The Oberlin Review
<< Front page News September 17, 2004

More Letters to the Editor
Alumnus urges students to take action in Ohio To the Editors:

You know why, now Get the 9Hell Out the Vote in Ohio for John Kerry! On Nov. 2, the varnished halls of King, Peters and Stevenson should be empty and the streets and doorbells of Ohio weary from a good day’s exercise in democracy by 6,000 Obie sneakers criss-crossing the state — and the campaigns could use your help until then, too. You are fortunate to be Obies and to have the hope, ideas and hard work to make a difference, change the world. Now’s your chance.–Peter ProwsOC ’02
Register to vote in lobby at Mudd Library To the Editors:

You registered for classes, you registered your car, but you keep thinking you’re forgetting something. Have you registered to vote?

Oberlin College students who are U.S. citizens age 18 or older at the time of an election have the right to register and vote from their college address in Oberlin or by absentee ballot at their home address. In order to assist you in this right, voter registration will be available on the Main Level of Mudd Library until the end of September. Please visit our staffed table, Monday through Friday, 3-5 p.m., for forms and assistance. We will be happy to answer questions and provide information about eligibility, voting residence and the absentee ballot. Registration can be filled out on the spot and will be hand-delivered to the Board of Elections—you won’t even need a postage stamp. If you can’t make it during these hours, you can fill out a registration form at the Main Library Reference Desk, when open, or Wilder Information Desk on evenings and weekends. Please be aware that if you have changed residence since your last registration—this includes having moved to a new dorm—you must re-register from your new address to maintain eligibility. We look forward to assisting you and answering any questions you may have. –Grace HammondOberlin College Library Associate
Consent policy important for students to know To the Editors:

According to the Oberlin College Sexual Offense Policy, “...all sexual interaction between students must be consensual.” One of the most effective ways to establish consent is through clearly expressed and mutually understood agreement for specific sexual behavior:

1. Let’s talk. Ongoing conversation is an important vehicle for consent. Don’t be afraid to ask questions if anything is unclear. Both parties should clearly and unambiguously express consent.

2. When in doubt, find out. The responsibility for obtaining consent lies with the person initiating the sexual act. Silence or non-communication must never be interpreted as consent.

3. Sex is a two-way street. If sex is mutually and simultaneously initiated, then responsibility for communicating consent—agreeing/obtaining/refusing/denying—continues to rest with all involved.

4. Consent should be understood as an ongoing process, rather than a one-time, one-conversation open door to any or all sexual interactions. Be aware that consent for one act, such as kissing, does not automatically imply consent for subsequent behaviors. Asking, “Do you want to have sex with me?” is a good start but not specific enough.

5. Consensual sex is best when partners can express themselves, are listened to and have their desires and needs respected.

6. At any point of sexual engagement, anyone has the right to stop the specific act or all sexual interactions. No always means no, not maybe.

7. It’s OK to check in and see if everyone’s enjoying her/himself. If you sense at any point that your partner is not fully participating or completely engaged in sexual behavior or has changed his/her mind, then ask if s/he wants to stop.

These are poor sexual consent practices:

A. Silence and/or non-communication and/or relying on assumptions.

B. According to Oberlin’s Sexual Offense Policy, consent cannot be given when any person is intoxicated (whether by drugs or alcohol), unconscious or asleep.

C. The threat or use of violence or force negates any previous consent or subsequent assumptions of consent.

D. Like physical force, coercion and intimidation negate consent.

E. Giving someone drugs or alcohol with the intent to impair his or her judgment or make him or her unconscious violates the Sexual Offense Policy and Ohio law.

F. Sexual harassment and gross sexual imposition are always a violation of consent.

Resources: Sexual Assault Policy Administrator x58555Campus Security x58444Counseling Center x58470SAST/Student Organiztionosast@oberlin.eduOffice of the Chaplains x58103Student Health x58180The Office of Health and Life Skills Education x55332Lorain Co. Rape Crisis 800-888-6161–Lori K. Morgan FloodAssistant Dean/Director of Health & Life Skills Education
Obie stands in support of Nader To the Editors:

The upcoming presidential election is popularly understood as a watershed event poised to reshape the American political landscape, as a definitive moment in history in which idealism and hope must be sacrificed on the alter of global exigency. Last week Julia Vogl called for “a bit better America with Kerry” and pilloried third-party votes as “my worst nightmare...a luxury this nation cannot afford,” and criticized Socialist Alternative for its critical support of Ralph Nader. We owe it to democracy, to every soldier shackled to an unjust occupation by the poverty draft, to every worker struggling under the abuses imposed by NAFTA, to every Iraqi suffering under illusory attempts at liberation, to every union handcuffed by pro-business labor laws and to every gay American denied the right to marry to do a bit better than that.

The logic of lesser-evilism spawns a vicious cycle in which marginal shifts between left and right undermine any far-reaching change. Searching through my grandparent’s attic three weeks ago, I found a yellowed 1964 campaign poster with the slogan, “We need to defeat Goldwater—FOR AMERICA.” These arguments are not new —they have continually disarmed popular movements and established a two-party autocracy upheld by the chimera of democratic process. Which pro-slavery party would you have voted for while the abolitionists were an unlikely third-party alternative? When will it be time to break from the Democrats and fight for tighter environmental regulation, pro-labor legislation, an end to militaristic foreign policy and nationalized healthcare — all things that find popular support in polls?

Julia Vogl argued that Kerry will foment an environment “...where third parties can flourish, where liberal ideas can be free from investigation and censorship (Patriot Act),” that gains can be won through traditional venues within the Democratic Party. At the Democratic National Convention there was not a single word of dissent against Kerry’s pro-occupation platform (he calls for an increased presence throughout his first term in office). Dean and Kucinich, who rallied the American left with poignant rhetoric during the primaries, failed to shift Kerry’s conservative agenda one millimeter to the left. Peace signs were prohibited in the audience, Kerry voted for the Patriot Act, and I am waiting for the Democratic Party to call for open debates and stringent limitations on campaign finance (it is fantasy to hope that those in power will advocate the development of competing parties). Resources and finances are chronically exhausted to fuel candidates unwilling to reshape American politics; this cannibalization of the American left derails popular movements from taking form and inexorably upholds the status quo.

I cannot stomach a vote for John Kerry—for a candidate who supports the occupation, voted for the Patriot Act, stands firmly against gay marriage, supports NAFTA, advocates revitalizing Clinton’s 1994 Crime Bill and is unwilling to repeal Taft-Hartley or nationalize healthcare. The anybody-but-Bush mentality, in which Kerry’s platform is unimportant, writes a blank check that will be cashed in conservative hegemony. If we continue to fatigue the American Left by supporting unconscionable candidates for fear of something worse, we will be left with a conservative government that misrepresents the sentiments of the American people. If we never take a stand for fear of sliding backwards, democracy will be subverted and the will of the people will continue to go unexpressed. –Jacob RinaldiCollege sophomore
Draft bill makes its way through Congress To the Editors:

This is an abridged version of the Draft bill introduced on January 7, 2003. The entire bill is available at http://thomas.loc.gov/. It’s abridged to keep it to 600 words (down from over 2000) per the request of The Oberlin Review.–Karles Saucedo-McQuadeCollege seniorUniversal National Service Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)108th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 163January 7, 2003A BILL

To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.[...]SEC. 2. NATIONAL SERVICE OBLIGATION.(a) OBLIGATION FOR YOUNG PERSONS—It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this Act unless exempted under the provisions of this Act.(b) FORM OF NATIONAL SERVICE- National service under this Act shall be performed either—(1) as a member of an active or reverse component of the uniformed services; or(2) in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the President, promotes the national defense, including national or community service and homeland security.(c) [....] (d) [....](e) [....]SEC. 3. TWO-YEAR PERIOD OF NATIONAL SERVICE.(a) GENERAL RULE- Except as otherwise provided in this section, the period of national service performed by a person under this Act shall be two years.(b) GROUNDS FOR EXTENSION- At the discretion of the President, the period of military service for a member of the uniformed services under this Act may be extended—[....](c) [....]SEC. 4. IMPLEMENTATION BY THE PRESIDENT.(a) [....] (b) [....](c) USE OF PRIOR ACT—[....]SEC. 5. INDUCTION.(a) [....](b) AGE LIMITS—A person may be inducted under this Act only if the person has attained the age of 18 and has not attained the age of 26.(c) [....](d) [....]SEC. 6. DEFERMENTS AND POSTPONEMENTS.(a) HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS—A person who is pursuing a standard course of study, on a full-time basis, in a secondary school or similar institution of learning shall be entitled to have induction under this Act postponed until the person—(1) obtains a high school diploma;(2) ceases to pursue satisfactorily such course of study; or(3) attains the age of 20.(b) [....](c) [....](d) TERMINATION—No deferment or postponement of induction under this Act shall continue after the cause of such deferment or postponement ceases.[SEC. 7. INDUCTION EXEMPTIONS.]SEC. 8. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION.(a) CLAIMS AS CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR—Any person selected under this Act for induction into the uniformed services who claims, because of religious training and belief (as defined in section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 456(j))), exemption from combatant training included as part of that military service and whose claim is sustained under such procedures as the President may prescribe, shall, when inducted, participate in military service that does not include any combatant training component.(b) TRANSFER TO CIVILIAN SERVICE- [...][SEC. 9. DISCHARGE FOLLOWING NATIONAL SERVICE.][SEC. 10. REGISTRATION OF FEMALES UNDER THE MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.][SEC. 11. RELATION OF ACT TO REGISTRATION AND INDUCTION AUTHORITY OF MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.][SEC. 12. DEFINITIONS.]
 
 

   

The Review News Service: News, weather, sports and more, in your ObieMail every Sunday and Wednesday night. (Click here to subscribe.)