10The Daily Tar HeelFriday, April 14, 1989
Readers9 Forem
97i year 0 editorial freedom
Sharon KEBscHULL,Jifor
WILLIAM TaGGART, Managing Editor
LOUIS BlSSETTE, Editorial Page Editor MARY Jo DUNNINGTON, Editorial Page Editor
JUSTM fAcGuiRI., University Editor JENNY CLONINGER, University Editor
TAMMY BLACKARD, State and National Editor CHARLES BrITTAIN, City Editor
ERIK DALE FlIPPO, Business Editor DAVE GLENN, Sports Editor
CaRaBoNNETT, Arts and Features Editor JAMES BENTON, Omnibus Editor
JULIA COON, News Editor DAVID SUROWIECKI, Photography Editor
Kelly Thompson, Design Editor
Bring rights out of the closet
Today is Blue Jeans Day, a day
when wearing blue jeans is supposed
to stand for support of gay rights.
Before running home to change,
however, think about what those blue
jeans really mean.
Take a good look around campus.
Many people are wearing shorts,
khakis, skirts anything but blue
jeans. This is the one day of the year
when most of UNC makes a conscious
effort to leave the Levis and Generras
in the closet, perhaps wishing that
homosexuals would go back there
themselves. The reactionary dress code
for Blue Jeans Day stands in mute
testimony to the attitudes towards
homosexuality on this campus: hands
off tolerance at best, but nothing
approaching acceptance.
Carolina Gay and Lesbian Associ
ation's Awareness Week traditionally
ends with this "demonstration." Oppo
nents justifiably argue that most
people wear blue jeans out of ignor
ance, but in many ways they are
missing the point.
Blue Jeans Day admittedly, is not
an accurate measure of student sup
port on this campus, but it can force
people wearing jeans to feel self
conscious if only for a minute
giving them a sense of how many
homosexuals spend their entire lives.
That is why Blue Jeans Day is a
successful idea. Maybe skeptics can
forget that homosexuality statistically
runs about 10 percent cross-culturally,
an indication that the cause is biolog
ical and transcends unique cultural
pressures or "moral failings." They can
ignore that homosexuality is practiced
by most mammals, or that homosex
. uality can be induced in rats strong
evidence against the "unnatural" and
"perversion" lables so often attached
to homosexuals. They cannot deny,
however, the stares and speculation
that even an association with homo
sexuality can bring. Doubters cannot
claim that anyone chooses to accept
such social pressure, not unless the
alternatives are even more painful.
This understanding is the purpose
of Awareness Week, of which Blue
Jeans Day is only a part. Students
must realize that homosexuality is not
a choice or preference but an accep
tance of natural inclination.
So, for today, stay with the jeans.
Listen to students poke fun at those
who wear them or explain why they
had to wear something else. Listen to
the ignorance and hostility. For many,
Blue Jeans Day is ridiculous grand
standing which can be ignored. But
it can also be an excercise in under
standing, one that won't hurt to try.
David Starnes
Taking amateurs to the hoop
The great tradition of international
amateur athletics in the United States
is in jeopardy. The FIBA, the inter
national basketball federation, voted
overwhelmingly last week to allow
professionals to participate in the
Olympics and other international
competitions.
Individual countries must now
choose whether to apply the proposal,
which passed 56-13 despite U.S.
opposition, to their own Olympic
programs. For example, the American
Basketball Association must decide if
National Basketball Association play
ers will play in the 1992 Olympics in
Barcelona, Spain.
Dave Gavitt, president of the ABA,
was ecstatic about the vote. He
predicted that the ABA would approve
the eligibility change and even guaran
teed a U.S. basketball gold medal a
the 1992 Games.
But in their quest for Olympic
domination, the advocates of profes
sional athletic eligibilty have lost sight
of Olympic ideals. Admittedly, other
countries most notably the Soviet
Union have enjoyed an unfair
advantage in world competition by
fielding teams of athletes who are
indeed professionals by Western
standards. This inconsistency, how
ever, should not obligate us to do the
same.
The Olympic Games are an oppor
tunity for American amateur athletes
to showcase their talents for the world.
Competition is what counts; winning
is of secondary importance. Isaiah
Thomas expressed his concern that pro
players would bring a "win-at-all-cost
mentality" to international competi
tion, and he's right.
UNC basketball coach Dean Smith
was also disappointed with the deci
sion, saying, "I'd rather have- the
excitement, the enthusiasm of a college
player who is realizing the dream of
making the Olympic team." Desire is
indeed a large part of what makes the
Olympics special, and an Associated
Press poll suggests that NBA players
as a whole are not overwhelmed by
the chance to participate. Only 58
percent said they would be willing to
play in the Games.
Even Michael Jordan, one of the
NB A's most enthusiastic players, said
he will not be suiting up for the U.S.
team. Playing in the Olympics is not
worth risking injury to a body worth
millions of dollars or losing the little
off-season recuperation time that pro
players have.
Although no commitments have
been made, it seems that professional
eligibility in world competition may be
just around the corner. The ABA
should come to its senses before a
proud tradition of amateur athletics
in this country comes to an end.
Louis Bissette
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writers: Kimberly Edens, Chris Landgraff and David Starnes.
Assistant Editors: Jessica Yates, arts; Jessica Lanning, city; Myrna Miller, features; Staci Cox, managing;
Anne Isenhower and Steve Wilson, news; Ellen Thornton ,Omnibus; Andrew Podolsky, Jay Reed and Jamie
Rosenberg, sports; Karen Dunn, stale and national; James Burroughs and Amy Wajda, university.
News: Craig Allen, Kari Barlow, Maria Batista, Crystal Bernstein, Victor Blue, Sarah Cagle, Brenda
Campbell, James Coblin, LD. Curie, JoAnna Davis, Blake Dickinson, Jeff Eckard, Karen Entriken, Deirdre
Fallon, Mark Folk, Lynn Goswick, Jada K. Harris, Joey Hill, Susan Holdsclaw, Jennifer Johnston, Jason Kelly,
Lloyd Lagos, Tracy Lawson, Rheta Logan, Dana Clinton Lumsdcn, Jeff Lutrell, Kimberly Maxwell, Helle
Nielsen, Glenn O'Neal, Simone Pam, Tom Parks, Jannette Pippin, Elizabeth Sherrod, Sonserae Smith, Will
Spears, Larry Stone, Laura Taylor, Kelly Thompson, Kathryne Tovo, Stephanie von Isenburg, Genie Walker,
Sandy Wall, Sherry Waters, Chuck Williams, Fred Williams, Jennifer Wing, Katie Wolfe, Nancy Wykle and
Faith Wynn..
Sports: Mike Berardino, senior writer. Neil Amato, Mark Anderson, Jason Bates, John Bland, Christina
Frohock, Scott Gold, Doug Hoogervorst, David Kupstas, Bethany Litton, Bobby McCroskey, Natalie Sekicky,
Dave Surowiecki and Eric Wagnon.
Arts and Features: Kelly Rhodes, senior writer. Cheryl Allen, Lisa Antonucci, Randy Basinger, Clark
Benbow, Adam Bertolett, Roderick Cameron, Ashley Campbell, Pam Emerson, Diana Florence, Laura
Francis, Jacki Greenberg, Andrew Lawler, Elizabeth Murray, Julie Olson, Lynn Phillips, Leigh Pressley, Kim
Stallings and Anna Tumage.
Photography: Thomas Clark, Evan Eile, Chuck Ellison, Steven Exum, Regina Holder, Sheila Johnston,
Tracey Langhome, David Minton and Todd Scott.
Copy Editors: Karen Bell, B Buckberry, Michelle Casalc, Joy Golden, Bert Hackney, Kathleen Hand, Angela
Hill, Susan Holdsclaw, Karen Jackson, Janet McGirt, Angelia Poteat and Clare Wcickert.
Editorial Assistants: Mark Chilton. Amy Dickinson, letter typist.
Design Assistants: Kim Avctta, Melanie Black, Del Lancaster, Nicole Lutcr, Bill Phillips and Susan Wallace.
Cartoonists: Jeff Christian, Adam Cohen, Pete Corson, Bryan Donnell, Trey Entwistle, David Estoye, Greg
Humphreys and Mike Sutton.
Business and Advertising: Kevin Schwartz, director; Patricia Glance, advertising director; Joan Worth,
' classified manager; Stephanie Chesson, assistant classified manager; Chrissy Mennitt, advertising manager;
Sabrina Goodson, business manager; Dawn Dunning, Beth Harding, Sarah Hoskins, Amy McGuin, Maureen
Mclntyre, Denise Neely, Tina Perry, Pam Strickland, Amanda Tillcy and Joye Wiley, display advertising
representatives; Leisa Hawley, creative director; Dan Raasch, marketing director; Genevieve Halkett,
Camille Philyaw, Tammy Sheldon and Angela Spivey, classified advertising representatives; Jeff Carlson,
office manager and Allison Ashworth, secretary.
Subscriptions: Ken Murphy, manager.
Distribution: David Econopouly, manager; Newton Carpenter, assistant.
Production: Bill Leslie and Stacy Wynn, managers; Tammy Sheldon, assistant manager; Anita Bentley,
Stephanie Locklear and Leslie Sapp, assistants.
Printing: The Village Companies.
Fetus at least deserves status of an animal
TTn lieu of the animal rights movement,
which seeks change in the present use
JXof animals for scientific research and
for profit by the fur industry, a fundamen
tal precept among popular attitudes must
occur in order to ensure the eventual
success of this cause. That is, people must
first begin to see animals as valuable
creatures in their own right who possess
the inalienable right to be free from
suffering and death resulting from the
specific purpose of furthering exclusively
human concerns, ranging from dire
medical needs to frivolous fashion.
With this re-orientation in the making
of viewing the animal as a life form ol'
substantial integrity which is protected
from human activity (except for the
purpose of self-defense, in the case of an
attack or in the pursuit of sustenance by
way of nature's food chain r of which
all creatures are a part, both human and
non-human), this mindset should logically
entail a re-examination of the present
status of the biological anomaly, the
human fetus. Given the raised conscious-
Michael Evans
Guest Writer
ness of those who advocate animal rights,
there ought to follow that the criteria for
basing any biological entity's right to
freedom from suffering and death, result
ing neither from self-defense nor a need
for biological sustenance, should be
extended beyond that which is human to
that which is animal. No longer, therefore,
should the pro-choice argument rest on the
contention that a developing fetus is not
yet human, but that the developing fetus
is not yet animal.
If our culture is going to begin to
recognize that it is wrong to make coats
of rabbits or neurosurgical patients of rats
and monkeys, then for the sake of our own
consistency and authenticity of motive, we
had also better re-examine and seek to
determine not when a human fetus
becomes "human," but when it instead
becomes "animal," according to our most
accurate scientific definition, and then
draw the line for justifiable termination at
this point, lest mere personal gain at the
expense of another life form characterize
our treatment of the human fetus as it has
characterized our treatment of (other)
animals. ' ;
Given that this developmental sequence
from fertilized zygote to biological entity
on a par with that which we call animal
likely occurs very early in human preg
nancy, I would suggest that those con:;
cerned about the lives and welfare of
exploited, helpless animals also seek' to'
bring the human fetus into the fold when
it has developed substantially enough to
attain this status as well, and so elevate
it from its present condition of endanger
ment to at least the rising level of the rat,
monkey and rabbit.
Michael Evans is a graduate student in
education from Greensboro.
Preregistration
tests patience
To the editor:
As one of many students
frustrated with UNC's present
adviser system, I was appalled
to learn that the staff of Arts
and Sciences advisers,
obviously understaffed and
overworked, does not extend
its limited office hours during
the week of preregistration.
After waiting in line 20 minutes
on two different days last week,
I was answered with a delight
ful "Your adviser isnt taking
anyone else today; her office
hours end in 30 minutes." The
first rejection was bearable;
however, on my second day this
reply was infuriating. Because
I was unable, on account of my
classes, to arrive any earlier the
next day, I was again turned
away. Now I am forced to ask
the advice of other students and
hope that I selected the courses
I need. Why do our advisers
not extend their inadequate
office hours for the one week
of preregistration, when we
need their guidance the most?
I am sure other students have
also been turned away because
of unavailable advisers, and, as
a result, have made their course
selections ignorantly.
AMY THORNE
Sophomore
International studies
B!IAjn... CLUMP 0. hWOUZ Wt8)1Z r rl?te PS Sp -
(jTrnHPiM) D)kV HAt eons . yak a Rose-
r-&-. yr -"-yj cf'4 pf 13
jyroio ffi wS&WP S more7
f!&tf&- rt) BRIAM CLUMP
0j XB S teND insults io-
Comic meant
to be funny
To the editor:
I am writing in response to
Tanya Person's letter concern
ing the Herschel comic strip
("Comic strip in poor taste,"
April 7) which she said was "ill
humored" in dealing with the
black Greek system. Can you
not take a jokel At the very
beginning of the school year,
Adam Cohen made fun of
white sorority rush in a series
of Herschel strips. Most of
them were quite harsh, to say
the least, but I could see the
humor in his opinion.
As a member of a sorority,
I consider Greek life very
important, but I can under
stand why someone would
laugh at the way formal sor
ority rush is handled. The point
is that a joke is a joke. I'm sure
that Mr. Cohen did not explic
itly say anything bad about the
black Greek system for fear of
being labeled racist. Herschel is
supposed to be funny, and my
advice to Ms. Person is to
lighten up. Being able to laugh
at yourself is one of the noblest
qualities you can possess.
LAURA-LEIGH GARDNER
Sophomore
RTVMP
o All letters and columns
must be signed by the
author, with a limit of two
signatures per letter or
column. Name, year in
school, major and phone
number must be submitted.
fl All letters must be
typed, double-spaced on a
60-space line, for ease of
editing. A maximum of 250
words is optimal.
B The DTH reserve? the
right to edit letters for space,
clarity, and vulgarity.
Remember, brevity is the
soul of wit.
Oil spill should show Bush's true self
To the editor:
I enjoyed Mike Soehnlein's analysis of
the recent Exxon Valdez accident ("Oil
spill an illustration of deeper problems,"
April 7). Mr. Soehnlein's elucidation of the
implications for maritime shipping was
clear and to the point. However, the release
of 10 million gallons of oil into the pristine
waters of the Prince William Sound invites
even deeper investigation into the murky
waters of policy-making that allowed the
Valdez to be off the Alaskan coast in the
first place.
Exxon retained Captain Joseph Hazel-
wood even after discovering that he had
a drinking problem. After successfully
completing an alcohol rehabilitation
program, Hazelwood was back at the helm.
Nine hours after the first gallon of oil began
spewing from the Valdez, test results
showed that Hazelwood's alcohol blood
level was above the limit set by the Coast
Guard. Exxon has promised that they will
no longer employ captains with substance
abuse problems.
While taking out full page apologies in
several publications such as Newsweek and
The Washington Post, Exxon, which has
more resources than any other Amencan
oil company, managed to recover less than
4 percent of the 240,000 barrels spilled.
After it became evident that Exxon could
not handle the cleanup, the operation was
federalized. The oil slick has, of course,
spread to the point that meaningful clean
up operations are impossible. According
to Alaskan Gov. Steve Cowper, the
amount of shoreline that has been inun
dated is equivalent to the entire California
coast. A large part of the cleanup will
consist of collecting dead fish, birds and
animals as evidence for the still-rising flood
of lawsuits that have been filed against
Exxon and the various governmental
agencies involved.
Indeed, the federal government is a
partner in the negligence that led to the
spill. According to the Clean Water Act
of 1972, the Coast Guard is responsible
for planning and monitoring spill contain
ment procedures. The Coast Guard con
tracted the Alyeska Pipeline Service
Company to handle oil spills in the Prince
William Sound area. That company
boasted that it could handle spills such as
this one, even in adverse weather. The
Coast Guard, along with the rest of the
state of Alaska, believed it.
On a more disturbing level, The New
York Times reported that the Interior
Department censored warnings about the
inadequacy of technology for. cleaning up
oil spills. Reports from several agencies,
including the Environmental Protection
Agency and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
were ignored in a final report issued
outlining the risks involved in exploratory
drilling. Rep. Mel Levine, D-Calif.,
obtained docments that show that high
level pressure was applied to keep the
public unaware of the inherent dangers of
increased off-shore drilling and shipping
off the Californian coast.
J. Steven Griles, Assistant Secretary for
Lands and Minerals (part of the Interior
Department), upon seeing a memorandum
from the Fish and Wildlife Service,
complained that it could "... prove very
damaging to this sale (of drilling rights)."
As a result, certain sections of the FWS
memo were ignored (they were said to be
"irrelevant"), including this one: "Minerals
and Management has inaccurately painted
a picture of a routine operation with few
potential impacts when in fact offshore
development in Northern California is a
high risk operation in rough seas, in a
geologically unstable area, with potentially
devastating impacts on coastal resources."
Another FWS report, one that questioned
the construction of a causeway to facilitate
oil development in northern Alaska, was
simply destroyed. Rep. Barbara goxer, D
Calif., who brought the incident to public
attention, said that the Interior Depart
ment wanted to "cover up the truth and
drill at all costs. "
Besides illustrating the, extreme hazards
involved in the handling of crude oil, the
Valdez incident has also reminded many
of the curious relationship that we Amer
icans have with scarce resources. We are
a country addicted to gas and oil. In
addition, there are many wealthy and
powerful people who make billions of
dollars from the oil trade annually.
Everybody wins.
Many experts predict that the world's
oil resources will be depleted in 75 years.
As major sources of oil dry up, oil
companies have to go looking for new
supplies: they go off-shore, off to Alaska
and into national parks. Both the envir
onmental and financial costs of recovering
oil increase as supply dwindles and demand
remains constant. Industry advocates and
others support further exploration for U.S. .
oil to decrease American dependence upon
foreign oil supplies.
That- would make sense if the oil were
earnestly being used to develop alternative
sources of energy and conservation tech
niques. Several estimates indicate that
raising the gas mileage for private cars from
the present average of 27 miles per gallon
to 40 miles per gallon would save the
equivalent of estimated reserves beneath
the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, 3.2 billion
gallons of gas, in the first two years. The
Reagan administration slashed funds for
energy conservation and alternative energy
research and development. Reagan sup
ported the opening of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, a currently protected
expanse of pure wilderness near Prudoe
Bay (from whence the Valdez oil origi
, nated). President Bush supports opening
the ANWR for oil recovery.
If Bush, like Reagan, cuts funding for
alternative energy development and energy
efficiency, using up the Alaskan oil reserves
makes little strategic sense. While more
Alaskan oil would decrease American
dependence on foreign oil in the short run,
it would ultimately leave us begging foreign
countries to satisfy our undiminished oil
addiction. Researching, developing and
switching to new energy sources requires
significant amounts of fuel and consider
able amounts of time; if we wait until we
have run out of American oil to begin the
changeover, we have waited too long. Then
' we will really be. at the mercy of foreign
oil producers. We will be forced to either
accept life without oil, pay the prices
demanded by foreign suppliers or go to
war. ' ,
All too often American policy is reactive;
that is, it reacts to a problem, instead of
preventing it. In environmental matters
this is particularly true. It is very difficult
for a legislator to cast a vote which, though
it might be scientifically justified, threatens
to do anything but enhance the "quality
of life," or income, of his constituents. Only
after a graphic blunder like the Valdez spill
do the majority of politicians get serious.
Transportation Secretary Samuel Skinner
told Congress he thought that an "over
optimistic" attitude had existed before the
spill. Now everyone has learned his lesson,
right?
Wrong. President Bush still supports
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. He claims that the Valdez spill is
an entirely different matter than the drilling
, issue. In a way, he's right: we can prevent
the development of the ANWR and save
its delicate ecosystem; we can't save the
Prince William Sound. The question
before Bush is whether he wants to
undermine our long-range strategic posi
tion by keeping oil prices low and thus
feeding America's oil addiction, all the
while increasing the chances of another
disastrous spill. He campaigned as a Texas
oil man. He also fashioned himself as
environmentally concerned. His decision in
the wake of the Valdez spill will allow the
real George Bush to emerge.
BLAN HOLMAN
Sophomore
English