Tuesday, Jan. 27, 1998
Organizers of King speech did well
Jan. 19 at Eisenhower Auditorium was truly special. I am proud to be a part of the Penn State community. Much credit to Vice Provost James B. Stewart, the committee and the many others who had a hand in this inspiring Martin Luther King Jr. Commemoration event. University President Graham Spanier's gift to Yolanda King of a tape of her father's speech at Penn State could not have been more thoughtful or appropriate.
I had the pleasure of hearing Yolanda King speak in New Hampshire
several year ago. That was an excellent speech; this was a superb
speech. Almost 30 years ago, I heard Coretta Scott King speak
in place of her husband, who had accepted an invitation to address
my college class before he was assassinated. The deep emotion
of that event remains with me through life, and events such as
ours helps heal the loss I felt and still feel.
Congratulations to all concerned with this event.
David W. Johnson
director of communications, College of Arts and Architecture
Clinton must answer latest allegations
During the course of the last week, Washington journalists have been treated to a treat -- the opportunity to discuss the latest in a series of sexual scandals that have plagued the Clinton presidency. For the first time, there has been talk of a possible resignation, maybe even impeachment.
During the last few years, the president has been able to avoid
sustaining damage by coming out immediately after the allegations
have surfaced and speaking to the American people. This time,
however, it's not that easy.
While Clinton's political advisers want him to stick to that tried-and-true
approach, his legal advisers want him to lay low, in order to
prevent him from saying anything that could be used against him
later in any potential legal actions. So while the president was
the invisible man this weekend, he fought a proxy war by sending
friends like James Carville out in his defense. Carville railed
against Kenneth Starr's tactics, specifically his willingness
to tape conversations.
It's statements like this that remind me of the last time a president
was in this kind of trouble. Does the phrase, "The people
have a right to know whether or not their president's a crook"
ring a bell?
Well, Carville, the people do have a right to know. And if that
interferes with a president's right to privacy, then that's just
too bad for the president. The presidency is the supreme manifestation
of the people -- one man who stands for all of us. He must be
someone we all can trust and believe in.
While Starr's tactics may be a little overzealous for a case against
a regular citizen, Starr isn't investigating a regular citizen.
It's quite possible that he overstepped his Whitewater mandate
by investigating Monica Lewinsky. In the end, though, it's entirely
irrelevant. Serious allegations have now been raised, and Clinton
must answer to these charges, regardless of his personal feelings
on how they came to light. If he doesn't like that, then he should
find a new line of work.
Christian L. Soura
sophomore-international politics
Abortion not a choice for women to make
I want to respond to some comments about a woman's "right" to abortion in Thursday's edition of The Daily Collegian. One woman said that Roe vs. Wade, "was a positive moment for women because it validated a woman's right to govern her body."
Another stated that, "Roe vs. Wade is a great thing. It's
given women access to abortion. It gives them the right to make
choices about their bodies." Now it's essential that both
women and men have the right to make choices about their bodies
and to govern them. We have choices about what we put into our
bodies, how or if we exercise and whether or not we have sex.
Men and women both have the choice to not have sex in the first
place and avoid unwanted pregnancies. I'm not saying waiting for
marriage to have sex is easy, but it is possible. And I know it's
the best choice we can make.
The big problem with the arguments in the Collegian is that the
woman who decides to have an abortion is no longer making a choice
about her body. She made that choice when she had sex.
When she has an abortion, a woman is agreeing to destroy the human
baby inside of her. That is not a choice about her body. That
is murder. And while women who have abortions are certainly guilty,
lovers and family members who agree with the abortion or pressure
them to have one are equally guilty.
I don't want to condemn people who have been involved in an abortion.
Some are so wracked with guilt that's the last thing they need.
But they do need to face the magnitude of their sin and repent.
The Bible says that those who want to be counted as God's children
must turn away from their sin and let Christ be first place in
their lives. When they do, He will heal, restore and forgive them
of whatever they've done and give them power to live a godly life.
Jesus didn't come to condemn us, but to save us.
He wants to give us mercy and hope. But we can't receive mercy
unless we admit our sin (and general sinfulness) and our desperate
need for Him. Those who insist on justifying murder as choice
will receive justice (hell). Those willing to admit the truth
and turn to Jesus will receive mercy.
Dave Hatfield
Class of 1997
campus minister with Champions for Christ
