State’s role with children questioned
This is in response to the editorial columns in the March 2, 1998 edition of the Lantern. I agree very much with David Overeem’s belief that the state cannot effectively do more than fruitlessly spend money when attempting to raise children. However, I’m not sure Mr. Overeem goes far enough in his liberal-bashing. The other side of that fence could use a good swift kick as well.The government has repeatedly shown itself to be a completely incompetent parent. Yet our legislators continue to make attempts to do their job in order to replace our roles as parents, role models, and friends. David, you say that today, “liberals would counsel [Mrs. Shipley] to get an abortion.” But don’t you see the corresponding lack of freedom in conservative attempts to forbid her the choice? Counseling should not be partisan, but all options, abortion, adoption, and acceptance, should be available. It is the right of no one to legislate family.Other initiatives exist, on both sides of the government intrusion debate. Democrats seek to help raise children through censorship of certain music and movies, while Republicans seek to overtake a parent’s right and responsibility to raise a child in the religion of their choice through state-financed school prayer. Yet both sides must realize that they have failed. They will not succeed because they cannot. The state has no ability to save children, all it can do is kill rights.I would also like to address Jessica Weeks’ (aka Cinammon Cooper II) assertion that “The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged),” recently staged by the OSU theater department, was highly sexist. Not to sound insensitive (though I realize saying that means nothing), but lighten up girl. You have some valid points, but attacking a play?I’m quite surprised you didn’t pick up on (or at least mention) the rather severe heterosexist and stereotypical depictions of gay characters in the play as well. I have a number of homosexual friends who found the play highly amusing, however. They were able, unlike you, to step back from the podium for a moment and to watch the play as a work of art, not to trump it up as a highly significant cultural event. They could see the humor in the play as it reflected a lot of the humor and absurdity in situations that are so close to their lives, they usually cannot appreciate it. They were able to look at their reflections in the fun-house mirror and laugh. “The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged)” was the funniest thing to hit this campus since Carrot Top came to town. I laughed my ass off.
Vince ConawayJuniorComputer science and engineering
