PAGE 2 — THE DECREE — OCTOBER 31,1986
Opifiions and Eilitorials
Book censorship
attacks education
The rising tide of attempted
book censorship in the schools
of North Carolina and other
states should be of concern to
any college student. As future
educators, business leaders, and
parents, we feel that the Wes
leyan student should see book
censorship as an attack on edu
cation in general. Therefore, the
Wesleyan student should become
more informed about the nature
of the problem in order to pro
tect against becoming dangerous
ly apathetic about the issue.
In this day of emphasis upon
freeing man from the bonds of
ignorance through education, is
there cause for serious concern
among professional educators
sufficient to warrant a vigilant
attitude among students concern
ing book censorship? We believe
so.
Recently, Gene D. Lanier,
professor of library science at
East Carolina University, and
chairman of the Intellectual Free
dom Committee of the N.C. Li
brary Association, cited just a
few examples provided by libra
rians from across North Carolina
of censorship attacks. There have
been more than 200 such reports
received by Mr. Lanier since
1980.
According to Mr. Lanier,
among these efforts to censure
books in the schools was an
effort in Durham to remove the
story of Little Red Riding Hood
from the library because the
basket the little girl was taking
to her grandmother contained a
bottle of wine and because of
the story’s violence.
Also, in Wilmington, efforts
were made to remove the "R"
volume of the World Book En
cyclopedia from a school because
critics object to the way the
topic of "reproduction" is treated.
Notwithstanding the well in-
tentioned efforts by parents and
others to attack education by cen
soring certain books, we believe
that the effort is misguided. The
efforts to ban books seems to be
a search for quick fixies to com
plicated social problems.
Our children, however, do not
live in a bubble and the banning
of books will do nothing to
protect them from the realities
of life. In fact, if a student can
not find information in a school
library because of the arbitrary
banning of information, where
can he or she find it?
One of the hoped for results
of many book banning cam
paigns seems to be the restor
ation of student morality. We
believe that such a view is nar
row and unrealistic given the
students susceptibility to peer
pressure, television, and other
media. The French philosopher
and political theorist Rousseau
wrote in his essay. The Social
Contract, "Censorship may be
useful for the preservation of
morality, but can never be so
for its restoration."
We subscribe to the policy
set forth in the American Li
brary Association's Library Bill
of Rights which states in part,
"Libraries should provide books
and other materials presenting
all points of view concerning
the problems and issues of our
times; no library materials
should be prescribed or removed
from libraries because of par
tisan or doctrinal disapproval."
This seems to be a more pru
dent approach to the dissemina
tion of information in a free and
open society.
OFFICIAL STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF ,
NORTH CAROUNA WESLEYAN COLLEGE
Editorial Board —Eva Bartleyi I>)nald Martin* Matt MeKownif: :
Bany Nethercutt, Christopher Ostling, Tom Rivers, ynda Smith,
Laura-Lee Spedding, Greg William^
Illustrator — David Gillia^
Photographers — Glenn Futrell, Steve Wiggins
The Decree is located in the Student Union, North Carolina
Wesleyan College, Wesleyan College Station, Rocky Mount, NC
27801. Policy is determined by the Editorial Board of The Decree.
Republication of any matter herein without the express consent of
the Editorial Board is strictly forbidden. The Decree is composed
and printed by The Spring Hope Enterprise.
Opinions published do not necessarily reflect those of North
Carolina Wesleyan Colkgc.
5 To mtM.
»H'3TRAT'oK DtL'KWJ[l-Y
lim Mi5'«f-oR/AAT0H
About SAPto To TliE
W«>'A,i5K’T iT ?
COLLEGE PRESS SERVICE
Required drug tests unfair
By Dr. CHRIS CARSTENS
North Carolina Wesleyan Ath
letic Director Mike Fox is quoted in
The Decree (10/17/86) as saying that
Wesleyan College is considering
mandatory drug testing for student
athletes. 1 think that 1 understand the
rationale for such testing programs.
It runs something like this: Illegal
drugs are not good for people, and
mandatory testing would discourage
people from doing bad things.
What I cannot understand is why
this line of reasoning applies exclu
sively or especially to athletes. If one
group among us must be tested, why
not English majors, or assistant pro
fessors, or red-haired persons? Why
not all members of the college com
munity?
However, since the members of
the Athletic Department are honor
able and intelligent people, it must
be the case that there is a logical
solution to this perplexing conun
drum. Accordingly, I have cleared
my mind of all distracting thoughts
and foreign substances, so that I can
attempt to figure out why athletes
alone merit special consideration in
this matter.
Perhaps athletes are inherently
more valuable human beings than
non-athletes; this would certainly jus
tify singling them out for drug
testing. I scoured my Bible forjhe-
ological validation for this position.
I initially thought that the search
was /dver when I learned that Jesus
g^e special attention to lepers. Ima
gine my chagrin upon learning that
lepers are not persons distinguished
by their jumping ability.
If athletes are not intrinsically
superior to non-athletes, then maybe
what athletes do is more important
than the mundane behavior of non
athletes. Is this the critical feature
that sets athletes apart? Call me
sentimental, but I think that teach
ing Western Civilization and run
ning the Admissions Office and
learning French are as important as
kicking a ball in a meritorious fash
ion.
Perhaps athletes are, on an ac
tuarial basis, more likely than non
athletes to take illegal drags, so that
we must monitor athletes more
closely. Logically possible, yes, but
hardly plausible.
Maybe athletes are not inherently
superior, nor behave in a more
valuable way, nor behave in a more
licentious way. Perhaps they are
simply easier to coerce. Indeed, are
they not over a barrel? They want
very badly to participate in team
sports, and can do so only with the
consent of the Athletic Department.
Athletes want to be on the team
so badly that they may be willing to
give up their constitutional rights to
privacy, to due process of law, and
to protection against self-incrimina-
tion. Perhaps there is a rationale to
this whole business: If you want to
trample on basic human rights, make
sure that the victims are in no posi
tion to fight back.
1 hope that no one will construe
these comments as a criticism of man
datory drug testing. 1 am not one of
those Walter Mondale wimps who
would allow trivialities such as the
Constitution to stand in the way of
Nancy Reagan’s Drug-Free America.
As a matter of fact, I plan to propose
mandatory sexual orientation tests
that would involve physical evi
dence, preferably videotapes, of he
terosexual intercourse at least once a
week. But that is a matter for another
article.
Why aren alarms fixed?
By TOM ROSS
I'm lying on Laguna Beach in
sunny, southern California over
looking the waves crashing on the
Pacific Coast shoreline. There is a
woman lying on each side of me,
listening attentively to every word I
say. Things are going just perfectly
when all of a sudden it's dark, I'm
alone, and in my own bed at N.C.
Wesleyan College. Yes, I've been
awal^ened from my dream by the
sound of the fire alarm. I quickly,
^d very unhappily, get out of my
bed to go outside into the freezing
cold. Why don’t these alarms work
properly?
When I attended my first dorm
meeting in the 1986-87 academic
year, I was informed of the procedure
to follow if the new fire alarm
sounded. I was told that there may
be some false alarms for the first
few weeks, as the system had some
"kinks" to woik out
The first few times when the
alarm sounded I quickly evacuated
the dorm, following the procedure I
had been told to follow. Again, I
wasn't happy about being awakened
during the middle of the night, but I
just knew that these "kinks" would
soon be worked out
Well, here we are in the ninth
week of the semester and these
"kinks" still appear to be in the
system. I was awakened just this
week once again by what I heard
someone call a "faulty detector." 1
realize that there is no way that my
RD, or anyone else on this campus
for that matter, can control this
system, but why don't we call the
people who installed the system and
ask them to come and find out what
is wrong with it?
I'm also a little in the dark about
another aspect of this alarm system.
Why is it that every time the alarm
sounds the system is left inoperative
for several days? Maybe I'm confused
about the whole idea of having a
fire alarm system installed in our
dorms, as I thought it had been put
in to warn me in case of a fire and
allow me a chance to escape safely.
How can the system alert me of a
fire if it is not even on?
I don't know about all of the
other people in the dorm, but it
worries me to think that if there is a
fire I will not be warned about it be
cause the system is inoperable.
I know that there is no one
answer to my complaints regarding
the new system, nor is there a quick
cure for tois entire problem. I sup
pose the people in charge have made
every attempt to correct these pro
blems — or have they? I just can't
understand the reasoning behind in
stalling a fire alarm system in each
dorm, at a great cost to the school,
when the time that the system is
operating, it works improperiy, and
the remainder of the time is not even
on. Therefore, again I ask the ques
tion, "Why don't these alarms work
pro^y?"