The day of graduation is quickly looming over the seniors. Some of my computer science classmates undoubtedly cannot wait to be outsourced to India, while I nervously await the beginning of my career as a "professional philosopher." In addition to sharing the anxiety about the future, we also share a common experience of attending Rutgers University. One must wonder: Has our college experience prepared us for the real world?
Outside of The Daily Targum universe of governing association meetings and guest speakers, the real world news cycle is currently obsessing over the life - or death - of Terry Schiavo. In case you have not been overloaded by 24-hour news networks, here is the basic story: Schiavo is in a brain-damaged, vegetative state and her husband controls her custody. Her husband believes she would not want to be kept alive artificially and asks for the removal of those equipments. Her parents disagree and went to the court to keep her alive.
The Florida courts have repeatedly ruled in favor or her husband. The case should have been closed then, but Congress intervened. Tom DeLay, the House majority leader argued for a "culture of life," and the Congress hammered out an extraordinary bill that supersedes previously established states rights and allows only any parent of Terry Schiavo to take the case to the federal court - so that no precedent is set. President George W. Bush signed off on this bill, arguing that "the legislative branch, the executive branch, ought to err on the side of life." The Supreme Court has since refused to hear the case.
Never mind the fact that this case shows that Bush, DeLay and Co. have no genuine interest in checks and balances or the rule of law, what about their interest in the "culture of life"? Bush is still pushing for Social Security "reforms" that would take away a safety net for retirees. The Republicans in Congress are still advocating cuts to Medicaid. There have always been vocal arguments against raising minimum wages closer to living wages. Internationally, the United States continues to protect its drug companies and refuse to allow affordable generics, for diseases such as HIV, to be sold in poor countries. The intellectual property law is written so that human DNAs can be patented, which results in a company holding exclusive patent on, say, the genes of breast cancer. Consequently, every time a test for breast cancer is performed, substantial sums must be paid to the company. Culture of life? Only if the revenue of political chips is greater than the expense of lives.
Luckily, the lesson of political factions, special interests and manipulation of the legal system is taught right here at Rutgers, so that we are well-prepared for the real world. The administration is happy to promote a culture of tolerance by addressing the offensive names of Grease Truck sandwiches and dedicating money to diversity initiatives. I support these measures, as my past column has indicated - prejudiced words reflect and shape prejudiced beliefs. Despite these encouraging actions, the administration remains mum on issues that make words seem, well, superficial.
Lost in the news cycle surrounding the Grease Truck controversy was the trial of football player Alfred Peterson. There was an editorial and a news item in this newspaper, but I guess no one noticed, so let me repeat the story: He was accused of assaulting a woman, for which he was first tried at a University judicial hearing. At the hearing he was represented by a professional lawyer, while the victim was not. The University exonerated him and allowed him to return to the gridiron while the county was still investigating the case, against NCAA rules. Later he agreed to a plea bargain of third-degree aggravated assault in the county case.
In addition, the athletic department fails to address the issue of homophobia in sports, as an enlightening investigative report by John Koblin last semester in this newspaper showed. Robert Mulcahy, the athletics director, was quoted as saying "[The issue of homophobia is] probably way down the list," in terms of priorities of the department. In the same report, Mulcahy defends the sensitivity trainings being voluntary by arguing that they may not change coaches' prejudices. Essentially, tolerating the reinforcement of a homophobic atmosphere.
The reason why I bring up this "old news" is because, to this date, neither Mulcahy and the athletics department nor McCormick and other top officials have addressed these reports. It is hard to believe that they are working on the problems in quiet, especially since Mulcahy apparently cares enough to write to The Daily Targum about the use of "choke" in a headline and take out ads thanking boosters' support for the athletic programs. Instead, one is forced to equate the administration's silence with its inaction on these serious issues. Culture of tolerance? Only if the revenue of public opinion is greater than the loss of profits from big-time sports.
The apathy of the Rutgers community clearly shows the University has made a wise business decision. On the other hand, maybe the administrators are just being altruistic by crafting us an environment that will prepare us for the real world. I, for one, have learned much. Thanks, Rutgers.
Sam Liao is a Rutgers College senior majoring in philosophy. His column "Intellectual? Property!" appears on alternating Mondays. His e-mail address is samliao@eden.rutgers.edu, but he would much rather you e-mail McCormick or Mulcahy.
Be the first to comment on this article!