needs a revision. Why do
our laws and courts make reference to marriage as an institution -
for “husband” and “wife,” for “man” and “woman?’’
Even Webster’s College Dictionary defines marriage as “the
social institution under which a man and woman live as husband
and wife by legal or religious commitments.”
A marriage should be defined as an institution for two people
who wish to live and love with commitment.
Homosexuals make up about 10 percent of the U.S. population.
It’s about time we grant them the same rights every heterosexual
citizen has and end discrimination based on sexual orientation.
-- Kansas State Collegian
-1 1
Staff editorials represent the official policy of the Fall 1992 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students ortheNU Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent
the opinion of the author. The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan. They establish the UNL
Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper. According to policy set by
the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of
its students.
Ihe Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers
also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material
should run as a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned. Anonymous submissions will not be
published. Letters should included the author’s name, year in school, major and group
affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 6858^-0449.
—... » 1T — ' —
NO NE\N
TArtES...
ENER...
AMR 1 MEAN
\T 1WS T\tA£.
-1-1
u—
Housing policy
I would like to address the issue
that has been recently publicized in
many different forums. The issue is
the lawsuit that has been filed against
the University Housing policy regard
ing students in wheelchairs.
fhavc been a student at the Univer
sity of Nebraska-Lincoln for the past
year. My perspective on life is from a
wheelchair.
I have quadriplcgia, which means
I have no feeling or movement below
my chest. Everyone has different
lifestyles. People in wheelchairs arc
not excluded from this fact. It is im
portant to realize and respect these
differences, yet not force other indi
viduals into living a lifestyle that is
not one’s own.
Having an attendant is very per
sonal for the person requiring the
care. The attendant must do things
that most normal people can do on
their own. Just throwing someone “off
the street” into a room with a physi
cally disabled person requiring atten
dant care is wrong because it will pul
a lot of stress on a roommate-room
mate relationship.
Last year, l had a roommate. He
was also physically disabled, using a
wheelchair for mobility. Because 1
have limited movement, I require at
tendant care. This encompasses rising
in the morning 2 1/2 hours prior to my
first class.
My attendant would let herself into
my room, get me out of bed, assist me
in showering, help me get into my
clothes, comb my hair and set me up
for breakfast.
Even though my roommate knew
about the attendant care, it was still a
great inconvenience for him because
he woke up for class one hour early.
No matter how quiet we tried to be,
the attendant care would still bother
him. It would wake him up two hours
before his alarm was set to go off.
If I would not have known my
roommate prior to our rooming to
gether, I would have been ashamed to
make him live with someone who
requires attendant care.
I do not believe that the university
policy is meant to exclude a person in
a wheelchair from having a room
mate. The university has set the policy
so that a physically disabled student
who/equires attendant care may have
the privacy he deserves. The Univer
sity Housing Department and the Ser
vices for Students with Disabilities
have helped ease my transition back
to school after 10 years.
Stacey Nerud
sophomore
psychology
Military
I would like to direct this at Jeremy
Fitzpatrick’s article, “There’s more
to life than politics” (Sept. 1) and the
response in the DN on Sept. 3.
Mr. Fitzpatrick, I am not a die-hard
pro-military person, but I would like
to express my feelings on the follow
ing:
Firstly, I served four years active
army. I wasa medic by training, butas
anyone will attest, you don’t always
work in your field of expertise. Any
way, I served during “Operation Just
Cause”and “Operation Desert Storm.”
I am 23 years old, and most of my
friends in the military were the same
age, give or take a year or two. I
imagine you arc the same age as well.
So I guess the question is, do you
consider yourself a boy or a man? I
personally consider myself a man,
just as the most of the 750 other guys
— or men, if you will — who served
in the same infantry battalion I did in
Germany during “Operation Desert
Storm.”
Secondly, I can tell you from expe
rience that it’s OK lo be scared. Ev
eryone I associated with was, me in
cluded. But — forgive me if I am
wrong — don’t hide behind your fear
for whatever reason. Someday you
might be called on to fight or defend
some country you have never heard
of.
Last, but not least, I really don’t
know what, or why, you had to go all
the way back to World War II lo find
an example of a war that was fought
for the rights and lives of innocent
people. What do think we were doing
in Kuwait? Maybe you should re
search your facts before you pul them
on paper for hundreds of people to
read.
I guess the main point is, your
statements are backwards. Especially
the one about the boys and the men
fighting. The men are the ones fight
ing, the boys arc the officers fighting
for the authority to point the finger.
The rest of your article was great if
you want to be an “ultra left-wing
liberal” or a “die-hard conservative.
It’s America, so be it.
, Dan Carpenter
freshman
biology
Abortion
I am writing this letter in response
to Craig Heckman’s column entitled
“Republican Party angers women”
(DN, Sept. 1). I am a NWU student
who read the article and questioned
how Heckman could get away with
the lies he fed his readers with.
First of all, please tell me, Craig,
where you get your facts on what the
majority of Americans feel about the
amendment to end abortion? I know
of many Americans who favor it. And
Craig, you brought up the rapc/inccst
issue. Did you know that according to
the National Rape Crisis Center, the
U.S. Center for Disease Control and
an organized survey done by Planned
Parenthood, less than 1 percent of all
abortions arc done because of rape
and incest. Also of all abortions done
in Nebraska last year, not one was
done for either of these reasons.
Also, isn’t the rape traumatic
enough by itself? Many women have
reported that the abortion is even more
traumatic. I sincerely feel for the v
woman who is raped, but I also feel
deeply for the child who is not to
blame for the rape and has the right to
live as we all do.
Another misconception you told
your readers is that many pro-lifers
feel it is all right for a 13-ycar-old girl
who is raped by her father to have an
abortion. You also said the women .
feel this way more so thart any of the
men who wrote this plank of the plat
form. Not only men, but women wrote
this plank and voted for it.
You also talked about how many
Reagan Democrats do not like this
plank of the platform. These same
Reagan Democrats you said voted for
Bush four years ago. The fact is that
the platform was just as pro-life four
years ago as it is now. So why would
these Reagan Democrats have changed
their minds?
The Republican Party is one of
family values. We want to teach our
kids love, respect and kindness. If we
took the position of Democrats on this
issue, then we would not respect these
values. How can we teach our chil
dren love, respect and kindness when
the killing of babies happens every
day?
Here is the kicker and a big mis
take in your argument. You men
tioned that the U .S. Senate was againsl
women and has alienated them. You
said this was prevalent in the Anita
Hill/Clarence Thomas hearings. You
made it sound like it was the Repub
lican Senate who was at fault. Re
member that the Senate is dominated
by Democrats. If the Democrats re
ally cared about women's rights, they
should have organized on Hill's be
half. I guess they really did not care.
If you want to write facts, stay with
a good newspaper. However, if you
want to continue to mislead your read
ers, write for the National Enquirer.
Tony Ojeda
senior
sociology
NWU