Newspapers / St. Andrews University Student … / Sept. 17, 1970, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of St. Andrews University Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
PAGE TWO THE LANCE THE LANCE St. Andrews Presbyterian College LaurinburK, N. C. 28352 Staff Editor Sara Lee Associate Editor Charlie Pratt Associate Editor - Wayne Warren Sports Editor Mark Kleber Business Manager Lonnie Burrell Advisor Mr. Fowler Dugger This staff is committed to the guidelines set up for campus media as recorded in the Code of Responsibility calling for "Recognition on the part of authors, editors and commentators that freedom entails corollary respon sibilities to be governed by the canons of responsible Journalism, such as avoidance of libel, slander, impro priety, undocumented allegations, attacks on personal integrity, and the technique of harrassment and innu endo." The opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of the College or the staff of the Lance. Letters to the editor and articles are welcome, subject to space limitations. Subscription Rates $3.00 per semester Advertising Rates $ .90 per column inch Challenge To Senate The Senate has already begun to play power politics In its sandbox. In their overzealous desire to change the structures of student activities and In a wider framework, those of the college Itself, members of the Inter-dormltory Senate have managed to overstep their bounds by dealing In personali ties and in areas over which they have no legitimate Jurisdiction supposedly. In particular, we are discussing their actions regarding the LANCE. We cannot sit by idle under attack- we must and will answer. ’ Currently, the Senate Is considering the budget of the Stu dent Association. Items In the budget Include the CoUege Christian Council, the Student Center Board, the Lamp and Itself through dorm money, the Cairn Md the Cabinet, as well as the LANCE. No other organiza tion here listed has yet been faced with an "Investigation” such as that being conducted concerning the LANCE. We have all had to cut our budgets as far as possible. And yet the LANCE has been singled out for an "INVESTIGATION” Into Its Internal workings and organization. The Senate Is legitimately, according to the Student Con stitution, to consider "all questlcns of student welfare and general student Interests...” to hear” recommendations from the Student Association Treasurer and” to approve ” a bud get for the Student Association.” We do not believe that “questions of student welfare and general student Interests” can or should l>e stretched to Include examinations of and interference with the Internal policies of the LANCE. The LANCE and Its affairs, outside the budget, comes expressly under the Jurisdiction of the Publications Board which Is composed of the Editorial staffs of the LANCE and LAMP and SHIELD and under the express Jurisdiction of the Stu dent Life Committee which has student faculty and admin istration members and which is In part, to develop "poli cies and procedures necessary for a total program of stu dent publications.- May we point out that as of last spring, the Student Constitution was rewritten so as to exclude the editor of the LANCE from the Student Life Committee when before the eUtor was. specifically a member of that committee. No^ere in the Constitution Is It given to the Senate to examllie policies and the Internal working of any organiza tion. In the case of the LANCE particularly they are acting In contradiction to the already stated powers allocated to o her areas by the Constitutions. In the process they seem tcj. y inferring that they, by virtue of some unknown power can Indicate b the LANCE staff when to publish and how to do' It. ihe next step Is student censorship. We fMl very strongly that, first,'the poll being conducted by toe Committee to study the LANCE” may be used against us to determine by vote of the Senate, what the LANCE may or may not do. And that the poU is worded so to anticipate a negative response toward the LANCE. J“*8ed In such a limited results of the poll would not be valid Most students will base their appralsal-for lack of any other crl- terlon - on the first Issue we published this year with a new ed“bv^h ® /reshmen, or their Judgement will be sway- I’'' taPressIon given by last year's paper which ^ opinion give a nearly adequate picture of the type of paper we want to be able to put out this year. This ^itor Is not going to back down under fire from the Senrfe. We rea^m certain basic committments of the ma jority of the stalf: that we are going to put out a paper as ^‘'•'“"'Stances and budget allowed legally by the Senate; that we are not going to give In of the LANCE or to control It; that we will adhere to the statements from the C(^e of Responsibility quoted above; and finally that we WUI constantly strive to give students, faculty ^ admta faL'thLe.' ‘“either, Letter To The Editor THURSDAY. SEPT_T7 ^ "Fantum" Attacks First LANCE Faced With Editor's Rebutal To the Editor of Oie LANCE: As a student relatively new to the St. Andrews campus I would like to comment on last week’s edition of your news paper. I must say It left me with a bad taste In my mouth as well as the smudges of Ink on my bands. Referring to the two-page picture spread entitled "Pro files In Courage” I object and say It takes no courage in low ering yourself to the crudeness of today's language. There were no laurels bestowed cm you for your courage.” The only re sponse noticeable" on campus was the giggles of students who acted as though they were in the fifth grade and reading a common four letter word written on the bathroom wall for the first time. Are you aAer respect or the giggles of a g^eratlon out to shock the world with their "open ness?" Well, Madam Editor, what you got were giggles. Did you prove your point? Is the Lance fully liberated now? If you were a self-suport- Ing publication of Independent standing with the shident body and sold subscriptions to whom ever would buy them, then you could print the type of paper that you want. But you are sup ported by the student body which makes you responsible to them. You are supposedly the voice of the student body. I say you are speaking for only a small faction of this campus In your first edition. You have neglect ed your duty to the rest of the school. We as students should not tolerate a paper which kowtows to a minute seg ment. As a great philosopher once said, “You may not be able to please all of the peo ple at one time, but you sure can alienate them all at one time.” Please, from now on, con sider the rest of the students who are forced to accept your paper and plan a paper that Is open and acceptable to all. There Is an old story which goes, “Once a boy makes a girl pregnant, there Is nothing he can do, except be more care ful In the future.” Well, the first edition Is out, but there are more to come. Serve the student body as you are sup posed to and we will be grate ful. I’ll see you In print and I shall be reading the next Issue with great Interest. Thanx, THE FANTUM P. S. Also take note: Rele- vence Is no longer relevent, it's sickening. Dear Fantum: The center spread In the Sep tember 10 Issue of the LANCE was an attempt to express freshman and transfer stu dents’ reactions to their first week at St, Andrews. The quota tions which appeared on pages four and five were printed ex actly as they had been stated to LANCE reporters In a sampling of all new students entering and leaving the CoUege Union Build ing on September 8 and 9. Due to time and staff limita tions, the LANCE could not reach all new students. The LANCE attempts to act, within the space allotted to it, as a clearing house of dlversl- fled student opinion. The LANCE censors no printed ma terial which adheres to the standards of good Journalism; neither does It edit material In an attempt to conform copy to the personal viewpoints of its editors. The LANCE encourages arti cles, criticisms and letters to the Editor, when written with responsibility and integrity. Responsibility and Integrity are not reflected in an unsigned let ter containing unqualified con- On Revolutions Edited by Charlie Pratt Luis Cabrera on "The Philo sophy of the Mexican Revolu tion”: “When a system of work is rlSit, but we fall to obtain re sults for lack of efficiency, the task of the reformer con sists In Improving the sys tem. But when a system Is ra dically wrong, we must aban don that system and find a bet* ter one. The gradual and slow reform of a system to make It suit the requirements of a man, at a business enterprise of an Institution or of a coun try, Is called evolution. The abandonment of a system to be replaced by another. Is called a revolution. The use of force Is not essential to a revolution; but the revolution in the per sonal conduct of man, in busi ness or in communities. Im plies always a considerable ef fort and a great amount of sacrifice.” Kate MlUett of Women’s Li beration: "We demand equal pay for equal work, free abortions on demand, round-the-clock, state-supported child care cen- 'ters. We call for a cultural re volution, which must neces- salrly Involve political and eco- nomlce reorganization but must go far beyond as well.” Karl Marx and George W. F, Hegel, The Communist Mani festo: "That In every historical epoch, the prevaUIng mode of economic production and ex change, and the social organ ization necessarily following from It, form the basis upon which is built up, and from which alone can be examined, the political and intellectual history of that epoch; that con sequently the whole of history of mankind (since the dlssolu- tl(Mi of primitive tribal society, holding land in common owner- ship) has been a history of class struggles, contests between ex ploiting and exploited, ruling (Continued to Page 3) Contributors to this issue: Kathy Kearney Marshall Gravely Jim Pope Judy Warple taddock Smith Photographers: Maury Edwards Jill Robinson Chris Gilbertson Eric Gregory The Fantum Jerry Briggs Jean Carr Larry Street, Mike McQuown Jecture. Your implicaUon tw your views are representative of a majority of students does not Include evidence of such standing. Do not try to dGstroy us vrtUi idle criticism. Rather, make your presence felt throu*^. clflc and constructive apprai- sals through which we can de- velop a newspaper that will bring us all together. Recruitment: Compromise Or Conflict? By Eric Gregory Many colleges this year (ace the increasingly controversial problem of dealing with military recruiting on the campus pro per. There are several radical groups who would have this procedure baimed through voice of threat or violence, but is this the correct or even the most expedient way to^proach the problem? I think not. Ij fact, I believe that 11 this course of action was even attempted it would do more harm than good. You must realize that In dealing with this problem there are a few basic questions one should ask. One Is that if this procedure is banned, is it con flicting with the rl^ts of cer tain Individuals on the cam pus? Without a reasonable doubt I would say that It Is, be cause there are some indivi duals who would like to be able to talk with these recruiters, especially those who will be facing the draft in the near fu ture. Another important ques tion that must be asked is whe ther or not interested students have a ri^t to be exposed to the Information that can be pro vided. I state emphatically that they do, and that to deny them this rl^t is a breach of in dividual freedom on the part d radical groups and their sup porters. The radical groups contend that military recruit ing on campus is a violation of their rights, but examine the facts. If the radicals do not gain their own way they seek to deny the rights of the Indivi dual. A concept that they preach Is taboo. By denying those Indi vidual rights to people who wisJi to hear what these recruiters have to say, these radical groups open the path to con flicts. Lastly, what can we do? The best approach to the pro blem as It stands Is the concept of compromise. Military re cruiters should be allowed on campus, but not In public places such as the College Union. It would be In the Interest of all If these recruiters held their sessions at a specified time. In > specified and previously se cured area such as a class room, so those who wanted to see these people could, without disturbance. Fairly simple and workable. It Is my belief that military recruiters have a right to come on the campus andpresentthelr information. I also believe that an Individual student hasarl^* to see these people, if he so desires. I do not, however, be lieve that anyone has the rl^t to deny another’s hidivldual ri^ts by threat of violence or bodily confrontatl(xi. (Continued to Page 3)
St. Andrews University Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Sept. 17, 1970, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75