Newspapers / North Carolina Wesleyan University … / Sept. 17, 1993, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of North Carolina Wesleyan 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 2 — THE DECREE — SEPTEMBER 17,1993 OFFICIAL STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF NORTH CAROLINA WESLEYAN COLLEGE EdltcH'^ii-Cluef — i^en Leonard Assistant Editor—Tiffany Page Staff — Michelle Anderson, Jennifer Beemer, Patrick Brannan, CecSta LywB Casey, Kimberlf Cwseen, John Fentress, Taumy Rowers, Paul Padbteco, Ben Reep AdvisorChris LaLonde Thel>eeite is kicaled in tlie Spruill Buttdtng, North Carolina WeS' leyftn College, 3400 Wesleyan Blvd^ Rodcy Mount, NC27«01. Policy is : determined tiy tlieEditQFlal Board of 7%eDe£/«e. Re-publlcatioii:of any tttatter liereio witbout fbe express consent of the Editorial Board is strictJy forbidden^ The Decree is composed and printed by the Spring xHope Gnterpdse; Opinions published do not necessarily reflect those of , North Carolina Wesleyan College, There’s more to do here than complain There has been just about enough complaining about the fact there is nothing to do in Rocky Mount. Stu dents tend to complain about this a great deal, and it is to the point of annoy ing many who do not find life so dull here. While Rocky Mount is certainly not New York City, some would consider that a good thing. N.C. Wes leyan College happens to have a very active Student Government with groups for just about every interest, and the opportunity exists for students to fill any gaps they see. You could always join the newspaper staff, anyway. (Meetings are Mondays, 3:30 p.m., and Thursdays, 4:30 p.m., in the Spruill Building. Call Ken Leonard at x5359 for more informa tion.) The Campus Activi ties Board would be happy to hear from you if you can think of anything that they could do better. As in most areas, those who tend to complain the loudest are also those who never try to solve their prob lems. Let’s all try this year to hold off the complaints until there has been some effort to resolve problems. After all, we are all sup posed to be acting like adults here, right? This year has a great deal of opportunity for each stu dent to grow and learn. It’s cliche, but it is also what college is all about. Have a great year, and good luck. LE C»MftNr TbWW'il TALK IS C Tm! Celebrities are only human We created Michael Jackson By DR. STEVE FEREBEE Although I am interested in the history of popular music and in cultural phenomena in gen eral, and although Michael Jack son is only five years younger than I am, I have never bought his music or watched more than a few seconds of a Jackson video. I haven’t watched a tele vision commercial since I dis covered remote control channel surfing, so I’ve never seen his Pepsi ads. I was aware that he was ec centric — looking more and more like a white Diana Ross; sleeping in some fountain-of- youth coffin; wearing one glove; hanging out with Elizabeth Tay lor. Then came this summer’s child sexual abuse allegations and the revelations about his slumber parties with 10-year-old boys. When I heard a mother of one of these children say that she didn’t mind that a 36-year- old man was sleeping with her son, I began reading about Jack son. What a weirdo. But he’s al ways been pretty harmless and certainly no more weird than Howard Hughes with Kleenex boxes on his feet or Ernest Hem - ingway chasing bulls in Spain or Elizabeth Taylor (for'tliat''n^^-^ ter) marrying a young construc tion worker whom she met in a substance-abuse center. So what if Jackson spends his money on elaborate cosmetic surgery and on a Never-Never Land amuse ment park? Other people have stranger friends than children. Jackson has been on stage since he was five years old; he has been famous since he was 13; he has been very famous since he was 21. The kind of pressure fame exerts on contem porary celebrities has to make them somewhat strange. At least Jackson seemed to be retaining a bit of modesty, unlike that toad Axl Rose or the supennen of the action movies or talk-show- hound Ross Perot. Jackson is also indisputably talented. He writes lyrics and music; he produces; he chore ographs; he dances; he sings; he orchestrates his image. -iiSut talent is not enough for the audience. We feed on outra geously intimate details about celebrities’ lives. And we want their lives to be what we think our lives cannot be. Then we hate the celebrity when he or she turns out to be creepy. I think (Continued on Page 3) Slaves were also victims of ‘pro-choice’ By KENNETH LEONARD They stood boldly against the intolerant religious zealots of the day. A sizable movement of Americans, most basing their cases in Biblical teaching in church, told them that they were committing a grievous sin against God and His laws. These religious folks then tried to codify their desires. The targets of this religious attack set themselves up against the others. Against major reli gious groups that agr^d oh Mle else — Jews, Catholics, Quak ers, Baptists, Methodists, Pres byterians, and scores of other churches — they stood their ground. They even found that some preachers would say that God was on their own side. What was this question? Whether another group of hu man-like beings was really hu man. Sure, they looked generally human, and they acted much like humans, but how could the ob vious differences be overlooked? '' ‘After ’all',' they did ’not have the same abilities as real humans. None of them ever did so much. Clearly, their deficiencies made them no more human than a mule is. So sound the arguments of the pro-choicers of 130 years ago. Then they advocated the buying and selling of human be ings who happened to have a darker skin tone. Today, the same arguments ^e ijsed ttf aid- vocate the killing of human be ings who happen to have not been bom yet. Increasingly, nobody likes to call the slavery supporters “pro- choice.” However, many of them fit this description better than they do “pro-slavery.” Gen eral Robert E. Lee, for example, was personally against slavery. He, though, would not impose his views on others. While he freed all of the slaves he had been given and inherited, he never took a solid stand against slavery. Hd w6iild be (ilbseir to‘ “pro-choice” than the modern abortion supporters. Unlike them, General Lee did not advocate federal funding of slavery, nor did he support re quiring all states to allow slav ery. The pro-abortion lobby fa vors both, meanwhile claiming to be “pro-choice, not pro-abor tion.” It is true that most of the op position to slavery came from churches, most of them in the northern states. President Abra- (Continued on Page 3)
North Carolina Wesleyan University Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Sept. 17, 1993, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75