Page 2
The Banner
Opinions
February 26,1998
The Banner
Editorial
Let's dance!
You've come a long way, baby
When the seniors on the men’s basketball team took the floor
for their first game against Montreat College in Nov. 1994, the
team was ranked 299 out of the 302 Division I basketball teams
in the national Sagarin rankings. Today, the team is the num
ber one seed in the Big South Conference Tournament, and is
only two wins away from the “Big Dance.”
Former coach Randy Weil and current coach Eddie
Biedenbach have built a program that the entire UNCA com
munity can be proud of At times this year, UNCA has actually'
been rated higher in the Sagarins than perennial powerhouse
programs Wake Forest and Louisville.
rhesc accomplishments, along with the two regular season Big
South championships, have not gone unnoticcd. Next year
Bulldog fins will surely miss seeing the thunderous dunks ot
Robert Stevenson, clutch shooting of Josh Pittman, aggressive
play of Dirk I.ommerse, and leadership of Vincent Krieger in
the Justice Center.
Seniors, it has been a great ride, and we at The Banner wish
you the best of luck as you try to accomplish your ultimate goal
of reaching the NCAA Tournament.
CaroUna(im)Perfect 1.0
The computer’s importance in student life, both as an instru
ment in educational and social dealings, cannot be denied,
especially since universities like UNC-Chapel Hill are now
considering making them mandatory for incoming freshmen in
the year 2000. This plan to have college students experience
technology through a more hands-on approach is all fine and
good in theory, but if UNC-CH is demonstrating anything to
UNCA, its that not all sound theories stay that way in practice.
UNC-CH Chancellor Michael Hooker reasons that manda
tory laptop computers will be an asset in the classroom because
“students will be able to engage in online discussions in class,
get responses from in-class poll taking, and take notes with the
laptop computer.” While online interaction with other schools
will benefit everyone, even though it is a rather non-confronta-
tional way to learning, is it really worth the cost? Demanding
that students put down $1,000-$5,000 for a computer just so
they can have easy access to online services is an expensive
alternative to the computer labs that provide the same services
at no price to students at UNCA and other universities, as is
the probability that, the laptop the student bought his or her
freshman year will be outdated and almost worthless when they
graduate.
While UNC-CH believes that requiring laptops will put
students on the same level as far as computer experience is
concerned, they fail to fully recognize that all students are not
equal to each other financially. UNC-CH shows no signs of
reducing tuition, fees, or room and board, or providing laptops
at a reduced cost. Instead, the school will provide financial aid
for students who cannot afford the added expense of a laptop,
mainly in the form of low-interest loans. With the price of
education increasing steadily year aher year, the last thing any
student needs to worry-about is how he or she will pay oft the
loan he or she took oiu for their mandatory laptop. Students
can still get a quality education using pen, paper, and a desktop
computer, which accesses online services just as easily as a
laptop.
UNC-CH should either offer students laptops at a discounted
price or offer to rent them out to students who cannot afford to
buy one. I’he fict that the school has failed to offer these
options to potential students proves UNCA’s Associate Vice
Chancellor for Academic Affairs Thomas Cochran’s comment
that UNC-CH appears to want students to bring computers
for the purpose of “public relations than necessity.” Laptop
computers should not be a required purchase until UNC-CH
can provide students with better funding options and realize
the financial burden it places on them.
MMMMMMBop!
I
It’s time to lay the Grammys to rest. This year’s ceremony,
like always, was a sad joke. Bob Dylan for Album of theYear?
We learn to have respect for the dead at an early age, but
giving Dylan the Grammy for Album of the Year for Time Out
of Mind over Radiohead’s OK Computer is the biggest travesty
in Grammy history (except maybe the year that Metallica lost
the Best Heavy Metal category to Jethro Tull.
Our editorial board picks for album of the year:
Brian Castle: OK Computer, Radiohead
Erin King: Sisters of Avalon, Cyndi Lauper
Chris Brooker: Bruther Monk, Bruther Monk
Renee Slaydon: Surfacing, Sarah McLachlan
Chris Garner; Hang-ups, Goldfinger
Amanda Thorn; Out of Nowhere, Hanson
Preston Gannaway: Time Out of Mind, Bob Dylan
Nate Conroy; One Day It’ll All Make Sense, Common
Note: At least they didn’t give it to Paula Cole. Where have all
the cowboys gone—they’re running away from you. You’re
scarrrrrrry.
You control your own destiny
Teresa
Calloway
columnist
Being a columnist isn’t easy. Basi
cally you have one stone—ONE—
to throw at over 3,000 people and
the institutions they comprise. You
throw it on a Wednesday, it lands
on a riiunsday, and then you have
three seconds to run for cover be
fore an astonishing variety ofpebbles
and boulders come crashing clown
on you from all directions.
You had one stone. So does every
one else.
Today, I join the hallowed ranks
ot Banner columnists, and as 1 look
around in awe at the animal rights
activists, religious philosophers,
comedians, and social commenta
tors, 1 wonder what it is 1 have to
say. Race relations? Not touching
it. Religion? Don’t have it in me.
Hell, I politely tookan invitation to
join the Church of God for Sunday
worship. I just didn’t have the heart
to tell the guy I was already reli
giously committed to a different
faith, so I nodded whilst he gave me
directions.
“You’ll pass a church on the cor
ner that says Church of God,” he
told me earnestly, “but that’s not
ours.” He leaned a little closer, as if
sharing a secret; “Every church that
calls itself the Church of God is not
the Church of God.” And while I
found some humor in his
conspiratory tone, I was mostly glad
he thought 1 was worth it.
As 1 was sitting in biology lab,
considering all of these things, I
noticed that the rest of the class was
sitting in biology lab considering
their fingernails, hair, the person
sitting across from them, whatever.
This was because we weren’t doing
biology lab. Instead, our teacher
was hurr)'ing around with another
scrounging for lab equipment, con
sulting with the assistant and any
one else who looked as if they might
have recently stuffed anythingelec-
trophoretic under their clothing.
This went on for maybe five min
utes; not long, but long enough to
realize that just this semester, my
mother wrote out a check to UNCA
that may as well have read “Pay to
the Order of Division I Athletics”
while I was sitting in an under
equipped lab with a marvelous pro
fessor who was recently reduced to
adjunct because of decreased fund
ing.
Ah, a point, you say. Wrong. I’m
not going to criticize Division I
status. 1 am going to criticize the
fact that, as far as I know. I’m the
only one who made this connec
tion between UNCA’s decision to
be Division I and my own life. Here
at UNCA, here in America, and
probably here on Earth, human
beings seem to be experiencing a
profound reluctance to examine the
age-old and much heralded scheme
of cause and effect. We like our
lives so much theway they are, with
cheap stuff at Wal-Mart and a cof
fee break in the middle of lab, that
we are unwilling to acknowledge
that this isn’t just “the way things
are.” This is the way we’ve made
them.
That’s right. The world isn’t dete
riorating because “that’s the way
things are,” it’s deteriorating be
cause millions of people would
rather watch Seinfeld than spend
half an hour thinking about where
their trash goes when the garbage
man picks it up. When you pass a
chicken farm and speed up to 80
miles per hour, it’s not because
“chickens just stink,” it’s because
we like paying a mere $2.50 for
whole chicken breasts, even if they
vverecrannned into cages tliatmake
six people in a Geo look comfort
able.
Lastly, we don’t spend idle time in
labs because “that’s the way things
are.” We do it because a lack of
funding has resulted in a scramble
for proper equipment (“Wear sun
glasses to class next week, everyone.
We’re doing a lab that requires eye
protection and we don’t have
any.”???).
The ability to make connections
is what keeps humans intelligent.
The ability to make connections
between an apple falling down and
the rotation of the planets. The
ability to make connections between
matter and energy. The ability to
make connections between feeling
sick and getting drunk, between
knowing how subatomic particles
are arranged and how molecules
bond, between the clear-cutting of
old growth forests and the ensuing
impact on wildlife. After all, there’s
not much new on the face of this
rock.
What makes it new is the human
ability to make new connections
between existing information. Ifwe
are willing to lose this ability for the
sake of maintaining a comfortable
lifestyle, then let’s at least be clear
about what we’re doing: we’re sac
rificing the history of human
progress, and whatever future it
may have.
I’m not saying you have to go out
and become vegan. I’m not telling
you to recycle. I’m not condemn
ing the fact that my mother has six
children and shells out good money
so UNCA can play basketball while
1 sit in lab wondering why I’m not
doing anything. But this week I
would issue a challenge to UNCA
ficulty, staff and students to con
sider the less immediate effects of
living the way we do live, and if
something should begin to rankle,
try something different. This week,
instead of getting offended when
you read something you disagree
with, try understanding that taking
offense is easy, and taking action is
noble.
Instead of getting offended by
Krystal Black’s proposal to go vegan,
try it one meal a day and see how it
feels to look at your plate and think,
“Nothing on this tray came from
an animal.”
Instead of getting offended when
a Baptist fundamentalist tells you
you’re headed to the fiery depths,
talk to him a bit and find out what
he does believe.
If what you believe can be up
rooted by controversy like so much
grass, don’t waste your time pro
tecting it with an impenetrable wall:
plant a tree instead.
And before you write The Banner
about what a hypocrite I must be,
put down your stone, however large
it is, and pick up the telephone. I’m
in the directory, and you might
need your rock for other things.
Bombs: pro-life h5^ocrisy
Heather
Garren
columnist
On the morning ofjan. 27, 1998,
a reportedly sophisticated bomb
exploded in front of the New
Woman, All Women Health Clinic
in Birmingham, Ala. The explo
sion killed off-duty police officer,
Robert “Sandy” Sanderson and in
jured clinic nurse Emily Lyons. Eric
Robert Rudolph, originally sought
only as a witness, is now wanted as
a suspect, with a $ 100,000 reward.
1 am not really sure about my
views on abortion, though 1 guess I
would probably lean more towards
the pro-life side. But circumstances
can be complicated - too compli
cated, 1 think, to judge such a com
plex issue on such a black and white
scale.
Anyway, my opinion on abortion
itself has little to do with the matter
at hand. Except, of course, for the
fact that by claiming even a shaky
pro-life stand I am inadvertently
associating myself with a rather
nasty group of extremist who seem
to think that the killing of adult
humans is justified in stopping the
“murder” of an unborn baby. Ex
cuse the cliche, but two wrongs just
do not make a right.
A common argument in the abor
tion debate is “Where do you draw
the line on where life begins, and
when is it too late to end even a
potential life?” Now, the answers to
these questions have not been sci
entifically proven. There are many
differentopinionseven in the medi
cal field. This leaves the decision on
a personal level, a line you have to
draw in your own mind to satisfy
any beliefs; religious, moral, or oth
erwise. Let me stress the words “per
sonal decision” in this column.
I am not one to say that abortion
is murder, even though I cannot see
how it would not be. I am not a
doctor or God. And the fact is that
no one really knows, and that is
OK! But 1 think I can also safely
make the assumption that the lives
ofSandy and Lyons had unarguably
began quite awhile go.
Sanderson’s life was definitely that
of a real live human being - there
fore his death was a murder.
Whether or not abortion is wrong
is questionable, but the killing of
this man was not the way to show us
this.
Are we living in a society so sick
that we can call ourselves pro-life,
and enforce our statement by shed
ding the blood of innocent people?
Pro-life means just that, and the use
of violence to back up a declaration
of peace and life is simply foolish,
for lack of a better word to use.
Those who base their beliefs on a
religious stand - correct me if I am
wrong. But I believe the Bible says
something along the lines of, “J udge
not or you shall be judged.” Who
are we to decide the fate of a person
whose behavior we do not approve
of? And does the Bible not also state
clearly that God is to be the judge of
things and that “sinners” will get
theirs intheend (in so many words)?
By claiming a religious belief as a
reason for murder, these people are
giving their religion and those who
share their claimed beliefs a very
silly and hypocritical appearance.
Is the Christian rehgion not sup
posed to reflect love and forgive
ness, and an unrelenting desire to
spread the “joy” of the-religion to
the rest of the world? Kind of like
By claiming a
religious belief
asa reasonfor
murder, these
people are giv
ing their reli
gion and those
who share
their claimed
beliefs a very
silly and hypo
critical appear
ance.
burning a cross in someone’s yard
to show them the “love of God,”
huh guys?
Despite my views, I can honestly
say that I do not know one pro-
choice advocate that can not sin
cerely state their belief that abor
tion is in fact, not murder. These
people are not murderers. And they
definitely do not deserve to die.
Abortion clinic bombers are not
pro-lifers. It does not matter what
they claim to be. That is like saying
that Hitler was a devout Christian.
They are ruining the name of a
movement that is meant to stand
for peace and life.
Anyone that would consider kill
ing to try and enforce an idea pro
moting life, would have to be in
sane.
Unfortunately it is hard not to
judge the whole group on the most
radical of it is members, in any
circumstance, and it helps their
cause even less that pro-choicers do
not seem to be causing much of a
problem.
I was reading an article on the
Internet the other day, and 1 came
across a segment from a quote from
the National Right to Life Com
mittee, where they argue the abor
tion clinic bomber’s right to call
themselves pro-choice. It read:
“It is false and offensive to sug
gest, as some pro-abortion groups
have done, that speaking in favor of
the right to life somehow causes
violence. Such as suggestion is like
blaming the civil rights move
ment—and all those who coura
geously spoke in favor of the rights
of African Americans—for the ri
ots or deaths that were part of that
era.”
This was the act of an individual
who just, to me, does not appear to
be quite there... if you know what
I mean. His actions, along with
those of other clinic bombers do
not reflect the beliefs of pro-life
advocates.
This was not a statement in favor
of life, but a mockery of everything
both groups stand for.