University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

Continuity May Change The System

Student Council elections, as
usual, are not far away, but at this
time there is developing a unique
situation. For the first time in
memory, there are several
experienced Council members who
are eligible for re-election.

It may be taken as a perennial
problem of student representation
that continuity is lacking.
Administrators undoubtedly find it
frustrating to deal with continually
changing student opinions, and the
problem is increased by the high
turnover in representatives.

In addition to this, it usually
takes a considerable period for new
members to become well versed in
the details of a particular issue.
Now, though, there are several
people who have a decided
expertise and who might be
returned to office and improve the
continuity problem.

I will not argue the wisdom of
re-electing any of these individuals,
that is up to the electorate. Rather,
I remark on the fact several of these
people seem to be without the
desire to stay on Council and
continue what they have started.

Are the results not worth the
efforts? It there no real chance to
to change policies? It Student
Council a waste of time? Maybe so.
Perhaps it is all just a game.

But it is at least possible that
this isn't the case. Efforts in recent
years concerning equal
opportunity, co-education, and
expansion have been far from fully
successful, yet imagine how things
might be without them.

We might still have entering
classes with a grand total of 9 black
students. We could still have eight
years to go on the quota system for
women. It is likely that we would
not even have a Future of The
University Committee to examine
the policy of growth without
efforts of Student Council.

Policies have not and will not be
changed quickly: it is a struggle
between interests -taking place in
the Administration. Without some
efforts, students would have no
voice at all in the things that affect
their lives and educations. We ought
to have the best available
representation. Those persons on
Council who have developed
expertise ought to consider the
contributions they could yet make
before giving up on Student
Council.

U-Hall Roller Rink

We are appalled by the repeated
misuse of University Hall on big
weekends. Why, by the look of the
place, you'd think the
administrative heads of that fine
athletic arena were actually
condoning hippy-infested riots. We
believe something should be done
to liberate University Hall from
these hideous displays of squalor.

We propose cancellation of the
December "concert." In its place
we urge that the University provide
an event that any student would be
proud to bring a date to see, an
event befitting so fine a sport's
palace as University Hall, an event
full of the drama that stokes the
flames of America's greatness. In
short, we want Roller Derby.

The two organizations now
operating this admirable pastime
are the original Roller Derby and
the new Roller Games. While many
prefer the authenticity of the
Derby, led by hard-hitting Charly
O'Connell and the San Francisco
Bay Area Bombers, some are drawn
to the flashy show of the Games.
We are certain that the people of
Charlottesville would be thrilled by
either group and both organizations
would delight in exhibiting their
talents before us.

In Conclusion

In his letter of Nov. 4
Psychology Student Kramer asks
that we of the CRTL listen and
express our opinions-we have and
we do. It is the editors of the
Weekly who have overstepped their
bounds. They no longer consider
abortion an issue, but have taken it
upon themselves to break the law
by providing an abortion referral
service. It is not CRTL who is
prosecuting them, it is the people
of Virginia, for the Weekly has
affronted them by violating their
statute law.

Certainly the diversity of human
behavior is overwhelming. But
when that diversity extends to acts
which society has determined to be
detrimental to the whole, the acts
will not be tolerated. The Weekly
put up a challenge to the law and
are now being taken to task. Let
them accept the consequence of
their actions and not cry,
"Fascist!" every time their
armchair liberal world is invaded.

As for the abortion issue itself,
and in reply to Patrick Alther's
Nov. 4 letter, the CRTL does not
"automatically assume" the fetus is
a human being, though we have
come to that conclusion based on
the fact that the fetus is a
genetically unique individual from
the moment of conception. Mr.
Alther says that there is a strong
case for arguing that the fetus's
removal is no more murder than the
removal of a diseased limb. In other
words there is a strong doubt. On
the basis of that doubt New York
legislators approved a law
responsible for the deaths of
600,000 lives. In a few more years
the "lebensraum" minded people of
this country will have caught up
with Hitler's record of six million in
Germany. We're not talking about
any mystical religious law here,
we're talking about our basic
sensibilities as men. If Mr. Alther
wishes to sacrifice 600,000 more
lives to preserve his garden, I
suggest he reorder his selfish
priorities. Certainly population is
our most pressing problem, but you
don't solve it the way Hitler did
and then rationalize your guilt
away. Let's fight that problem at its
roots-with more effective methods
of birth control. If abortion is
considered a solution to the
population problem, why not kill
off all the aged, infirm and retarded
people while we're at it? How do-you
justify your own right to life,
Mr. Alther?