PAGE TWO
"the lance
staff
Editor - Jeff Neill
Associate Editor
Associate Editor Marshall Gravely
Business Manager Hunter Watson
Copy Editor Elaine Thomas
Advisor Mr. Fowler Dugger
Staff writers: Ligon Perrow, Rod Brown, Dan Breidegam
Susan Harris, Nancy Meator, Glenda Buck, Jackie Dove.
The Editorial staff’s intent is to maintain professional stan
dards within the guidelines put forth by the Code of Respon
sibility. Signed articles reflect the opinion of-the author, where
as unsigned editorials and articles reflect the majority opinion
of the staff. Opinions expressed arc not necessarily those of
the College. Letters to the editor and articles are welcomed
though subject to space limitations.
Subscription rates $2.50 per semester.
Advertising rates S .90 per column inch.
Semester contracts, S .80 per column inch.
THE LANCE
Blessings . . . Pope
There is so much to write about when I realize that this is
my last time before the reading public at St. Andrews,
Yet, it is difficult trying to decide what should or should not
be said. Last week I turned sentimental to the surprise of a
number of people.
I could take a few stabs at the cafeteria, which has not im
proved greatly in the past months; maintenance, which either
did or did not fix my air conditioner; the business office, which
is still without the spunk Peacock put into it; C & C, which is
and forever will be C & C; STMS, which needs no mention;
the P. E. department, which is still attempting to take itself too
seriously; etc, which could mean anything, anything at all.
Or, I could write a long but humorous story on life in a suite
situation, working out problems with friends, attempting to find a
job. President Nixon (who is a long, but not humorous story in
himself), professors who try too hard, etc.
But not this week. What 1 want to say is of a serious nature,
and is directed to the students and indirectly to the whole St.
Andrews community.
But are you the same people who are asking for peace in the
world? If you are, then Richard Nixon is doing the same thing
you are, only on a larger scale. Instead of throwing firecrackers
at people he knows, he is bombing people he has never seen be
fore. Is there a difference? Think about it, children.
The verbal and physical assaults on the police were ir
rational actions, spurred on by emotion. This action has hurt
the relationship between the city and the campus.
I am not saying that the school is entirely at fault. I do not
like to be threatened, and that is what I think the police were
doing in the local paper last Friday, A front page spread such
as that also adds injury to insult.
What should be done? Who knows? Surely I don’t have the
answer.
St. Andrews is now in the age of puberty. It has grown some,
but it is not old enough to handle the situation.
The incident of last Wednesday, namely the bust in Mecklen
burg and the behavior of the students afterward, has been talked
and written about so much lately that I am certain everyone is
tired of it.
Yet, I feel more needs to be said. Dr. Hart in his eloquent
“Dialogue” expressed many of my feelings. It distressed me
deeply to hear people laughing about what he had to say.
These are the same people who want to attack the police
station downtown and talk about violence as if it were a harm
less game. And these are the same people who enjoy throwing
firecrackers at each other.
As a senior, I know that I am glad that I am graduating
soon. I do not like the atmosphere here anymore. I see the
generation gap between myself and the underclassmen.
and confusing stage of life to exist
within If that is where St. Andrews is now, then all I can do is
hope that this stage passes quickly for the sake of the school.
St. Andrews gave me what I wanted from college. It can of
fer the same to anyone else who is willing to take it. But
you must respect the school, and love it.
Sure it has faults, but before they could be solved in a peace
ful manner. Can it be done so today?
So, as I close and put the final Blessings column to bed I
want to say to the students who wUl be here next year- the
Wish, but If you remain
irrational be willing to suffer the consequences. Don’t kill
it before it reaches adolesence.
THURSDAY, MAY 11,1973
injj;
Criticism Of Paper Seen As
Improvement Over Approval
BY JEFF NEILL
In recent weeks a sudden
onslaught of criticism concern
ing the Lance has come out into
the open for the first time this
year.
This is good.
Prior to this criticism all that
The Lance heard after each pub
lication was how good thepj^>er
has been this year — as com
pared to other years — and
how “this Issue was the best
yet!” Naturally different people
made basically the same state
ment each week which gave us
the feeling The Lance was being
accepted, liked, and read by the
campus as a whole. Positive
strokes are always good for the
ego.
Yet at the same time compli
ments without constructive cri
ticism can lead to complacency
rather than innovation and 15)-
gradlng of standards.
Perhaps the largest and most
valid critclsm we have heard
recently Is that The Lance has
not Investigated complaints
about possible wrong doings by
various community members
and groups. In short,The Lance
has been bland and lacking the
dynamics of criticism.
We plead guilty with exten
uating circumstances.
First with the obvious: major
controversies do not always
Crime Proposal
Contradictory
Editor:
This is not an opinion of the
Student Senate, I am not writing
an official statement for my
dorm. This is a personal opi
nion.
The recent proposal concern
ing felonious crimes by the
Committee for the Implementa
tion of the Code was in many
ways ironic. We at St. Andrews
have lately been great advoca
tors of personal right. We have
thrown mud at police cars, we
have called policemen cute
names (peculiar to our genera
tion), and we have reacted vio
lently to the local newspaper
article which covered the dope
bust.
Our College is supposedly a
liberal college, extending its
privileges to any and all who
wUl accept them. Racial dis
crimination? Nol Sexism? No!
Yet in all our tolerant facades,
tile ugly sickness of discri
mination has found true repre-
sentation in the Proposal.
Granted, the majority of stu
dents did not support it and
the Student Senate did not pass
it. Yet it did prove, at least
to me, that things at St. An
drews are not as they should be.
The Proposal publicly proved
that myself, along with the oth
er members of tiie student body
are scheming, bourgeois, con
descending hypocrites. To con
sider myself and my fellow stu
dents otherwise is to continue
an unending and hc^less game
with ourselves, the administra
tion, the faculty, and most of all,
the people whom we so right
eously term “undesirable” l>e-
cause they have committed a
felonious crime.
The crime and the criminal
are both products of the same
rationale that prompted the
Committee for Implementation
of The Code to make its pro
posal, and the reason that
four students from Kent State
are now dead.
Tommy Warren
happen on the S. A. campus for
The Lance to report. But be
that as it may. To put togeth
er a paper on any type of a
basis—daily, weekly, month
ly—requires a great deal of
time, energy, effort and abi
lity. These things the staff,
as a whole, lacked In sufficient
quantities (for the majority
of this year there were four
full time staff members).
It must also be realized The
Lance staff is comprised of
members of the S. A. commu
nity and therefore can only re
flect the S. A. community in
certain ways. And the staff has
in two ways: first by not Iwing
totally engaged and enthusias
tic about our work. We perhaps
lacked as a group the willing,
ness to exert the extra effort
required to push The Lance
from what It Is to what It migit
have been. Second, we held
the same attitude toward con
troversy on a large scale as
most people In our community
hold on the individual level:
total aversion to It.
A friend of ours carried out
an experiment a coiq;>le of years
ago for a psychology research
paper. He did not wear deod
orant for a period of several
weeks to see how many pec^le
would confront him or at least
ask why he was not wearing
deodorant. He was amazed at
how few people said anything
. . . even his closest friends
(Continued to Page 3)
Repeal of Abortion Law
Threat To Women Here
BY GLENDA BUCK
A bill was passed yesterday
by the New York House of
Representatives aimed at re
pealing New York’s abortion
law. This bill must now be
passed by the Senate and signed
by Governor Rockefeller before
it goes into effect. If this bUl
is passed, the effects will be
both dangerous and tragic.
In the past several years the
abortion counseling service at
SA has remained busy, with stu
dents being referred to an ex
cellent clinic in New YorkCity,
According to Van Joines, this
is one of the best clinics in the
east and is considerably less
expensive than clinics in Wash
ington, D.C. He also stated that,
though he doesn’t believe the
bill will pass, the clinics in
Washington probably wouldn’t
be able to handle all the abor
tions due to the repeal of the
New York law.
The possibility of such ac
tion makes the need for birth
control on campus even more
urgent. The fact is that Bob
Davenport does recommend
women from SA to an abortion
clinic and counsels women who
attempt self-abortions. This is
proof that women on this cam
pus can become pregnant and,
despite all other factors, will
refuse to continue pregnancy.
Do we want to see these women
die trying to abort childrer
they do not feel they can bring
into the world? Maybe we do.
After all, killing both the mother
and the child would be a very
effective way of fighting over
population.
New Nixon Policy Means
More Killing In Vietnam
BY MARSHALL GRAVELY
President Nixon’s announce-
ment Monday night and the
subsequent storm of protest
from students and antiwar peo
ple across the country has, in
the favorite term of the Penta
gon, “put us back at square
one.” It seems clear, however
that there were actually two
messages Monday night—one
new proposal for peace hidden
inside a belligerent move to
continue and escalate the war.
Nixon justifies his latest ac
tion of mining North Vietna
mese ports and bombing rail
roads to prevent the delivery
of supplies as a move to coun
teract the “reckless efforts of
Hanoi’s International bandits to
Impose a Communist govern
ment on 17 million South Viet
namese who are heroically re
sisting.” Aside from the rhe
toric itself, the policy of a land
victory seems to be a complete
reversal of the policies of Viet-
namization and withdrawal. Ni
xon is still trying to win the war.
But there was also a peace
proposal Involved in the speech.
The plan is now to offer com
plete U. S. withdrawal 4 months
after a cease-fire and the
scheduling of national elections
open to all parties. Contingent
from the withdrawal would be
the return of all U. S. prisoners
and a North Vietnamese guar
antee for continuing the case
fire during the elections. Thus,
It seems that Nixon is also
trying to end the war.
One must also consider
the rhetoric of Cabinet mem
bers in trying to determine the
real alms of this administra
tion, Secretary of Defense Mel
vin Laird began his Pentagon
press conference Wednesday
wih an exhortation for national
unity and support of the Presi
dent’s policies. Which ones?
Laird said that this is no time
for "quitters” or talks of “in
stant surrender,” and that there
would be used “every means
necessary to stop the ruthless
aggression by North Vietnam,”
This seems close to the true
tone oif Nixon’s speech. Fur
thermore, Republican leaders
In Congress were highly critical
of those who had criticized the
speech, saying that the critics
were siding the enemy by stir
ring division among Americans
and giving the enemy hope to
continue the aggression.
In view of student protests at
Wisconsin, Berkely, Stanford,
and nume rous other universi
ties, it seems obvious that there
is no danger of stirring division
among Americans. There is al
ready plenty of it without pro
vocation, What the protests are
about, moreover, is the almost
Incredible length of the war
and its tragic continuation in
search of a victory that can
not and will never be won by
either side. The war goes on,
and the divisions at home grow
deeper and deeper.
(Continued to Page 4)