Giving season
Human needs linger past charitable holidays
it s oetter to give then to receive.
Cliche, I know, but there’s reason;
it’s true.
And with the passing of Hallow
een, the giving season has officially
begun.
Ask any organization that uses
volunteers and they’ll tell you that,
with the holiday season, comes the
well-meaning bell ringers, package
wrappers, can collectors, clothing
donators and money givers.
And it’s wonderful this outpour
ing occurs. It makes the holiday sea
son brighter and warmer for many
families.
Children who may not have had
anything to look forward to on
Christmas morning are surprised with
the toy or two “Santa'’ left. Or they
may acquire a warm coat that fits.
People will feel better about
themselves and their communities
during these next couple of months.
Turkey Day is a blend of family, food
and can drives. Winter holidays are
for friends, family and the Salvation
Army. New Year’s is ... well ... a time
for friends. *
After the holidays, ask those
organizations that have benefited
from the generous spirit of the
community, how many of those
volunteers stick around past January
31st?
It seems that, as soon as the
Christmas tree or the Menorah goes
away, so does the volunteer spirit.
Funny the coincidence: it’s real
easy to give time, money or gifts to
strangers when you’re doing the
same thing, on a grander scale, for
your loved ones.
And when we stop giving to those
we know, the giving almost always
comes to an abrupt end for those we
don’t.
But people are just as hungry in
July as in December. Children need
role models, tutors, clothing and
health care year round.
Jessica Kennedy
But people are just as
hungry in July as in
December. Children
need role models, tutors,
clothing and health care
year round.
About a month ago, the Daily
Nebraksan ran a front page story
about the shortage of male volunteers
in programs such as Big Brothers/Big
Sisters and the Nebraska Human
Resources Institute.
I’ll wager a month’s income that
in the following two months, there is
a dramatic increase in the number of
inquiries Big Brothers/Big Sisters
receives regarding volunteer opportu
nities.
I’ll also bet that, at most, half will
follow all the way through orienta
tion.
And of those, only a few brave
souls will actually take on the
responsibility of a “little.”
I, myself, only made it through
the orientation process. School
started, I got busy and my priorities
changed. I didn’t feel that I had the
time to consistently give to a young
child in need.
But, unlike the other 80 percent
who drop out of the program, I’m
still going to volunteer. When the
BB/BS office called to set up an
interview, I told them that I had
changed my mind about being a
“big.”
I heard the dismay in the
caseworker’s voice — before he
heard my “but...”
“But,” I said, “I’d still like to help
out whenever I can. I’ll do office
work or help plan events for the
children on the waiting lists. I’ll do
anything.”
And so now I’m going to be
helping out with their publicity and
recruitment.
Volunteering doesn’t have to take
a lot of time.
It can be as simple as “rounding
up” when you go to the supermarket.
If ten people do that, one family may
be able to have a turkey for Christ
mas dinner.
Or giving up a couple hours a
month to work in a shelter.
Or donating leftovers from a party
to a soup kitchen.
Or participating in a publicity
campaign — it may take a few hours
of your week.
But volunteering is good for your
mental health. It makes you feel
good about yourself and the people
around you.
Sure, occasionally you may have
to put off something you need to do.
But haven’t you done that a few
times before, for something less
noble?
If nothing else will persuade you
to do something for your community,
how ‘bout this: if you were in dire
straits, wouldn’t you appreciate it if
someone did something for you?
Kennedy Is a broadcasting, advertising,
and integrated studies/public relations major
and a Daily Nebraskan columnist
Survey says
Louisiana, not Mississippi, most unhealthy
I’m not sure if you know this or
not, but Nebraska has recently been
selected as one of the most healthy
states in America.
According to a recent poll
conducted by Relia Star State
Health Rankings, Nebraska was
rated the 1 Oth most healthy of the
51 states*
(* As of 1992, Relia Star has
insisted that Oprah Winfrey is large
enough to be considered a state and
therefore, is included in this poll.)
Being a healthy state nowadays
is no small feat. With the enormous
amounts of pressure from other
states trying to get you to smoke
cigarettes and accept nuclear waste,
it’s amazing Nebraska didn’t
buckle.
It’s almost impossible to remain
a healthy state in today’s society,
but somehow, Nebraska held true to
its morals and did just that.
Unfortunately, my homestate of
Mississippi didn’t fare as well in the
poll as Nebraska did; it was listed
as the most unhealthy state in
America.
Mississippi has its problems but
let me tell you, being unhealthy
isn’t one of them. Illiteracy,
unemployment, and pooting to the
beat of “WE WILL, WE WILL,
ROCK YOU” — these are the
problems facing Mississippi today.
I have more than just a little
problem with the credibility of a
company whose sole purpose in life
is to determine the “health” of a
state.
What kind of schmuck works foi
a company like this?
“How was your day honey?”
(Loosening his tie) “Awful. We
found out today that Montana has
been eating fried foods again.
Dammit, he used to be so healthy!”
I guess I’m a little confused as t<
how a healthy state is determined.
Do they ask that the state in
question turn its head and cough?
t_
Steve Willey
“New Orlea ns itself is
extremely unhealthy. It’s
perhaps the only city in
the world where one can
repeatedly use the phrase
1Quit urinating on me. ’”
• • •
How does one conduct a poll on
the health of a state? Do they just
randomly call people, attempting to
find out what kind of health they’re
in?
■ “Er — sorry to bother you
ma’am, but are you — uh — eating
mayonnaise right now?”
(Shocked) “Well, YES I am.
Who are you?”
“Oh, uh.nevermind, say, how
many times a day does your
husband soil himself?”
(Disgusted) “That’s none of your
damn business. Are you that healthy
state poll?”
-click
1’11 be honest, I was a little upset
when I saw the results. I can easily
see where Nebraska deserves 10th,
but to rate Mississippi 51st was
) improper.
The logical choice for the most
unhealthy state would be Louisiana.
Ninety-three percent of the state
is a mosquito-infested swamp. The
other 7 percent is comprised of
mosquito-infested panhandlers
located in New Orleans.
New Orleans itself is extremely
unhealthy. It’s perhaps the only city
in the world where one can repeat
edly use the phrase “Quit urinating
on me.”
If you’ve ever been to New
Orleans, you know what I mean.
And what’s more, you can’t go
anywhere without stepping in
alligator poo.
Mississippi, on the contrary, has
always been healthy — especially
its citizens.
My father is a prime example. If it
wasn’t for the gallon of whiskey he
drinks daily, he would be a remark
able spokesman for good health.
He always tried to instill good
health habits in me.
When I was four, for some odd
reason, I used to enjoy riding on top
of my dog completely nude.
This is a very unhealthy thing to
do by the way, and something that,
if done in Australia, may get you
the death penalty.
My lather, sensing the unhealthy
act in progress, would stop it the
best way he knew how.
“Son,” he’d bellow. “Riding
animals while you’re naked will
make you go blind!”
“Dad,” I stuttered while waving
my arms behind him. “I’m over
here, who are you looking at?”
It’s hard to say with any degree
of accuracy which states are really
the healthiest.
As long as there are state health
polls and people being paid to
discuss them, I’m sure it’ll be a
concern for many.
As for me, I couldn’t care less
about them — Mississippi just
better not be last anymore.
Willey is a junior ag-journalism major
and a Daily Nebraskan columnist
...doomed
Nov. 4, 1979
Bret Gottschall/DN
Blackmail should not
have been so easy
But the integrity of the United States as a just,
humane nation cannot be sacrificed—for the
whining of another country or even for the
lives of the 60 American hostages.
Nov. 4, 1979: A militant
Iranian government — which,
for some reason, was continu
ously referred to as “stu
dents” in the press (irrepress
ible kids!) — took the U.S.
embassy in Tehran and held
60 people captive for what
seemed like forever to those of
us who remember it.
The Daily Nebraskan
didn’t cover any national
news in those days, but four
days later it released this gem
of an unsigned editorial.
Can’t you just hear the
acne in this young journalist’s
expression of opinion?
Ayatollah Ruholla
Khomeini’s decision Wednes
day not to receive two envoys,
seeking the release of American
Hostages at the U.S. embassy
in Tehran, has placed the
United States in a difficult
position.
Failure, now, to move
quickly and firmly to secure the
release of the Americans will
be criticized by many as
weakness.
Acting with unnecessary
force, on the other hand, could
cause the untimely deaths of
those whose lives might be
saved through some other
course of action.
Hopes now seem to rest on a
delegation of the Palestine
Liberation Organization which,
at the time of this writing,
apparently was on its way to
Iran.
The PLO has had good
relations with the Islamic
government and an earlier siege
of the embassy this year ended
after the PLO spoke on Ameri
can behalf.
Whatever the outcome of
these negotiations may be,
however, the United States
cannot submit to blackmail.
On this point Americans
must remain firm.
Demands that the ousted
Shah, Mohammad Reza
Pahlavi, hospitalized in New
York for cancer treatment, be
returned to Iran for trial are
outrageous.
The earlier decision by the
Shah to live in Mexico upon
exile had been greeted with
relief by the American Govern
ment.
At a time when our govern
ment was was seeking to
establish friendly relations with
Iran, the decision was politi
cally prudent.
But it would have been an
act of inhumanity to deny the
Shah medical treatment. And it
would be morally wrong to turn
the Shah over to those who
seek militant vengeance.
The traditions and customs
of this country would not allow
us to bend to the demands of a
country whose judicial system
and political ideals conflict so
radically with our own.
When the Shah was exiled,
the United States was criticized
for what the Iranians called
immoral U.S. intervention into
their country’s laws, customs
and lifestyle.
Now, however, because of
Iranian intervention, they ask
us to violate the laws of
Western civilization.
But the integrity of the
United States as a just, humane
nation cannot be sacrificed —
for the whining of another
country or even for the lives of
the 60 American hostages.
BE OUR GUEST
The Daily Nebraskan will present a guest columnist each Monday.
Writers from the university and community are welcome.
Must have strong writing skills and something to say.
Contact Mark Baldridge c/o the Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska
Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, NE 68588.
Or by phone at (402)472-1782.
