The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 79, No. 4, Ed. 1 Friday, September 13, 1991 Page: 4 of 24
twenty four pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
4 FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1991 THE RICE THRESHER
ACT-UP misbehaving like a bunch of children, should just grow up
by Steven Bryant
Radical activism and civil disobe-
dience have been rather consistent
players on the American political
scene since the anti-Vietn am protests
and civil rights demonstrations of
the 1960's. Even in the 1990's, the
substantial social impact of the free
publicity generated by mass media
coverage of such demonstrations has
not been disregarded by groups will-
to break the law in order to make
a point
One of the more reec.r.t examples
of such an organization is the Aids
Coalition to Unleash Power, better
known as ACT-UP. This movement
protests the lack of federal money for
research on AIDS and FDA foot-
dragging in the approval of new drugs
to treat the disease. My attention has
focused on thisgroup in recent weeks
because of one of their demonstra-
tions on Sunday, September 1,1991.
These AIDS activists marched
through the town of Kennebunkport,
Maine to get "George Bush to rec-
ognize that we have an AIDS crisis",
as announced by Joe Grabarz, a
Connecticut politician and supporter
of the group. Truly a laudable goal,
even though I, for one, am fairly sure
that our President is aware of the
problem and concerned about those
individuals who have the disease.
To be honest, I support ACT-UPs
stated end of finding a cure for AIDS;
it's the means and the fact that sev-
eral of their grievances against the U.
S. government lack any real
substance that annoy me.
During a recent Sunday march,
these activists proceeded to destroy
an effigy of our President with golf
clubs, breaking it open and spilling
the condoms they had put inside it
out onto the ground. In light of such
an insult toward George Bush, I find
myself wondering, "What good does
this do? What does it prove?"
ACT-UP has consistently, since
their formation in 1987, engaged in
activities in their marches and sit-ins
that are simply offensive and inap-
propriate at best and absolutely dis-
gusting and shocking at worst.
In 1989, after Cardinal O'Conner
plaints, lack of federal funding for
AIDS, is, in fact, a non-issue. Al-
though in the first few years follow-
ing the initial recognition ofthe AIDS
crisis the federal government did in-
deed move too slowly in allocating
sufficient funding, in 1990 the Na-
... these activists proceeded to destroy an
effigy of our President with golf clubs,
breaking it open and spilling the condoms...
had spoken out against abortion, in-
discriminate sexual activity, and cur-
rent legislation to provide homo-
sexuals with minority benefits, ACT-
UP members picketed St. Patrick's
Cathedral in New York City. ACT-UP
not only interrupted the mass with
thefr chanting, but, according to cer-
tain witnesses present at the scene,
also spit their wafers back up in the
priest's face after receiving the Holy
Communion. Some unsubstantiated
reports even accused one activist of
defecating on the floor of the cathe-
dral itself. Although the veracity of
this last act is in doubt, ACT-UPs
overall behavior in this incident was
still inexcusable.
These demonstrations are mere
publicity stunts perpetrated by indi-
viduals politically and socially alien-
ated from mainstream America in
order to shock the United States'
public through television and the
newspapers; however, in the process,
these actions completely overshadow
ACT-UPs positions and stifle their
message. In essence, ACT-UP is ru-
ining its own credibility because of
its rabid behavior.
If one is willing to disregard all of
ACT-UPs foul grandstanding (and
that's certainly a big if) and analyze
its arguments, then one discovers
that they are hopelessly weak and
overblown as well.
One of ACT-UPs major com-
tional Institutes of Health's AIDS
funding grew a substantial 22.9% with
allocations increasing from $602,294
dollars in 1989 to $740,509 dollars in
1990. Moreover, AIDS funding as a
percentage of all of NIH's monetary
obligations in 1990 stood at an im-
pressive 9.8%.
In addition, recent federal stat-
utes have alleviated the slow drug
approval process at the FDA In 1987,
the Food and Drug Administration
approved new rules that would per-
mit the sale of experimental drugs
for serious diseases. Doctors could
prescribe the drugs for new thera-
pies before they were officially de-
clared safe by the FDA. The FDA
quickly followed this step in 1988 by
streamlining their evaluation process
through which drugs reach the U. S.
market Finally, it reinterpreted its
enforcement policy for foreign drugs
to permit the importation and admin-
istration of any drug for personal use
provided a physician supervises the
process and large quantities (more
than three months' worth) not be
brought into the Unites States.
Obviously, the FDA has re-
sponded adequately to an important
situation and does not deserve the
label of'bureaucratic murderer' that
ACT-UP has applied to it In truth,
the FDA is leading the fight to find
safe and effective treatments for a
dread disease .while ACT-U P spends
its time pointlessly marching and
venting its own misplaced and irra-
tional anger on the presidential ad-
ministration and American society in
general Since ACT-UP refuses even
to recognize the enormous strides
made by the government or to tone
down its own radical positions, it's
quickly becoming irrelevant in the
fight to cure AIDS.
Why would this organization,
which cares about the plight of AIDS
patients, relegate itself to the position
of a sideshow on its most salient
issuePThe answer lies in the fact that
the majority of ACT-UP members
are disappointed radicals dismissed
by an increasingly conservative
American electorate. Having found
an issue with which they can pum-
mel the establishment, these
individuals absolutely refuse to admit
that the establishment could indeed
be on their side in the problem and
not be out to oppress the masses —
in this instance, the masses of AIDS
patients.
So, they march and demonstrate,
firm in their particular beliefs, while
the people they are trying to reach
with their actions disregard them as
an organization of obnoxious losers
who have nothing valuable to con-
tribute in the AIDS dilemma. That is
a shame, since so many of ACT-UPs
members are sincerely interested in
AIDS and in the plight of its victims.
It's not only shameful, it's sad.
Athletics
FROM PAGE 3
own committee to review the find-
ings of the current Presidential
Athletic Review Committee. This
represents their unhappiness with
the President's decision to appoint a
committee without first consulting
the Faculty Council. It is also evi-
dence that many members of the
faculty expect to find the committee's
conclusions to be unrepresentative
of their own opinions.
Dr. King Walters chairs the cur-
rent Presidential Athletic Review
Committee. Other members include
Evans Attwell, Dr. Sarah Burnett,
Catherine Hannah, Dr. Duane
Windsor, and Spencer Yu. Although
at least one member is predisposed
strongly in favor of big-time
intercollegiate athletics at Rice, none
ofthe members seems to be strongly
against it Still, this committee has
apparently done a tremendous job of
gathering facts about all facets of the
current intercollegiate athletic pro-
gram. They intend to present their
report to the President's office around
the end of September. At that point,
the President will decide if and how
the report will be distributed.
The President should release this
report to the general university
community so that future debates
about the role of intercollegiate ath-
letics at Rice can be informed by facts
and cease to be merely polemical.
However, no matter how excellent
its fact-finding work may be, the cur-
rent committee is likely to recom-
mend that intercollegiate athletics
should be continued without sub-
stantial reform and that the discon-
tent members of our community
should simply be content, once
again, with what reform there is.
If some faculty members perceive
a failure on the part of the Presiden-
tial committee to ask serious ques-
tions about the current role of big-
time athletics in our community, they
may again unify against the
President's office to demand funda-
mental reform. To the degree that
the current committee reports the
facts, but concludes in favor of the
status quo, we should look forward
to seeing the work of the faculty
committee as it reviews the Presi-
dential committee's report and issues
its own conclusion.
We're Conoco, the Hottest Brand Going. And if you're a Business Major, have we
got a date for you. On Wednesday, September 18,1991, from 6:30-7:30 p.m.,
we'll be hosting a reception, in the Farnsworth Pavilion, and we'd like to meet
you. Come find out about the career opportunities at Conoco. And we'll be back
on campus to interview on November 1,1991. So, mark these dates, it could be
the beginning of a very hot future.
(conoco)
A Du Pont Subsidiary
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Zitterkopf, Ann & Howe, Harlan. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 79, No. 4, Ed. 1 Friday, September 13, 1991, newspaper, September 13, 1991; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245789/m1/4/: accessed June 20, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.