AN AFFIRMATIVE RE-ACTION
The Black Law Students’ Association of Southern MethodistUniversity offer the following response to the Young Conservativesof Texas bake sale that recently occurred on the campus of SMU:
We, the Black Law Students’ Association, wish to expressour disdain for the bake sale’s gross misrepresentation ofthe intent and effect of affirmative action. It is well establishedthat minorities have suffered from disproportionate educationalopportunities, putting them at a disadvantage when applying toinstitutions of higher learning. The consideration of lifeexperiences from one’s cultural background provides somebalance in the equation. It also enriches the educationalexperience by providing varying perspectives and approaches toproblem solving. Since race is not the only factor used todetermine admission, to assume that a student is admitted solely onthe basis of his or her race reflects flawed research or adeliberate intent to inflame rather than inform. The Black LawStudents’ Association at Southern Methodist University willcontinue to support cultural diversity and other factors used inthe admissions process that will assist in providing suchdiversity.
We recognize, support and embrace the basic American right tofreedom of speech. However, that right does not preclude the rightof freedom from discrimination. Therefore, if the YoungConservatives of Texas were simply copying what similarorganizations have done around the country, shame on them forfollowing a misled movement. If the only goal of the YoungConservatives of Texas’ demonstration was to make evident itsopposition to using one’s cultural background as a factor inadmissions, it failed to effectively communicate its point becausethe method it used was highly offensive. The information itconveyed was highly inaccurate.
Opponents of affirmative action would likely argue thataffirmative action is a form of reverse discrimination that has noplace in the modern American societal scheme. However, thatargument is based on the faulty assumption that racial and genderinequality no longer exist in American society. It is necessary topoint out the difference between cultural diversity and racialdiscrimination. Cultural diversity in admission practices uses raceas one factor to help ensure a diverse and culturally rich studentbody. Inversely, racial discrimination is the inclusion orexclusion of a group based solely on their racial ethnicity.
The Black Law Students’ Association concludes with thisfinal thought:
• Cost of tuition and fees for one semester at SMU Law:$13,000
• Cost of books for first semester law school: $800
• Cost of obtaining an education from an institution thatis filled with a variety of cultural beliefs, attitudes andperspectives to ensure that all individuals receive a well roundedexperience: PRICELESS.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Dear Editorial Board:
My, my, my, how quickly you have changed your tune … I am anSMU graduate and now in my third-year of law school here.
For over six years, I’ve read countless articles on howapathetic the student body is. There were three editorials in thefirst two weeks of school. On Aug. 22, there was: “Fightingthe Lame Quotient at SMU.” Then, only six days later, youpublish not one, but two articles on the subject, “Break theStereotypes – Get Involved” and “A Campus-Wide Call toArms.” These articles made various suggestions to theapathetic SMU student:
• “Start taking an active role in rethinking andaffirming your political beliefs …”
• For SMU to be a “more interesting, stimulating, anddiverse [community], all we need is a little more effort from aseemingly apathetic student body”
• “Break the stereotypes and get involved.”
With all of this advice in the first two weeks alone, you canimagine my surprise at your editorial “tough cookie.”In your article you wrote “the bake sale did not benefit thestudent body.” Oh, really? Where have you been for the pastweek?
If you were here, you would have seen students reading The DailyCampus word for word to see what fellow students felt about theincident. You would hear students talking about affirmative action,free speech and the SMU administration.
You would see teachers and students together actively engaged inpolitical discourse about this week’s events. So, did itbenefit the student body? I think so.
To the SMU administration: Freedom of speech applies not only towhat is said, but how and where it is said. The bake sale was not aviolent protest, but was a creative way of expressing one view on atimely issue.
Your actions effectively sent out a message to thoseyou’ve tried to convince to not be apathetic: “keepquiet, unless we approve what you say, and how and when you can sayit.”
Furthermore, history has shown that such an organized debatewould suffer from poor attendance. The 45–minute bake salefueled more political discourse at SMU than 2 hours of an organizeddebate, or even years of begging students to “get involvedand speak your mind.”
To The Young Conservatives: “Way to go!” Regardlessof my personal beliefs, I am grateful to you for being strongenough to stand up for what you believe; for encouraging fellowstudents to actively discuss real issues; and for showing thenation that SMU students aren’t apathetic – we have beliefsand are courageous enough to voice them.
And finally, to those who were offended : The right to freespeech is not as valuable when we all agree. Its value comes fromissues on which we disagree. The Young Conservatives voiced theiropinion. If you don’t like it quit complaining about it andget out there and take a stand!
I think Senator Nina Morris gave you the best advice possible:”Wake up!”
Natasha Nassar
Third-year law student
