Opinion
\_ - - -
Net?raskan
Editorial Boaid
University of Nebraska- Lincoln
Chris Hopfensperger.:. .Editor, 472-1766
Jeremy Fitzpatrick. .Opinion Page Editor
Alan Phelps....Managing Editor
Brian Sheltito....Cartoonist
Susie Arth...\ Senior Reporter
Kim Spurlock... ...Diversions Editor
Sam Kepfield...Columnist
Stay aiert
Waco proves cults need close watching
Monday, rather than being forced out of his compound in
Waco, Texas, David Koresh set it ablaze and is believed
to have perished inside with as many as 87 members of
his Branch Davidian cult. Among those suspected dead are 25
children.
The fire was set six hours after FBI agents began pumping tear
gas into the compound buildings in an effort to end die 51 day
standoff. According to the FBI, the cult members who perished
set the fire themselves.
This startling episode brings back memories of the 1978 mass
suicide of followers of Jim Jones in Guyana that killed 913
people. It is a sobering reminder of what people are capable of—
especially when guided by one such as Koresh, who claims to
know the will of God.
It is also further evidence of the danger of cults. And the
problem is not so far away as Waco. Lincoln has had its own
problems with a group that has been identified as a cult that has
used suspicious methods of recruiting and training its members.
Cults like David Koresh’s operate by preying on those who
feel isolated from society and taking them in and giving them a
false sense of belonging. The allegiance that can be developed by
such groups — as evidenced by the willingness of the Waco
compound members to literally bum themselves to death — can
4 be frightening. .. .
In Lincoln and in cities everywhere, care should be taken that
cult groups do not establish such a hold on helpless people.
Certainly the danger of something like what happened in Waco is
not likely here, but still we should keep a watchful eye on groups
that prey on those isolated from society and demand control over
their lives.
Shameful symbol
Mississippi should redesign state flag
An assault was launched in Mississippi on Monday against
an institution that has been dead for almost 130 years but
still refuses to die in too many peoples’ minds.
The Mississippi NAACP, its Jackson branch and 49 individual
African Americans filed a lawsuit seeking to get rid of the Missis
sippi state flag, arguing it promotes racial disharmony with its
symbols of the Confederacy.
The flag, designed in 1894, includes a copy of the the Confed
erate Battle Flag.
The Confederate flag itself flics above the Alabama capitol,
and Mississippi and Georgia use it as part of their state flags.
South Carolina flics it in its legislative chambers.
State Rep. Aaron Henry, president of the Mississippi state
branch of the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People, called the Mississippi flag “an insult to African
American citizens.”
Gov. Kirk Fordice, named as a defendant in Monday’s lawsuit,
has said there arc more pressing issues facing the state.
Redesigning the state flag may not be the most important issue
facing Mississippi. But it is a change whose time is long past.
The American South has many things to be proud of. But the
the Confederacy, a rebellion dedicated to ensuring that African
Americans would remain enslaved, is not one of them.
It is time the South finally let the Confederacy die and remove
its symbol — which can only be incredibly offensive to African
Americans — from their flags and capitols.
— -1 I
Staff editorials represent the official policy of the Spring 1993 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set
by the Doily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students or the Nil Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent
the opinion of the author. The regenu 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
iu students.
- 1 ■ ---
The 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 reuins the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Reeders
also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material
should run ai a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be relumed. Anonymous submissions will not be
published. Letters should included the author’s name, year in school, major and group
affiliation, if any. RequesU to withhold names will not be granted. Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
i
(Sure hope we get
enough rainfall to fill
this baby up, Tim.
MacEd loon by Scott Maurw/DN©
-1
Accusation
This accusation is simply false(DN,
April 19,1993). The Senate has a 57
43 Democratic majority and these 43
Republican members are standing up
for our “conservative ideology.” This
ideology is a minority in both houses,
but it shouldn’t be swept under the rug
as most Democrats want
As a college student, I don’t have
much money to begin with, but with
out this opposition 1 wouldn’t have
enough to attend school. I applaud
Sen. Dole and the other 42 senators
for their courage and leadership in
liberal times. Inis stimulus package
is bogus in many ways. Socialized
medicine is wrong. 1 agree that the
health care industry needs to be over
hauled, but not to the extent of social
ism.
Efficiency is bred through coop
eration. Even though President
Clinton’s office door is open and the
challenge to come up with a different
plan is offered, he will not accept any
cuts because of a tax and spend ideol
ogy in which he believes. “Conserva
tive ideology” tells me that President
Clinton’s plan, while good
intenlioned, is a bad solution to a bad
problem.
Joshua Daws
sophomore
history
Antics
Ilappcars that in ihc Daily Nebras
kan editorial “Childish antics” (DN,
April 18, 1993) the editors had their
facts hopelessly distorted. First of all,
the National Organization for Women
was not protesting exploitation on
16th street, they were protesting the
greek system as a whole and Kappa
Sigma fraternity in particular. I would
submit to you that the sign reading
“Hey frat boy, you ever been gang
raped?” carried by one marcher was a
“childish antic” in itself. The real
problem, however, was the implica
tion that the conservative students
who planned to protest Hillary
Clinton’s socialization of medicine
were somehow scared of her powerful
position. Quite to the contrary. Most
conservatives welcome women and
anyone else who is qualified in posi
tions of power and influence.
As a public policy figure in such a
position, Hillary Rodham Clinton's
political philosophies and agendas are
open tocrilicism and scrutiny just like
any other politicians. To imply that
somehow she should be immune to
criticism simply because she is fe
male smacks of sexism and paternal
ism. And an effort by a student publi
cation to undermine the efforts of
organizations to demonstrate their
disagreement with public policy has
dangerous overtones of an attempt to
violate our freedom of speech. But
then again, if we’re just scared con
servatives spouting off, maybe you
think the first amendment doesn’t
apply.
Greg Anderson
freshman
.
‘Daily hypocrite’
Let's all play a game of specula- ■
lion, OK? Imagine for just a moment
that last November’s election had
turned out differently. George Bush is
still president. Dan Quay le is still vice
president. Marilyn Quayle is to arrive
at UNL for a speech. The Young
Democrats, Students for Choice and
the Women’s Center organize a pro
test outside the Lied Center in oppo
sition to the Bush administration poli
cies on issues like health care and
abortion.
Would the Daily Nebraskan criti
cize the organizations for being “child
ish” and "immature” or whatever their
language was when they did the exact
same thing in the April 16 edition,
whilechastising the College Republi
cans for exercising their Constitu
tional rights in response to Hillary
Clinton’s appearance? It is rather
doubtful the DN would do such a
thjng in support of free speech, unless
they agreed with thefrec peopledoing
the speaking.
Everyone has the right to protest
something they do not support,
whether you, I, or anyone else agrees
or not. The DN, as a liberal paper,
normally in favor of progressive ideas,
should recognize and support this.
Otherwise, they may just have to
change the initials of the paper to the
DH, lor the Daily Hypocrite.
Andrew Meyer
i, senior
English
I
Abortion
I’d like to respond loGary Young’s
column (April 12,1993) in which he
criticizes pro-choice people for fail
ing to address the other side of the
abortion issue. Although Young feels
he has room to criticize, he, like the
people he is being critical of, also fails
to approach the conflicting issues.
How will we feed all the people in
SO years when the earth’s population
is estimated to be at 11 billion people,
yet today wc are using all our agricul
ture resources and arc barely ahead of
caloric demand? How can we cry out
“Adoption, not abortion” when only
white children arc in significant de
mand for adoption? What about the
fact that in China alone there are
70,000children waiting for homes, as
well as thousands of other children
worldwide? What about due to poor
education and poverty, the poor —
who are too often minorities—are the
ones who are experiencing excessive
unwanted pregnancies? Who’s going
to adopt these babies of color? Who’s
going to pay to feed these babies who
are being bom into poverty? Strange
it is that the people who are fighting
abortion rights are not only acting as
a stumbling block to contraceptive
distribution and education, but also
strongly objecting to additional taxes.
Yes, Gary is right, pro-choicers
should address the fact that this is a
life; diplomacy cannotoccur with one
sided views, and I believe pro-lifers,
as one-sided as their views are, are not
fighting just to annoy or suppress pro
choicers. We must all realize that
there are two sides to this issue. The
truth is, neither side on this issue
really knows what kind of life this
really is, whether we can really call it
human, what its physical awareness
is, or whether it thinks or experiences
pain uie way we ao.
If we don’t getthe population prob
lem under control, millions of fully
developed humans will suffer from
starvation and disasters, many more
than the numbers of questionable lives
that will be destroyed through the low
number of abortions that occur in a
well-educated society given access to
protection.
We pro-choicers are fully willing
to work together with anti-abortion
ists to vastly decrease abortions. His
tory shows that abortion laws do not
work — the rich can still afford
black market abortions, and the poor
die in the back alley; however, we
know that modem birth control meth
ods prevent pregnancy quite effec
tively. Laws don’t work, but birth
control does; let’s work together to
educate our population so future gen
erations will have a world to live in,
too.
Paul Kocstcr
senior
agronomy
