8 The Daily Tar Heel Wednesday, October 29, 1986
latiu
94i rear o editorial freedom
Jim Zook, &fcor
Randy Farmer, Managing Editor
ED BRACKETT, Associate Editor
DEWEY MESSER, Associate Editor
Tracy Hill, News Editor
Grant Parsons, university Editor
LlNDA,MONTANARI, City Editor
JILL GERBER, State and National Editor
Scott Fowler, sports Editor
KATHY PETERS, Features Editor
ROBERT KEEFE, Business Editor
Elizabeth Ellen, Am Editor
DAN CHARLSON, Photography Editor
Staff strain in Senate race
Issues in the U.S. Senate race
between Jim Broyhill and Terry
Sanford are in danger of being clouded
by campaign staffs.
In the home stretch, campaign
workers are growing tired and testy,
causing exhaustion to sometimes
overpower judgment.
Take Monday, when Lisa Brewer,
an aide to Broyhill, tried to attend a
Sanford press conference. A Demo
cratic Party worker, Ronnie Moore,
refused to let her enter. Moore jokingly
identified himself as Claude Allen (a
former aide to Jesse Helms) and told
Brewer to "stay out."
When Sanford arrived, he told
workers (and attentive reporters) to let
Brewer in. He said her presence
emphasized BroyhhTs refusal to dis
cuss issues, that Broyhill was "sending
a young woman to speak for him."
Sanford's unmannerly comments
aside, Moore's actions were petty and
unreasonable. Brewer was a press aide
at a press conference. And whether or
not the confrontation and Sanford's
arrival were timed, they appeared
more than coincidence. The incident
did little for the Sanford image.
But Sanford's point, however made,
was valid. A Broyhill press conference
Monday was long overdue. His sche
dule has been loaded with fund-raising
and club appearances, with no legit
imate media sessions. Between three
minute interviews to and from dinners
and sharp words with audacious
reporters, Broyhill has not been
making media friends. Broyhill seems
to forget that the press is the source
of information for most voters.
The Broyhill campaign schedule has
suffered mix-ups as well. On at least
one occasion, Broyhill was slated to
appear in two places at once. Having
to cancel an appearance only hours
in advance doesn't do much for the
candidate's image, either.
With such incidents, Broyhill and
Sanford can be tainted through the
work of their campaign staffs rather
than judged on merit. If their workers
don't try for better press relations and
quality appearances (one at a time) a
lot of voters could be swayed for the
wrong reasons.
Fundamental faith, freedom
In recent years, as fundamentalist
Christians have extended their influ
ence beyond the religious sphere, the
term "secular humanism" has become
their catchword for modern evils. For
the fundamentalist, secular humanism
is a philosophy which places man
above God and removes God from his
rightful spot as the foundation of
society's values and goals.
The conflict between these two
visions of life came into sharp focus
over the weekend. Federal District
Judge Thomas Hull ruled that students
should be allowed to skip a class rather
than be forcibly exposed to material
which their parents feel contradicts
their religious beliefs. As long as
students met the school's reading
standards, Hull ruled, and there were
sincere religious objections to the
books, attendance was not required.
The suit was brought by seven
Christian families in Hawkins County,
Tenn. They argued that First Amend
ment rights to the free exercise of
religion were violated by books used
in their children's reading classes. The
plaintiffs charged that the books dealt
with ungodly issues, such as supernat
uralism and male-female role reversal.
Vicki Frost, a mother and star
witness for the parents, captured the
plaintiffs' view of education when she
said, "Our children's imaginations
have to be bounded." Frost was
referring to a reading exercise asking
seventh graders to imagine themselves
as part of nature.
Judge Hull was careful to limit his
decision, saying only the plaintiffs
could be excused from class and skip
only the disputed class. His decision
must not be seen as advocating a
fundamentalist vision of education or
religion, as he wrote some might
consider such beliefs "incomprehens
ible and illogical."
The decision can be seen as finding
a sanctuary in the no man's land
between the enemy camps. After all,
if students learn to read at home, they
suffer no harm. Also, the free exercise
clause precludes the state forcing a
religious view on the individual.
But the decision has serious flaws.
Pragmatically, it holds the danger of
creating a "cafeteria" vision of public
education, selecting or rejecting classes
based on conformity to one's beliefs.
More importantly, the decision, and
the plaintiffs' arguments, contradict
what public education is all about.
Education, particularly at the gram
mar school level, must not consist of
reinforcing one's own beliefs by
excluding consideration of others. It
must foster respect for all opinions and
not deny the validity of others.
When dogmatic religion enters the
realm of secular education, an inev
itable conflict ensues. And in a non
theocratic society the first responsibil
ity is to education. If Frost wishes to
limit her children's minds, she can send
her children to private school, as she
is doing now. Such limits have no place
in our public schools.
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writer: Kathy Nanney
Omnibus Editor: Sallie Krawcheck
Assistant Managing Editors: Jennifer Cox, Amy Hamilton and Regan Murray.
News: Jeanna Baxter, Stephanie Burrow, Charlotte Cannon, Chris Chapman, Paul Cory, Sabrina Darley,
Kimberly Edens, Michelle Efird, Jennifer Essen, Jeannie Faris, Scott Greig, Maria Haren, Nancy
Harrington, Timothy Harrison, Suzanne Jeffries, Susan Jensen, Sharon Kebschull, Michael Kolb, Teresa
Kriegsman, Laura Lance, Alicia Lassiter, Mitra Lotfi, Brian Long, Justin McGuire, Karen McManis,
Laurie Martin, Tracey Maxwell, Toby Moore, Dan Morrison, Felisa Neuringer, Rachel Orr, Fred
Patterson, Liz Saylor, Sheila Simmons, Rachel Stiffler, Elisa Turner, Nicki Weisensee, Beth Williams,
Robert Wilderman and Bruce Wood. Jo Fleischer and Jean Lutes, assistant university editors. Donna
Leinwand, assistant state and national editor. Cindy Clark, Ruth Davis and Michael Jordan, wire
editors.
Sports: Mike Berardino, James Surowiecki and Bob Young, assistant sports editors. Bonnie Bishop,
Greg Cook, Phyllis Fair, Laura Grimmer, Clay Hodges, Greg Humphreys, Lorna Khalil, Eddy Landreth,
Mike Mackay, Jill Shaw and Wendy Stringfellow.
Features: Jessica Brooks, Julie Braswell, Eleni Chamis, Robbie Dellinger, Carole Ferguson, Jennifer
Frost, Jennifer Harley, Laura Lance, Corin Ortlam, Lynn Phillips, Katie White and Mollie Womble.
Arts: James Burrus, David Hester, Alexandra Mann, Rene Meyer, Beth Rhea, Kelly Rhodes and Rob
Sherman.
Photography: Charlotte Cannon, Larry Childress, Jamie Cobb, Tony Deifell, Janet Jarman and Julie
Stovall. '
Copy Editors: Karen Anderson, assistant news editor. Dorothy Batts, Beverly Imes, Lisa Lorentz, Sherri
Murray, Sally Pearsall, Marielle Stachura and Joy Thompson.
Editorial Cartoonists: Adam Cohen, Bill Cokas and Trip Park.
Campus Calendar: Mindelle Rosenberg and David Starnes.
Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Patricia Benson, advertising director; Mary
Pearse, advertising coordinator. Angela Ostwalt, business manager; Cammie Henry, accounts receivable
clerk; Eve Davis, advertising manager. Ruth Anderson, Michael Benfield, Jennifer Garden, Kelli
McElhaney, Chrissy Mennitt, Beth Merrill, Anne Raymer, Julie Settle, Peggy Smith, Kent Sutton,
Ashley Waters, and Layne Poole advertising representatives; Tammy Norris, Angie Peele, Stephanie
Chesson, classified advertising representatives; Tammy Sheldon, editorial assistants; and Mary Brown,
secretary.
Distributioncirculation: William Austin, manager.
Production: Elizabeth Rich and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway, production assistant.
Guiarding XJNC's academic integrity
The author is chairman of the Undergrad
uate Honor Court.
The Honor Code: It shall be the respon
sibility of every student at the University
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to obey
and to support the enforcement of the Honor
Code, which prohibits lying, cheating or
stealing when these actions involve academic
processes or University, student or academic
personnel acting in an official capacity.
The Campus Code: It shall be the further
responsibility of every student to abide by
the Campus Code: namely, to conduct
oneself so as not to impair significantly the
welfare or the educational opportunities of
others in the University community.
't is my responsibility, along with four
other members of the court,' to preside
Lover cases involving students charged
with alleged violations of the Code of
Student Conduct. For three years, 1 have
been active with the Honor Court and have
had the opportunity to evaluate the pre
mises, as well as the effectiveness, of our
Honor System. 1 have also been able to
review my role both as an administrator of
the Honor System and as a student governed
by its principles.
Often 1 am questioned by friends and
others about my real enthusiasm in prom
oting the Honor System. About six months
ago, after chairing a case late into the
evening, 1 was approached by a student who
had served as a character witness during the
hearing. Obviously stricken by the magni
tude of the court's decision, the student
inquired how 1 could ever enjoy putting
myself and someone else through the trauma
of a case. After pausing, I replied that our
system was the best means of guaranteeing
Tory Johnston
Guest Writer
academic integrity and that 1 enjoyed playing
a part in its functioning.
What is so great about the Honor System?
Certainly there is much at UNC to make
us hold our heads high. This list is not limited
merely to academic and athletic excellence,
but should also include our student-run
Honor System, which has been a traditional
part of the academic functioning of this
university for over a century.
We should be proud of the immense
academic and personal freedom bestowed
upon us by this system. As students, we are
given the latitude to govern our lives and
to pursue our education without extensive
monitoring or interference from UNC
faculty and staff. Why? Because the basic
premise of our Honor System is that we,
as students, are honest and trustworthy an
that we will act accordingly in upholding
the principles of academic integrity. When
1 take a test here at UNC, I like the fact
that no one is standing over my shoulder
and spying to see if 1 would dare cheat.
Unlike some other universities without a
parallel Honor System, UNC professors
don't have to pace the aisles during tests.
If college is synonymous with freedom and
availability of choices, then a system based
on heavy exam proctoring conveys inherent
doubt in a student's capacity to make ethical
decisions. We should be proud that UNC
has entrusted us as students with the
recognition of our maturity to conduct
ourselves in an honorable fashion. This faith
in individual students to exercise their
freedom responsibly is the most fundamen
tal component and the most appealing
aspect of our Honor System. By dele
gating to students the responsibility of self
regulation, the University offers us tangible
evidence of its trust in us.
We should also be appreciative that our
Honor System encourages us to do our
personal best and to accept the responsibility
for our own coursework, whether it be
graded an A or an F. The Honor System
embodies the notion of personal integrity
in that a grade must reflect an individual's
efforts to comprehend and to express an idea
or a fact. In essence, the beauty of academic
freedom is marred whenever a student denies
himself the challenges of critical thinking
and- learning by resorting to academic
dishonesty. A grade earned through cheating
or plagiarism thwarts the goal of student
self-development engendered in the Honor
System's encouragement of students to
participate in academics with self-reliance.
Yes, I enjoy the position I hold in the
Student Judicial Honor System. It is not
an easy task. Judging the conduct of peers
requires emotional strength, impartiality
and much sensitivity to the concerns and
fears of the accused student. And yet, I can
say I enjoy my work because I support and
share the pride in a system which promotes
self-regulation, individual responsibility and
trust within an academic setting. I hope you
share my respect and will reaffirm your
commitment to the long tradition of
academic integrity here at UNC.
Tory Johnston is a senior psychology
major from Chattanooga. Tenn.
'Review9 out
To the editor:
The Carolina Course Review
is now available on campus for
students to utilize in making
their course selections during
preregistration for spring 1987.
1 urge students to avail them
selves of the Review's informa
tion, and I hope that it will be
of service.
I also wish to call attention
to the fact that the period of
coverage of the teaching eva
luations is misstated on page 2
of the Review. The courses
were surveyed at the end of the
spring semester 1986, not
spring 1985 and fall 1984 as
indicated in the Review, and
thus, the data are as current as
possible.
DENNIS APPLEYARD
Faculty Adviser
Carolina Course Review
Fed up
To the editor:
I'm sick and tired of hearing
of this Anti-Apartheid Support
Group. Are they concerned
with the campus or their own
reputation? Last year was bad
enough, as they degraded the
most beautiful area on campus,
the quad, with those accursed
shanties (or "shoddies," as I call
them). Then, on a day during
which a rare, ceremonial event
occurs (President Spangler's
inauguration), they interrupt
activity to protest. Ceremonial
events are supposed to be
honored, and somewhat even
a break from daily, hectic
routine.
To the Anti-Apartheid Sup-
Throwing stones
To the editor:
John Hood, in his Oct. 20
column ("For Soviet coopera
tion, stand firm"), says that
Americans who oppose Star
Wars Strategic Defense Initia
tive argue "with emotion rather
than logic." It's ridiculous for
anyone who refers to the Soviet
Union as the "Evil Empire" to
accuse the other side of emo-
tionalism. Those who live in
glass houses shouldn't throw
stones.
FRANK NEWTON
Library Assistant
Protest justified
To the editor:
In response to your Oct. 20
editorial, "Protest lacks tact,"
1 can only observe that the
protesters had as much right to
that hallowed ground as the
new president himself. The
microcosm that is the Univer
sity of North Carolina, and all
of its components, allows for
dissent. It is frequent that the
voice of dissent leads us down
the right path. The protestors
at Friday's ceremony were in
their rightful place in the
academic procession.
LEEHANSLEY
Durham
BEAGLE, OUADDAVA TVUNK ?
F. HALLOWEEN, I'fA GortrtA
GO UP ON FfcAMKJJN STREET
AS A CAfAPUS POLICEMAN
C? I) NO Gco5 , MAM . A T
The Daily Tar Heel welcomes reader com
ment. For style and clarity, we ask that you
observe the following guidelines for letters to the
editor and columns:
O All letters columns must be signed by the
author(s). Limit of two signatures per letter or
column.
a Students who submit letters I columns
should also include their name, year in school,
major and phone number. Professors and other
University employees should include their title
and department.
a All letters! columns must be typed. (For
easier editing, we ask that they be double-spaced
on a 60-space line.)
B The Daily Tar Heel reserves the right to
edit letters and columns for style, grammar and
accuracy.
port Group, I say that your
cause is just, but your methods
are the reason you turn many
people away from your mes
sage. By showing a clear dis
regard for the ceremony, you
openly expose the fact that
your morals need work. Of
course you have the right to
freedom of expression; that is
why we have an area known
as the Pit. Remember, your
rights end where other people's
rights begin. For example, I
have the right to swing my fists,
but my freedom to do it ends
where another's right to well
being begins. Similarly, your
right to build shoddies and
interrupt ceremonies ends
where our right to appreciate
scenery and assemblies begins.
Think about it.
TIM FRY
Sophomore
Business Administration
With divestment issue, accept no excuses
To the editor:
Once again the UNC Board
of Trustees has decided to defer
the issue of divestment from
South Africa. Until a few
months ago, the trustees hypo
critically argued that invest
ment into the apartheid regime
was indeed beneficial to the
black majority of that country
(though even the conservative
U.S. Senate had approved
limited sanctions against the
P.W. Botha regime). Now new
excuses are found. Suddenly,
some of the BOT members
became forgetful and now
require new information before
they can make a decision on
divestment. One wonders how,
without such information, they
have been investing in South
Africa all these years, or could
this be an admission of ignor
ance on the part of the BOT?
Many other excuses are
made. One particularly
grabbed my attention because
of its boldness: "My duty was
and is to manage the invest
ments to maximize the Endow
ment Fund," said BOT member
W. Travis Porter at the organ
ization's Oct. 16 meeting.
Furthermore, as an indication
of the extent of the rip-off of
the South African people, he
alleges that the University will
lose $1 million in investment
revenue per year if it divested.
Ethical egoism could not be
expressed more clearly. In
task (his so-called duty) to the
consideration of economic
gain. Porter destroys the very
sense behind morality. Moral
ity, it would seem, functions to
restrict the pursuit of self
interest. If enlightened self
interest is the principle of all
morality, it is necessary for the
private interest
and scholarships for UNC
students. We, as students, have
not been misled by this bribe.
In fact, UNC students have
voted for total and immediate
divestment in campus referen
dums. Just last week the Trus
tees were handed a Student
Congress resolution supporting
of each person
or institution
to coincide
with the
general inter
est of
humanity.
Every class
has its own
standards of
morality, and
capitalist con
siderations ultimately can
not go much
beyond the
ethical egoism
that Porter
represents. "My duty was and
is . . . to maximize the Endow
ment Fund" how about your
duty to your fellow human
bei ngs that are denied every
basic human right under apar
theid? If you cannot lend a
, hand to overthrow the criminal
regime of apartheid, how about
your duty to hot invest in it?
Unfortunately, some BOT
members are also strongly
paternalistic, claiming that the
purpose of the University's
reducing the morality of his investment is to secure grants
the full divestment of UNC
funds from South Africa.
The majority of UNC stu
dents and faculty do not look
at the world through the green
spectacles of some BOT
members. Their morality asks
for the right of self determina
tion for the people of South
Africa and for an end to invest
ment in apartheid.
AHMAD GOLCH IN
Senior
Pharmacy
A
ttUfnm