University of South Carolina Libraries
Quote, Unquote ‘[Partnership Among Lutherans and Methodists] can be thought of as an oasis from the world.’ Tom Wall, United Methodist campus minister Wednesday, October 20,1999 Whe Gamecock Serving the Carolina Community since 1Q08 Editorial Board Sara Ladenheim • Editor in Chief Kenley Young • Managing Editor Emily Streyer • Viewpoints Editor Corey Fbrd • Assistant Viewpoints Editor Brad Walters • Editorial Contributor Kiki McCormick • Editorial Contributor Lottery vote bodes ill for Alabama schools Last week’s lottery vote in Alabama is a direct slap in the face for educational improvement in a state that certainly needs reform. In a huge defeat, the lottery went down, with 54 percent of Alabama voters rejecting the proposal. The odd thing about this referendum is that Democrat Gov. Don Siegelman de feated longtime Republican incumbent Fob James in 1998 primari ly because he proposed a plan to implement the lottery as his key issue. ■*. Alabama schools and universities will certainly suffer because of this vote. Alabama’s educational systems consistently rank low in comparison with those of other southern states like South Car olina and Mississippi. The lottery, while not a fix-all for education, might generate sufficient money to fund newer schools and colle giate scholarships. A large number of Alabama residents undoubt edly cross the border to Georgia to buy lottery tickets, thus giving money to Georgia’s educational system. Imagine the revenue that could be created by keeping Alabamans home to participate in their own state lottery. The same is true for South Carolina: Dollars that could be re directed toward the improvement of our educational system (and increasing the amount of the LIFE scholarship) are instead flowing into Georgia to pay for Georgia’s students to go to college on the Hope scholarship. Fortunately, for South Carolina, our lottery vote is nearly 12 months away. Enough time, we hope, will pass to allow the anti lottery’s (and anti-video poker’s) momentum subside. The lottery would certainly be means of improving our own lacking education al system. South Carolinian voters should disregard Alabama’s vote and embrace the lottery in the 2000 general election. Students should take advantage of flu shot Csrm paper season is upon us, and that means flu season isn’t far behind. In response to mounting coursework and ex tracurricular obligations, our hours of sleep dwindle and the attention we pay to our diets shrivels, the combination of which leaves us vulnerable to the many contagions flying about the cam pus. Most of us don’t have the time to spend two days in bed to sleep off a cold or the flu. The Thompson Student Health Center, however, offers us a chance to arm ourselves against the flu virus. For $5 (a bargain compared with the prices of many doctors’ of fices), we can get a vaccine against the season’s anticipated type of flu. Those in dorms with hall bathrooms should especially take ad vantage of this opportunity, for, in the cramped living space of most first-year housing, they are particularly susceptible to germs. We not only take care of ourselves when we get a flu shot, but we help to protect others, as well. The fewer flu carriers in our daily contact, the less likely we are to get sick. Take advantage of what your health center has to offer, and take care of yourself and your classmates; get a flu shot while they’re still available. About Us The Gamecock is the student newspaper of The University of South Carolina and is published Monday, Wednesday and Friday during the fall and spring semesters and nine times during the summer with the exception of university holidays and exam periods. Opinions expressed in The Gamecock are those of the editors or author and not those of The University of South Carolina. The Board of Student Publications and Communications is the publisher of The Gamecock. The Department of Student Media is the newspaper’s parent organization. The Gamecock is supported in part by student activities fees. Address The Gamecock 1400 Greene Street Columbia, SC 29208 Offices on third floor of the Russell House. Student Media Area code 803 Advertising 777-3888 Classified 777-1184 Fax 777-6482 Office 777-3888 Gamecock Area code 803 Editor gcked@sc.edu 777-3914 News gcknews@sc.edu 777-7726 Viewpoints gckviews@sc.edu 777-7181 Etc. gcketc@sc.edu 777-3913 Sports gcksports@sc.edu 777-7182 Online www.gamecock.sc.edu 777-2833 Submission Policy Letters to the editor or guest columns are welcome from all members of the Carolina community. Letters should be 250-300 words. Guest columns should be an opinion piece of about 600-700 words. Both must include name, phone number, profes sional title or year and major, if a student. Handwritten submissions must be personally delivered to Russell House room 333. E-mail submissions must include telephone number for confirmation. The Gamecock reserves the r'^ht to edit for libel, style and space. Anonymous letters will not be pub lished. Photos are required for guest columnist and can be provided by the submitter. 779A fnr more information Sara Ladenheim Editor in Chief Kenley Young Managing Editor Emily Streyer Viewpoints Editor Kevin Langston Brock Vergakis News Editors Clayton Kale Associate News Editor Rachel Helwig EtCetera Editor Todd Money Jared Kelowitz Sports Edita Kristin Freestate Copy Desk Chief Sean Rayford Photo Edita Rob Lindsey Encae Edita Student Media Ellen Parsons Director of Student Media Susan King Creative Director Kris Black Julia Burnett Betsy Martin Kathy Van Nostrand Creative Services xx Will Gillaspy Online Editor Corey Ford Asst. Viewpoints Editor John Huiett Asst. News Editor Ann Marie Miani Assf. EtCetera Editor David Cloninger Asst. Sports Edita Greg Farley Assf. Photo Edita Casey Williams Assf. Online Edita Brad Walters Graphics Edita, Copy Edita, Editaial Contributa MacKenzie Craven Charlie Wallace Philip Burt Senior Writers Lee Phipps Advertising Manager Sherry Holmes Classified Manager Carolyn Griffin Business Manager Erik Colins Faculty Adviser Jonathan Dunagin Graduate Assistant College Press Exchange fqjK ©q&fe'l WU.i»/e|2 > QUITE! I ToU?yoO NloT TDUTWUA^RTE. ^ okW stettfes. National Issues Rejection of gays un-Christian Gay Chris tians were dealt some harsh blows this summer. I’ve felt as if I haven’t been able to think all semester, so I didn’t deal with this topic in a timely fashion. But now that video poker is on the back burner, it’s time to talk about another is sue that demands attention. Incidents this 3U1I1IIIC1 UIVUIVCU Methodists, Catholics, Baptists and Pres byterians, which means the vast majority of Christian churches in America are grap pling with the subject of homosexuality. United Methodists have been argu ing over same-sex marriage. Since 1996, Methodists have had a rule stating; “Cer emonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers, and shall not be conducted in our church es.” A number of dissenting ministers have performed ceremonies for gay couples. Some have been suspended by the eccle siastical court, or suffered other discipline measures. The number of parishioners and ministers on both sides of this issue — in January, a whopping 68 ministers jointly blessed a lesbian union in front of an ap proving audience of more than 1,000 — suggests it won’t be resolved soon. The Presbyterian Church (USA) vot ed this summer not to allow non-celibate gays and lesbians to be ordained. More specifically, it opted to keep a constitu tional clause that says ministers of any ori entation must be either married or celi bate. As homosexuals are not allowed to marry, they are left with no option of hav ing even the meaningful, monogamous re lationships that heterosexuals enjoy if they want to share their faith as ministers. Kiki McCormick is a psychology and religious studies senior. She can be reached at kikiwm ©yahoo.com The Catholic Church also forbids gay marriage, as well as any sex outside of marriage. This summer, the Vatican even ordered two well-known gay-rights ac tivists, a priest and a nun, to cease minis tering to homosexuals. They were known for advocating compassion toward gays and encouraging them to stay in the Church. According to the Vatican, the two were giving gays the impression that the Church may soften its attitude toward homosexu al activity; the Vatican insists it will con tinue to consider homosexuality an “in trinsically disordered” condition. As usual, Southern Baptists take the most extreme position. They actually chid ed President Clinton for establishing June Gay and Lesbian pride month and for mak ing a gay man ambassador to Luxembourg. Ostensibly, they felt the need to do this be cause it places people of their faith “in the untenable position of either denying a pres idential proclamation or rejecting their own deeply-held religious convictions.” As if they would otherwise look to Bill Clinton for spiritual or moral guidance. Why do churches feel the need to dis criminate against gays in these ways? The only logical answer is that such atti tudes reflect a tradition that insists gays choose to have sex with members of their own sex against their natural tendencies, and that this is somehow evil. This could be the only reason—aside from old-fash ioned prejudices — as the Biblical argu ments for their position are weak. Sure, in the old days of Sodom and Go morrah, God vented wrath at practition ers of gay sex. But Christians’ concept of God is formed by more than the Old Tes tament Rather, Christianity holds that there is a new, more accurate revelation of God with Jesus. Therefore, those who call them selves Christians should look to what the New Testament says on the subject. Unfortunately, Jesus never directly ad dresses homosexuality. The New Testa ment only mentions it in three Pauline pas sages, which cannot be relied upon to accurately report Jesus’ sentiments. But assuming you trust Paul, we’ll deal with him anyway. One of the passages sim ply refers to God’s Old Testament actions. The others have more complex problems. One translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9 says that even the “effeminate” are doomed if they don’t change themselves. This may lead some to believe that basic innate qual ities can be changed at will; hence, pro grams to “convert” gays. Another transla tion of the same verse uses “male prostitute” and “sodomites” in the place of “effemi nate.” These address controllable behav iors, not innate qualities. People who read this may agree that gay people cannot be made straight, but that to avoid sin, they must remain celibate; after all, they aren’t allowed to many. But as those who aren’t hopeless lit eralists can conceive of differing, pro gressing revelations of God, they must con sider the “revelations” of a sort that have occurred since Paul wrote. Jeffrey S. Siker, in an essay in “Bibli cal Ethics & Homosexuality,” edited by Robert L. Brawley, gives us two important ideas to consider about Paul’s attitude. First, in first-century Palestine, it was assumed that sexual preference was a choice rather than a natural inclination. Second, there was a fear that if men had sex with other men, humans would become extinct (there was a belief that gay sex could make men rton ln^ Now, we know differently. People are gay because — if you’ll forgive the sim plification — “God made them that way.” We also know we’re in no danger of ex tinction. So the reasons upon which Paul’s argument was built are gone. It is time for Christians to view gays and lesbians as equal members of the church and society. They should enjoy the same rights, such as the right to marry, that straight peo ple have. Ironically, the best argument for that comes from 1 Corinthians 7:18: “Flee fornication.” If sex outside of marriage is fornication, allow gays to “flee” it by rec ognizing their unions. Gays should also, among other things, have the same opportunities to share their gifts, in ministerial capacity and otherwise, rhen, Christians will be getting closer to what it really means to be Christian: to love their neighbors, no matter how much :hey disagree with them. Letters sHHHHHHI Treasurer Fordham a worthy student leader To the Editor Upon reading a headline in a recent is sue of The Gamecock [“Treasurer might be impeached,” Oct. 15], I had to take a second look... How could such a dedi cated student servant as Elizabeth Anne Fordham face impeachment in the student senate of USC? It would seem that cer tain members of Student Government have decided that class-related conflicts are no excuse for missing the occasional finance committee meeting, and Ms. Fordham is paying the price of this odd committee de cision to place an extracurricular activity above academics. The distinguished stu dent body treasurer has made every effort to work out a compromise with the finance fommittee, yet the chairwoman of the com mittee has failed to move an inch on the meeting time issue. The senate finance committee should realize that Student Gov ernment is about compromise, not petty self-aggrandizing, and those who fail to work toward compromise fail the students whom they supposedly serve. Maybe, just maybe, impeachment proceedings are mov ing against the wrong finance officer. Adam L Bourne Political Science Sophomore SG treasurer neglects duty to student body To the Editor I just finished reading the article in Fri day’s issue of The Gamecock about arti cles of impeachment being brought against Ms. Elizabeth Fordham. It seems perfect ly clear that Ms. Fordham places her own interests above those of the Student Government and the student body it rep resents. According to Ms. Fordham, she has been unable to attend meetings due to a class conflict. She defends herself by say ing as a senior undergraduate, she is trying to graduate and the class is necessary for her to do so. Ms. Fordham should have thought of that before she ran for student body trea surer. Of course, as with all of us, our un dergraduate or graduate studies do come first. Our GPAs are an integral part of get ting accepted into higher levels of educa tion or higher-paying jobs. But when it comes down to it, good GR\s alone do not look as good with a few extracurricular ac tivities on the side. It is blatantly and disappointingly ap parent that Ms. Fordham ran for student body treasurer to improve her resume, un fortunately, at the expense of the Student Government. Ms. Fordham has been un able to properly execute her constitu tionally established duties because of a class conflict. Also, she has not kept her assigned 10 office hours per week. That is inex cusable. She has also not attended any tea surer’s workshops in their entirety, she has not taken part in the fall budget process prior to Oct. 6, and does not even com plete daily tasks consistently such as re turned phone calls, work with students or work with the senate finance committee. Those last three things are the three arti cles Ms. Ladenheim does not report in her well-written article on Friday. It is unfortunate that students would involve themselves in student organiza tions such as Student Government for re sumes and not for what they are intended for. As a finance student, I am deeply con cerned with financial practices, and one thing I have learned at this school is that financial mismanagement is a bad thing. Ms. Fordham should be impeached so that Student Government can find a qualified treasurer (Tim Clardy) and Ms. Fordham can focus on her studies. Michael A. Iglesias Finance Senior l <er.._, .. . „ „ _ __ Campus Issues Lottery vote faces long fight Under the current cir cumstances, last week’s South Carolina Supreme Court decision out lawing video poker enhances the qual ity of life for all the state’s citizens. Bet ter known as one of the most addictive forms of gambling, video poker seduces underprivileged, un dereducated indi viduals-those peo Corey Ford is a sophomore political science major. He writes every Wednesday. His e-mail is prescef® yahoo.com pie already in a dire financial situation - to haplessly waste main ly piecemeal income. However salutary this victory might seem, the underlying conse quences could result in the lottery’s defeat in the 2000 general election. Accompanying the anti-gambling sen timent in South Carolina was the rejection of a lottery by Alabama voters last week. The statewide referendum, which would have all but created a lottery, was inflicted a devastating loss with 54 percent of the vot ers against the measure. Gov. Don Siegel man, a Democrat who - like our own Gov. Jim Hodges - won the ‘98 general elec tion primarily due to his persistent push for a lottery, suffered a demoralizing defeat at the hands of gambling opponents; of the 56 counties Siegelman won in the general elec uon, oniy 1* supported me lottery. The lottery’s defeat in Alabama, while seemingly irrelevant to our state, will affect the outcome of our own lottery vote in 2000. The game of politics comparably resembles a football or basketball game in that mo mentum plays a significant role in the final outcome. This re-genesis of the anti-gam bling attitude marks a direct shift from the near-embracing of pro-lottery candidates across the South in many gubernatorial elec tions from last fall. And if opponents build upon the already sturdy coalition - religious conservatives and even social liberals - the Palmetto lottery might be doomed be fore its time to flourish arrives. Evangelical churches, an integral factor in defeat of the lottery in Alabama and the imminent video poker loss, once again showed off remarkable solidarity in the Bible Belt. Despite the current disdain, Hodges can learn from Siegelman's legislative loss in Alabama Hodges and his pro-lottery forces must counter the strong turnout of conser vatives with a nullifying turnout from those voters turned off by their intolerant rhetoric. This task will be easier than in Alabama be cause, thankfully, South Carolina’s refer endum will occur during a presidential elec tion year - usually a year in which more Democrats turn out to vote. ruiuicb, uuwever, can gci uuwnngni complicated. A large majority of South Car olinian voters oppose video poker, while the voters mainly favor a lottery. Go figure, right? Critical to the outcome of the vote, a distinction between video gambling and a lottery has to be drawn in order for Hodges to win. Hodges must explain to the elec torate that video poker - more of a temp tation to potential players - aggravates the state more by abusing low-income individ uals. Instead of alleviating people out of poverty with “monstrous” jackpots, the games only pushed the players deeper into the hole. But a lottery, Hodges must argue, might possibly provide a financial base for increased scholarships and general educa tional reform, which certainly aids in the fight to uplift the poor. Hodges is no ignorant politician; he knows he has to defend his cause gainst the fund-raising and morality plea from the re ligious conservatives. Put simply, the first term governor possesses the imperative task of building the same coalition that swung him into the Governor’s Mansion in No vember. Two key factors will determine the fate of the lottery. Will the 20 percent of Republicans who abandoned David Beasley vote for the lottery? And will the enormous, 25 percent turnout from African Americans occur again? The debate revolving around a state-run lottery for education signifies the magnitude of the issue. In a state that consistently ranks embarrassingly low in any education cate gory, a lottery that funds educational pro grams could improve the psychological mind sets of South Carolinian parents and citizens. And with the momentum forged by a lot tery, who knows, maybe South Carolina will jump in the standings, thus shocking the na tion. ........ ■