8 The Dailv Tar Heel Thursday. March 31. 1977
Greg Porter
Editor
Joni Peters, Managing Editor
Ed Rankin, Associate Editor
Lou Bilionis, Associate Editor
Laura Seism, University Editor
Elliott Potter, City A State Editor
Chuck Alston, National Editor,
Jack Greenspan, Features Editor
Jeanne Newsom. Arts Editor
Gene Upchurch, Sports Editor
Rouse Wilson, Photography Editor
3wp
latin
(Mr ni
84th Year of Editorial Freedom
The individual a wasted source of power
Big-time basketball
in a small-time facility
Yesterday the number-two team in the nation and the number-one team
in the world returned to a well-deserved reception by 6,000 loyal fans.
The Olympic champions and national runners-up also returned to a
crackerbox of a gymnasium, a 'coliseum' that seats less than I0,000fansfor
some of the finest basketball games in the world.
The University of North Carolina, long inscribed on the honor roil of big
time basketball programs, is still playing in a small-time facility.
The result is that many students and fans can see only a few games a year,
if any at all. For big games, students have to wait all night to get a ticket.
And the average fan, who does not give the Rams Club a fortune, is lucky if
he gets to see Carolina play Seton Hall or some other cream puff.
And although Dean Smith is definitely doing a consistently excellent
recruiting job, we are sure he has won over no high school stars with an
inspiring look at expansive Carmichael.
While Carmichael is an excellent facility for its size and would be a
valuable intramural and minor sports facility, it is no longer adequate to
house what may well be the nation's most vibrant basketball program. M ost
big name basketball programs, Kentucky and UCLA, for instance, have
coliseums seating over 15,000.
There is little question that UNC could fill a 20,000 seat auditorium
consistently. The question is where the money will come from.
The legislature is a doubtful source. Since legislators have to look after
the entire University system, they would be charged with blatant favoritism
if they funded a large coliseum in Chapel Hill. Besides, the legislature is still
haggling over a Research Triangle sports facility. This structure would
definitely enhance the development of the area and would be an important
step forward for the Triangle. But a Triangle sports arena is not the answer
to UNC's problem. We agree with the Athletic Department that UNC
should not stay so far from campus for its regular home games.
The answer, of course, is private contributions. The support for Carolina
basketball is at an all-time high throughout North Carolina. Many a fan
would be glad to contribute in the hope that he might get a ticket more easily
in the future. Now is the time to collect the money for a new coliseum. Now,
while the fans have basketball on their minds and in their hearts.
But, as of now, the Athletic Department has no plans to make a push for
an arena. Assistant Athletic.Director Moyer Smith says, "We hope to have
something under way in the next five years."
There seems to be some concern on the part of many University
administrators that solicitation for basketball funds will hurt the push for a
larger. endowment for the University as a whole. But it is obvious that the
most lucrative, time to collect for a basketball coliseum is now while the fans
are enthusiastic. It's even possible that coliseum and endowment gifts could
be tied together, using basketball as a promotional lure for general giving.
We're not so sure that solicitation for a coliseum construction fund would
hurt endowment giving a great deal. But we're sure that a fine basketball
program has been overlooked for too long. And we're sure that waiting any
longer is the worst thing that we can do.
Dean Edwards Smith, voted the number one coach in the nation by his
peers, won't be here for ever. We're eager to sec the beginning of a drive for
the Dean E. Smith Auditorium.
Medicaid forces parents
to split to save children
Because of a quirk in the state's Medicaid law, children whose families are
at least poor enough to qualify for health care cannot receive aid because
their parents are married. Not only is the state denying 69,000 sick or poor
children needed benefits, but also North Carolina actually is encouraging
people to be on welfare.
The state now allows the children Medicaid payments if their parents are
divorced, separated or disabled. But if their parents are married, they
receive nothing.. Low-income couples thus are often faced with a disastrous
choice: either they split up, or they are forced to let their sick children go
without health care.
This situation occurs because the state ties its Medicaid program for
children to Aid to Families with Dependent Children, an organization
which provides payments only to families where one or both parents are
missing. Under federal law, however, North Carolina can include children
of married couples as well as children living with only one parent.
The present system is an injustice to children in this state who deserve
health care. They needlessly are excluded from benefits because their
parents are married. In addition, the system forces people to go on welfare.
In order to qualify himself for the money he needs for his child, a parent
must go on the dole for something else.
The argument against broadening this system of welfare is the price tag.
The Department of Human Resources has estimated that the Medicaid bill
for 69,000 additional children would be $129 million a year. Opponents of
broadening the program say the General Assembly would never approve the
$8 million increase that the state would have to pay.
But it would appear, however, that bringing children of intact families
into the Medicaid program would not change costs that extensively. Many
families denied benefits now split up and get aid anyway.
The Medicaid program obviously needs broadening to include children of
intact families. Maintaining the program only causes unnecessary grief for
both the parents who are forced to separate to save their children and the
children who are left out in the cold.
The Daily Tar Heel
publixhes Monday through Friday during the academic year. Offices are at the Student
union Building. University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill. N.C. 27514. Telephone
numbers: 933-0245, 0246, 0252. ,
By CHA RUE SC HEELER
And so it came to pass that in the waning stages of
the 20th century, after over a millenium of desperate
and relentless progress, man's march towards the
golden gates of the good life ground to a halt. For man,
in his single-minded quest for an economic Utopia of
abundance, finally had sacrificed his environment to
the extent that Earth could no longer satisfy man's
gluttonous appetite. Even more important, man had
sacrificed his individuality in this hell-bent sprint for
affluence. And man saw that there were still millions
without food, without education, without hope; and he
saw that their ranks would not be decreased. And it
was not good.
It does not appear likely that we are condemned to
endure a new Dark Age as a penalty for our past
transgressions, but undeniably the days of mass
producing Tonka toys and flourescent Barbie dolls to
bolster the economy have vanished. Gone forever are
the times when Robert McNamara and his amoralistic
eggheads could feed a million numbers into a computer
to determine if a war with a small Southeast Asian
country would sufficiently decrease unemployment.
Man has played this numbers game not only in
economics, but in physics, chemistry and all sciences,
and thus far he has lost the game. Through some
incredibly esoteric calculations, he has conquered
polio, but he has no idea what to do about depression.
Man can develop a theory of relativity and measure the
distances to places he cannot see, but he cannot
develop or measure or define far more important
concepts like fulfillment or happiness. Clearly, man
has found no arithmetic solution to the good life.
All this does not mean that we should dismiss
Einstein as a superflous freak or ritualistically detonate
a Texas Instruments warehouse at dawn. But the time
has come to realize that the welfare of nations, the
validity of scientific theories, and the quality of life
cannot always be measured in depersonalized
quantifiable terms.
"There a re. other cultures in the world that virtually
are unknown to us. because they have never mass
produced gas-eating hunks of steel or seriously played
our numbers game. In the 1960s, a young
anthropologist named Carlos Castenada studied one
of these cultures, the Yaqui Indians. This group had
never seen fit to develop the Bl bomber because they
had found sources of nearly unfathomable power in
the inner strength and will of the individual. As,
Castenada documented, just because this power
cannot be evaluated in megatons of TNT does not
mean it is any less potent.
The Yaquis are not alone in their realization of inner
power. Eastern man has long been able to perform acts
which defy Western scientific logic. Indian swamis
have, under Western scientific supervision, stopped
their heartbeats for 20 seconds at a time. And even a
small, unheralded university in Durham, N.C. has
initiated a program which studies parapsychology. The
time has come to realize that just because a man does
something that cannot be-counted, that doesn't mean it
doesn't count.
It would appear, then, that although Western man
has done a masterful job of harnessing horses, steam,
wind, oil and atoms, he thus far has been incredibly
wasteful in developing his most limitless source of
power, the powers of the individual. But it is
imperative that we do not let the individual become
overwhelmed and tramped by the technocracy we have
built.
Although we can force a peace upon the world, we
cannot make peace with ourselves. Every day, tens of
millions of Americans knock down Valium to fend off
reality. Rather than expose our children to this horrid
reality, we program them to sit passively in front of a
fantasy box for hours a day while their creative
processes are slowly sapped away. And no computer,
no linear program with umpteen variables can solve
this problem. The major problems of the 20th century
have shifted from quantitative to qualitative. And so,
the answers to these problems will not be found in
Arab oil fields or IBM memory banks but must come
from ourselves.
in depending upon the ABMs, the Bis, and the H
bombs for power, we have let ourselves become weak.
For in the great military-industrial complex that is
America, it has become all too easy for the individual
to become depressed, disillusioned and dependent. Yet
it is the power of the individuaUhat is needed to get us
out of the mess we're in. If the individual cannot be self
reliant, ultimately society cannot be self-reliant. Man
can no longer allow himself to be swallowed by the
monster he has created. For when once again one man
can make a difference, it will make one hell of a
difference.
Charlie Scheeler is a junior accounting major from
Katmandu, Nepal.
Thank you, Tar Heels, you're still first
To the editor:
As one of many followers of Carolina
basketball this year, I would like to express
rny sincere and deep appreciation to Coach
Smith, the members of our great basketball
team and everyone else concerned with the
team effort. It's really been a great year. We
love you all. But in particular, the seniors
deserve our recognition and praise.
One more thing, I'd rather go to Carolina
than win a basketball game GO HEELS.
The Carolina spirit is No. 1.
Hugh Goodman
308 Lewis
To the editor:
Joining thousands of loyal Tar Heel fans.
Rev. Manuel Wortman and I went to
Carmichael for the welcome home
celebration Tuesday. Shouts of "We're No.
I" echoed throughout the afternoon. The
sign of the raised first finger signaled the
same sentiment. Nowtoaliteralist.allof this
might have been confusing. He or she may
have wondered if any of us had watched the
previous night's game. There is a clear,
understandable explanation for those with
"eyes to see and ears to hear."
To us, the Tar Heels are No. I. They
represent what being a winner is all about.
They are No. 1 in their team effort and
determination to play their best. This doesn't
change even when a player is having an off
night.
They are No. 1 in the manner in which they
represented UNC. They showed character in
victory or defeat. When they lost to
Marquette, there was no excuse-making,
blaming or scapegoating, only open sadness
and honest tears.
They are No. 1 in courage for all the times
they were down and came back. The team
showed courage by its victories over pain,
injury and personal disappointment. They
were winners even when they lost a game.
They are No. I in the affections of all their
supporters. The players of this team have
been personal examples of sportsmen.
So while we hope to win the whole thing
some day, to my mind this 1977 team is still
No. 1. Tuesday was a united effort to salute
them and their fine achievement.
Rev. Stan Smith
Aldersgate UNC
To the editor:
The season-long love affair we have
carried on with our team doesn't end simply
after the final game. Thank you. Heels, for
everything you have given all of us.
Kate Urquhart
213 V2 McCauley St.
To the editor:
Dear Tar Heels:
We are saddened to see the dream end, but
. thank you for bringing us so close. You are a
great basketball team. We will not forget
you.
The Boys from EOWYK
249-252 Craige
Remove bumper stickers
To the editor:
I am happy to learn that the Sigma Nus
have overcome the need for sleep. Perhaps
they can devote their new-found time to
constructive projects, such as removing
bumper stickers that deface public property.
Bart McMillan
Craige Underground
Indian culture misrepresented
To the editor:
After reading the article (March 29)
concerning the Kola Pow-Wow held in
Raleigh this past weekend, 1 felt that a
response was needed as there were a number
of errors and misconceptions in the article
which need to be corrected.
First, it was rather obvious to me that Ms.
Arsdale did not bother to talk to anyone
concerned with the Pow-Wow about what
was going on. Had she done so, she might at
' least have avoided some of the more
technical errors she made, such as calling
head singer Roscoe Conklin a Comanche
instead of a Ponca (and then misspelling
Ponca when she did get around to using it).
She might have found out that our Pow
Wow was not "unique in that whites as well
as Indians participated in the festivities", as
there are few, if any, Pow-Wows to my
knowledge that are closed to non-Indians.
She also might have learned that the
majority of Indians at the Pow-Wow were
from right down in eastern North Carolina,
from the Lumbee and Haliwa tribes. Maybe
it just sounds more romantic to talk about
Indians from Oklahoma than from North
Carolina, but some of us feel otherwise.
She also might have found out, if she had
bothered to talk to them, that the white
traders who were there are not people who
make their money exploiting Indian people.
I am personally acquainted with two of the
three white traders who were there and can'
truthfully say that they are highly respected
by the Indian people with whom they work
and are highly knowledgable about Indian
culture.
The article continues to perpetuate the
myth that Indian culture is static and has not
changed in the past hundred years. We are
expected to act certain ways and do certain
things or risk being tabled "un-Indian". We
are told in the article that the Indian fry
bread was not authentic because a deep-fryer
was used to cook it. We are told that because
the head singer for the Gourd Dance chose to
sing in English instead of Ponca for a few
verses that the dance and song are not
authentic. This seems very unfair to me.
Your Anglo-American culture has stolen
and borrowed customs and traditions from
almost every conceivable source, and no one
worries about this. But if our culture, or any
other, borrows something from you, we are
accused of no longer being real Indians.
However, I did not write this letter to
teach a course in Indian culture. I wrote it to
say that we in the Carolina Indian Circle
would have liked maybe just a little more
objective writing about the Pow-Wow and
less sentimental stuff about why the "tall,
proud Indian on the environmental
commercial was crying".
Forest Hazel
Past Administrative Chief
Carolina Indian Circle
516 Ehringhaus
A S
JM.- J A- J 1
sorry, w m us, &mm has mmm m you may cm m qhcbr
Save Our Children: 'unbiased' or anti-gay?
To the editor:
Where did Joel Roberts (March 30) get his "unbiased"
information about Anita Bryant and Co.? The fact is that Ms.
Bryant believes that being gay is o.k. so long as she doesn't see it,
hear about it, or, for that matter, know about it. Bryant not only
wants to keep homosexuals out of the schools where neither
atheists nor KKK. members are banned by law but also out of
rights to housing and employment of any kind.
Ms. Bryant's main worry is what she calls "recruitment." She says
that because gays "can't reproduce" (as if gays were born without
reproductive organs), they must recruit to keep their ranks large.
Stop a moment, and consider how easily you might be recruited
into homosexual behavior, feelings andattitudes. These last two
are important. Is a female child who is sexually molested by an
adult male, who takes advantage of her ignorance of sexual
matters, converted to believe that pursuing sexual encounters for
physical pleasure is a viable lifestyle? With regard to recruitment
alone, have the Shakers taken over the world with their beliefs?
Stop again, and consider how much your sexuality defines you as
a whole person. Out of all the preferencesattitudes and feelings we
develop, sexual and affectional preferences are perhaps the least
affected by the persons we have encountered as teachers. Consider
the number of people with affectional and sexual preference for
their own sex who came through a heterosexually defined school
system and education. (Yes, there are many homosexuals in school
systems throughout the United States, but you seldom hear of them
because this has little to do with their jobs and because of people
like Anita Bryant and Joel Roberts who seem to feel that same-sex
affectional preferences define one's whole being).
Joel Roberts thinks he is being unbiased. Would it also be
unbiased to say that a number of "well-meaning" white parents do
not want their children taught by black teachers or exposed to black
people; and they, therefore, have the right to try to ban blacks from
public classrooms, housing and, employment? Certainly "beliefs are
hard to suppress," but Mr. Roberts seems to .think he has
suppressed his when others cannot and that he can stand
"unbiased" as he watches certain basic human rights collapse before
an onslaught of some homophobic orange squeezers who seem to
have no faith in their children's ability to make their own decisions.
Emily Seelbinder
Chapel Hill
To the editor:
Joel Roberts response (March 30) to my letter concerning Anita
Bryant's anti-gay rights activities contains a subtle bias I feel
compelled to point out. Characterizing Ms. Bryant asjust a mother
worried over her children's well-being, Roberts writes, "Ms.
Bryant. like any concerned parent, only wants what she thinks is
best for her children." He later adds, "...beliefs are hard to suppress
in a classroom, where they would influence small children." I
couldn't agree more.
The point here is that no one condemns heterosexual teachers for
(unconsciously) influencing their pupils to "become" straight, but
let a gay teacher in the classroom and one immediately hears
protestations of "unnatural influence." If children had positive role
models, both gay and non-gay. available to them in school and
throughout their lives they would grow up with a more secure sense
of their own sexuality, whatever that may be, than did the young
adults of today.
Ms. Bryant has made it clear she does not want her children to
have this opportunity. Her current campaign is directed at
depriving your and my children as well; a bigoted and ill-guided
effort I, for one, resent.
Gary Parks
Department of Art
To the editor: . .
I haven't followed Anita Bryant's situation very closely, and I
don't know all the trouble she is havingJiut I do know that I admire
her for her crusade against the homosexual community in Dade
County. She stayed out of this issue as long as she felt it was
possible, but finally it came.time for her to intrude. I believe she is
concerned for all the children in Dade County, not just her own,
I'm not sure if Gary Parks (March 28) knows all the
consequences of her situation either. I get tired of hearing about gay
rights at this University. Instead of talking about all the rights of.
homosexuals, I think that people have the right to avoid these gay
movements, and I consider this latter right as a civil right of mine. I
don't plan to fight Anita Bryant and Save Our Children, Inc.;
instead, I support their actions 100 per cent.
Rick Beroth
115 Lewis