University of South Carolina Libraries
... ;* v . Page 4 - June 6, 1984 UPllllOIl THE GAMECOCK i i. # i i??i\ i TlU, District's censorship unconstitutional? Sometimes people can make a bad situation worse. Such is the case of the decision last month by Richland District Two's school board to remove Robert Cormier's novel "The Chocolate War" from middle school libraries. D y-v 4' n D r% M f nrao Ar ' O A>An t Vl Of occausc ui a ua^iDi s tunituuvju mai the novel contained explicit language not fit for his child's reading assignment, the board has taken a dangerous first step toward blatant censorship. Memories of the pre-war Germany of the 1930s come to mind when reviewing the situation. Where rlr?#?c crinipnnp Hraw fhf linp in Hf?ff?rmininp whaf is fit to read and for whom? And, for that matter, who is to say what programs should be shown on television? The answer to these complex problems lies in the freedom to choose for one's self or one's young children what is proper or decent. No one has the right to decide for others. If a movie is in poor taste, the channel should be changed. If a book, such as "The Chocolate War" is offensive to an individual or his child, that person may choose, for himself and that child, not to read it. But to decide that any literature is not fit for anyone else approaches violations of First Amendment rights. These are the 80s, not the 30s, and decidedly offensive language is heard and read frequently, like it or not. Cormier says he based the book on the experiences of his son, who advised Cormier on the slang and foHc nftoon iuuj vj ivvuagvia auu IU1U mill, CXI I CI 11 It UUUN VVU5 completed, that it accurately portrayed the way teenagers talked and felt. As he said in an article in The State, children between the ages of 13 and 16 "are not saying 'Golly gee ' to each other" anymore. This brings about another drawback to the school board's decision. Several area bookstores reported they had sold out of the book shortly after the controversy began and all copies were checked out at the Richland County Public Library as well. Obviously, more people in Columbia are reading the novel now than ever before. Does that not defeat the purpose of the book removal in the schools altogether? Situations such as these are better left alone. A teacher's judgement should be enough to satisfy a concerned parent. If not, the parent could ask the teacher for an alternate reading assignment for his child. That way, everyone could be satisfied and could have the freedom that they deserve. Got an opinion? If so, The Gamecock welcomes letters and guest editorials from students, faculty and staff on any newsworthy topic, limited to 300 words, typed and triple-spaced. Writers must sign their name, class, major and phone number on the submission. Pseudonyms are unacceptable. Letters should be mailed to The Gamecock, Drawer A, Russell House, USC, Columbia, S.C. 29208. Gamecock Editor in Chief ! Leslie J. Dunson News Editor Marisa Porto General Manager Ron Emler Entertain. Editor Robert O'Connor Ad Manager Ron Emler Sports Editor Tracy Mixson Business Manager Carolyn Griffen Dateline Editor Margarita Pate Production Mgr. Mark McEwan Photo Editor Drew Pearson Graduate Asst Wanda M. Hite Copy Editoi,, Ann Farmer Adviser Mark Ethridge Jr. Copy Editor Herb Reeves j Newsroom 777-7181 Advertising 7774249 Business Office 777-3888 Production 777 2833 The Gamecock welcomes letters and guest editorials. All letters and guest editorials must be typewritten, triple spaced on a bti space line. Letters should be no longer than 300 words and guest editorials should be limited to one newsworthy subject no longer than four typed pages. Letters and guest editorials MUST be signed with the writer's name, telephone number, mailing ad dress, class standing or faculty position and maior. Pseudonyms are unacceptable, but the writer's name may be withheld upon request if the circumstances warrant. We reserve the right to edit guest editorials and letters. Address letters and columns to: Opinion Page Editor, Gamecock, Drawer A, USC, Columbia, S C. 29208. On Olvmoics M To all supporters and observers of international athletics, the cover of this week's Newsweek magazine is extremely distressing. The cover pictured one of the Olympic torchbearers, with the question "Are the games dead?" printed across the page. Indeed, the Soviet Union's May 8 announcement that it would not attend this summer's Olympic games in Los.. Angeles threatens the continued existence of this international quadrennial snortinc event. Some people speculated all along that the Soviets would not show; others thought for sure that they would come. But this speculation itself indicates how the political overtones which have always been part of the games have taken over the event and have become more important than the athletes and their achievements. You can't de-nationalize the Olympics; they have always been a source of national unity and pride for many countries across the globe. But if something is not done to de-politicize the games, the question Newsweek and many others have been asking lately may turn out to have "yes" for an answer. Perhaps the most viable soulution to the problem of politics in the Olympics is the one offered by former Olympian and Senator from New Jersey, Bill Bradley. He proposes moving the games to a permanent, neutral site. This would alleviate the problem of countries boycotting to protest the actions of the host country. Moving the games to a permanent site would hold down the mammoth CflQli; nf h/\Ctino thf? pwonl ir? o rliffnt-nnt w. v/vjvuif, Iiav V * VIII ill U UH 1VI VMl place every time. Many of the complaints surrounding this summer's games deal with their commerical sponsorship, which the event's organizers used to cover much of the costs. In fact, one of the reasons given by the Soviets and other countries boycotting the games is that commerical sponsorship violates the Olympic ideal. All of this could be avoided because commercial sponsorship would not be as necessary at a permanent site with lower costs. The point the Russians made about the Olympic ideal is a valid one. It is not just the U.S. who is at fault, though, but the whole system. The Olympic idea! is all the word's best athletes, regardless of their professional or quasi-professional status, competing against one another in an athletic forum, not a political one. The Soviet-bloc boycott is a disappointment to everyone interested in the iSLKN | > TO>lTO,NO? J //, J ///* Intercampus Central An games, but especially to the athletes on both sides, who have worked hard and have long looked forward to competing against one another. The games snouid be moved to permanent, neutral ^site, so that they can once again serve the purpose for which they were intended. The Chronicle j: Duke University ' Congress struck a happy medium recently in military aid appropriations for troubled countries in Central America. The House voted 267-154 to provide $62 million in militarv niH fr?r PI Salvador, but refused to go along with President Reagan's request for $21 million more for CIA-backed rebels fighting Nicaragua's Marxist-led government. Approval for further aid in El Salvador comes on the heels of a visit to the United States by newly elected President Jose Napoleon Duarte, who pleaded for the money in his talks with Congress. The $62 million provided in the bill for El Salvador is for emergency military aid and includes $32 million to repay the pentagon budget for the equipment and supplies that Reagan transferredtoEl Salvador in April when the bill was stalled by a House-Senate conflict. Once the measure clears Congress, it will bring $126 million the total military aid to El Salvador in the first five months of this year. The bill will now be sent back to the Senate, where the Republican majority voted in favor of both aid packages back in April. Duarte's visit annarentlv nlav^H -j > j r ;vM " decisive role in swaying the House vote in favor of continued support for the fledgling democracy in El Salvador. Rep. Clarence Long, a Maryland Democrat and chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations, reversed his earlier opposition to the Salvadoran aid, saying he believed in Duarte's claims to initiate major reforms in El Salvador. "1 believe it is important to provide symbolic support for what your presidency offers for the future of El Salvador and its people," Long said in a letter to Duarte. But liberal House Democrats are as vehement as ever against any further aid for Centra! American countries. The opposition, of course, was headed un bv none other than r - ?"*? ? iv/n^v, Speaker Thomas "Tip" O'Neill of Massachusetts. ^?v <>/v mrina. etc. While Reagan describes Niqara^guan rebels as "freedom fighters," O'Neill labeled them "Marauders, murderers and rapists," and said it would be "a disgrace to this government" to provide money for their support. Clearly, both sides of the argument over Nicaragua are somewhat extreme. However, the House with its vote ... Thursday has shown thsV,frave weighed the evidence in both countries and " made a prudent decision. The facts show progress is being made in El Salvador. The new president has declared even more will be made in the future. The United States is therefore wise to protect that investment. I n \I Ir>r?rn rtiin I? *11 in inv,aiagua, mc vciUltl 15 51111 (JUL. , American ard to that country would appear to be nothing more -than subversive encouragemnt toward war. If that is so, the U.S. should let the Nicaraguans fight their war unaided, and then decide how to proceed. In any case, the House vote is a wise policy compromise in Central America. The Daily Beacon University of Tennessee Lately politicians have revealed more about themselves through their jokes than throueh thpir nr?l First there was Jesse Jackson's referring to jews as "Hymies" and New York City as "Hymietown." Now this past week President Reagan uttered what he though was a humorous cc* ment on a serious subject. Instead t. Jackson's telling a "joke" in private, Reagan told his in front of a group. Reagan met with American observers who witnessed the recent runoff elections in El Salvador. He said he was told anti-eovernment guerrillas in El Salvador shot at a helicopter carrying journalists covering the election. "You've got to give them credit. There's some good in everyone," Reagan said. While his audience laughed, he told the reporters covering the meeting that he didn't really mean it. We hardly believe he didn't mean it. The statement revealed Regan's deeper feeling for the press. Hp Hope nn? l!l/? u~: ? ~ ?1 ...v?i iim. ucuig questioned uy anyone, especially the press. When the press does its job, it keeps him on his toes. No matter how he regards journalists, however, he should watch what he says. ft's distasteful humor when we're talking about human life. me lanrorn Ohio State Univeristy