EDITOR
Paula Lavigne
OPINION
EDITOR
Kasey Kerber
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Brad Davis
Erin Gibson
Shannon Heffelfingei
Chad Lorenz
Jeff Randall
Our
VIEW
The
good life
Nebraska pride
shown through unity
Sometimes, Nebraskans have an
identity crisis.
Though we’re fiercely proud of
our Cornhusker football team, we
make excuses for other parts of our
state.
We often ignore the rich history
and culture our state adds to the union
of 49 others.
We quickly forget the pioneering
spirit of those who came before us to
develop the land and lay our founda
tions.
me supposeu lacx oi mings 10 uo
in our two largest cities causes us to
apologize to out-of-state visitors.
But students at the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln should be proud, as
should the entire state.
We exemplify, perhaps more than
any other state, the unity that is possi
ble when people rally around a com
mon cause, such as the national
championship Husker football team.
Our sparsely populated state sup
ports a major research university that
is internationally known in some cir
cles for its quality and academic rep
utation.
Though legislators worry students
may leave the state for bigger and
more glamorous places, they can be
sure some will be lured back by
Nebraska’s “good life,” and that their
invaluable experiences will make
Nebraska even stronger.
Students who temporarily leave
the state this summer for internships
or jobs will come to realize there
really is no place like Nebraska.
It’s the type of place people can
choose to live in a sleepy, small town
or a vibrant, cutting-edge city and
still share the common bond of being
Nebraskans.
One thing living in Nebraska
teaches you is to have pride in where
you come from and what that place
exemplifies.
Some people may question why
you choose to live in the land of
rolling hills and fields of corn, but
you know what makes Nebraska
great.
Not only its football team, but also
its farmers, business people, govern
ment and students - all of whom con
tribute to the pride shared by its citi
zens.
And wherever you go after gradua
tion, or just for the summer, you’ll
soon realize Nebraska really is “the
good life.”
Editorial Ptlicy
Unsigned editorials are the opinions of
the spring 1998 Daily Nebraskan. They
do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, its
employees, its student body or the
University of Nebraska Board of Regents.
A column is solely the opinion of its author.
The Board of Regents serves as publisher
of the Daily Nebraskan; policy is set by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. The
UNL Publications Board, established by
the regents, supervises the 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 student employees.
letter Policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief
letters to the editor and guest columns,
but does not guarantee their publication.
The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to
edit or reject any material submitted.
Submitted material becomes property of
the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be
returned. Anonymous submissions will
not be published. Those who submit
letters must identify themselves by name,
year in school, major and/or group
affiliation, if any.
Submit material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St. Lincoln,
NE. 68588-0448. E-mail:
letters@unlinfo.unl.edu.
I
Haney’s
VIEW
<HE m *£**•»«* -ftmigt) BRP ...J
M X RI6HT,
? J
—.^i-f ■ :. __
DN
LETTERS
The final planned response
Columnist Josh Moenning’s
illogical and irresponsible accusa
tions about Planned Parenthood and
its founder Margare^Sanger are
based on lies, half-truths and myths.
Sanger has been falsely accused
of saying, “More children from the
fit, less from the unfit.” These are not
her words, but those of the editors of
American Medicine in an editorial
on Sanger’s article “Why Not Birth
Control Clinics in America?” The
items were published next to each
other in the May 1919 issue of Birth
Control Review.
In other statements she said she
“emphasized the necessity of leaving
the decision as to the number of chil
dren and the time of their arrival to
the mother, whether she be rich or
poor.”
Sanger made her position clear in
her response to the editorial: “We
hold that the world is already over
populated. Eugenicists imply or
insist that a woman’s first duty is to
the state; we contend that her duty to
herself is her first duty to the state.”
Moenning’s labeling of abortion
as a racist “population control tool”
of modem day Planned Parenthood
is his most outrageous attack. First,
Planned Parenthood does not view
abortion as a “population control
tool” but as a last alternative for
women who believe they cannot con
tinue their pregnancy.
In fact, abortion services at
Planned Parenthood of Lincoln com
prise less than 5 percent of our repro
ductive health care services.
Second, his charm of racism is
based o.t data showing minority
women having a higher rate of abor
tion than white women. If there is a
race connection, it is the fact that a
higher percentage of minority
women live in poverty, which is often
why they feel they are unable to bear
a child.
It is paternalistic and racist for
Moenning to suggest that minority
women are unwittingly having abor
tions forced on them.
If Sanger’s motives were racist, it
is unlikely that W.E.B. duBois would
have worked side by side with her, or
that Martin Luther King Jr. would
have praised her work. Both these
African-American leaders respected
her work and her motives.
We are proud of our founder
Margaret Sanger, and we believe she
would be proud of us as we continue
to provide quality, affordable repro
ductive health care to all women,
regardless of age, race or income and
continue to provide people with
accurate information about human
sexuality.
And like Margaret Sanger, we
will continue to be advocates for
public policies that enable people to
take responsibility for their repro
ductive lives.
Chris Funk
executive director
Planned Parenthood of
Lincoln
Dr. Thomas Calhoun
associate professor of sociology
UNL board member,
Planned Parenthood of
Lincoln
Passing a new pass/no pass?
I urge Chancellor James Moeser,
the Academic Senate and students
not to shorten the current pass/no
pass policy, but to lengthen it to
twelve weeks.
I have scholarships which require
a 3.5 GPA each semester, so I’ve had
to change classes to pass/no pass
accordingly to ensure I maintain my
grades.
For example, I had to change my
Political Science 160 class to P/NP
based on only 27 percent of the class
graded by the end of the eighth week!
I have since improved my grade
after switching to P/NP and would be
looking at a B or B+, which I happily
would’ve accepted to fill several
requirements but am now only filling
an elective.
If Chancellor Moeser gets his
way, and possibly shortens the option
to four or six weeks instead of eight,
I wouldn’t have even received a
grade yet in some of the classes I’ve
taken here!
I ask you, Chancellor Moeser,
how are we supposed to utilize the
option unless we have a grade to
measure where we stand in the
class?!
The idea that shortening the P/NP
option will create his utopian “more
rigorous environment” is absurd.
You should encourage the hiring
of higher quality faculty and better
teaching, not take away students’
freedoms by STEALING our grade
options.
Brett Otte
junior
finance
P.S. Write Back
Nebraska Union, 1400 "R" St., Lincoln,
r e-mail <letters@unlihfo.unl.edu.
phone number for verification
L—
