OCR Text |
Show Pag The Daily Utah Chronic!), Tuesday. Six "vital interests," assuming the right to govern some and to judge and punish others. They proclaim and attempt to carry out plans for the economic and political "destabilization" of governments and nations which disagree with them. All of this reflects the irresponsible, adventuristic approach to the serious problems affecting the fate of mankind. Led by the United States, the militaristic course and aggressive policy of the NATO bloc compels the Soviet Union to take measures to maintain a necessary level of its defense capabilities. This is crucial. At the same time, the Soviet Union envisions its task in the future not in the infinite accumulation of a stockpile of arms, but in attaining reasonable agreements with its counterpart for the mutual reduction of military arms. This policy of our country has not changed. Consequently, the Soviet Union actively supports the liquidation of the threat of war, the cessation of the arms race and the preservation and strengthening of detente. As L.I. Brezhnev stated in his speech of March 1 6 to the XVII Trade Union Congress: "Our party and the Soviet government conscientiously are fulfilling the dictate of our people to do everything in order to justify the hopes of our country's working class and of all mankind for a lasting peace." Comrade Brezhnev's speech has attracted worldwide attention and is of enormous international significance. It puts forth proposals which are first and foremost directed at solving the problem of nuclear arms reduction in Europe the key question in preventing the growing threat of world nuclear war. In addition to its previous proposal, which took the first step toward facilitating a just agreement for a major bilateral reduction of nuclear capabilities in Europe, the Soviet leadership has adopted a resolution to introduce a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of medium-rang- e nuclear arms in the European part of the USSR. Our country has frozen the numeric and qualitative ratio of such weapons already deployed here. This moratorium will remain in effect until an agreement is reached "A Lasting Peace for the Nations of the World" The Soviet Union holds firm to a course of lasting peace, and will cooperate with those nations of different social systems which are founded on a strict respect for into independence and truth, and for of which nations affairs another internal the country will join their efforts in strengthening universal peace and mutual trust. Such a course answers the letter and spirit of the decrees of the Conference on European Security and Cooperation as well as other international agreements reached in the past decade. The forces of imperialism and reaction would want to throw out the legal and ethical norms of international relations which have been formed over the centuries, and to nullify their independence and sovereignty. They attempt to remake the political map of the world, declaring wide regions of the globe as areas of their non-interventi- on Q 1. 1982 PRAVDA'S WORLD 1! Editor's note: Kavin McKenna, a University professor of languages, uses "Pravda," the official newspaper of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, as a teaching tool in his classes. Below is an editorial from "Pravda" that was translated by some of McKenna's students. "Pravda" editorials, it should be noted, do not represent the biases of "Pravda 's" editors nor the opinion of some journalist or private citizen as one would expect to find in the editorials and columns of American newspaper op-e- d pages. Rather, "Pravda" editorials, which are always run on the left side of the front page, are written by party officials (they are sometimes signed) and represent the official views of the Communist Party Central Committee. The following editorial on disarmament was run in a March edition of "Pravda." According to Professor Slava Lubomudrov of the Political Science Department, this editorial is fairly representative of what the Soviet Union leadership has been saying concerning peace talks and disarmament during the Reagan administration. Jure with the United States on the reduction of medium-rang- e or nuclear missiles to be deployed in Europe U.S. the the leaders, when disregarding until that time safety of mankind, move on to actual preparation for the deployment of the Pershing-- 2 and cruise missiles in Europe. Demonstrating its commitment to peace, the Soviet Union intends this year, in the absence of new international conflicts, to take the lead in reducing a specific missiles. At the same time it number of medium-rang- e issues a serious warning: If NATO's nuclear arms resolution were nonetheless to be enacted, contrary to the world's wishes for peace, it would create a real additional threat to the Soviet Union to take retaliatory measures, placing the United States and its territory in an analogous position. This is a point which should not be forgotten. The question between the USSR and the United States on limiting and reducing strategic nuclear arms is of great importance for diminishing the threat of a worldwide nuclear conflagration. The United States has refused to enact the SALT II treaty signed in 1979. Meanwhile the urgency of the question increases. Afterall. the realization of the American plans for basing new missiles in Europe could overturn the present ... balance of strategic capabilities which has been reached by both sides. The consequences of this reversal are difficult to predict. Furthermore, if the development of new weapons of mass annihilation is not halted at the negotiation table, it could affect the limitations, reductions and control agreements which, at present, are still possible. The Soviet Union calls upon the United States to join in the SALT negotiations in the immediate future. And until the time of their renewal, the USSR suggests that both sides take upon themselves a mutual obligation not to open new channels in the arms race and not to deploy e d sea and missiles. Inasmuch as the world situation requires maximum continued on page seven land-base- long-rang- GUEST COLUMN I'LL OUST WAIT Legislature's moral guidance TO BAN THE III by Steven L. Hill It's Friday evening. You've just had three midterms in as many classes. You throw your books aside when you get home, deciding this weekend isforfun. You knowthereisa good movie on HBO, so you sit down to watch it. At the prescribed timethe movie is to begin, you see nothing but static. In a fir of rage, you call Community TV of Utah and ask just what is going on. They calmly explain that the movie that was to be shown will not be shown because of movie that was to be shown will not be shows because the new "Child Protection Act" has just gone into effect. You will no longer be able to see movies. If Rep. Lloyd Selleneit has his way, this will be happening to all who subscribe to cable TV next year. He intends (for the third time) to present a bill that will prevent you from movies on cable TV because they may be seeing obscene and because maybe 10 percent of Utah's parents are not regulating what their children see on TV. Once again, the Utah Legislature is attempting to intervene in you private life and tell you what you can and can't do. fmr THMIMi .VJL ii MOVE.. ed While many are amazed at this, one shouldn't be. Something like this should be expected of Selleneit. In the 1981 General Session of the Legislature, Selleneit introduced a resolution that would call for a constitutional convention. At this convention, he wanted a constitutional amendment passed that would allow 34 of the states to overturn an unpopular Supreme Court decision. In opposing this resolution, Rep. Beverly White responded adequately when she asked if his resolution wasn't, in reality, "an early April Fool's joke." Unfortunately, it was not. The House passed the resolution, sending it to the Senate. The Senate showed good sense (as hard as this is to believe, the Senate can, on occasion) by not even considering the resolution. Another incident occurred during a labor protest over the passing of House Bill 1 (doing away with the prevailing wage law). happened to overhear Selleneit talking to a I secretary, telling her how disgusting he felt the demonstration was, and that it just "furthers my resolve to vote to override the veto, if the governor does veto the bill." True to his word, he did. It is not surprising, then, that Selleneit wantsto move into our homes and tell us what we can and can't watch on our televisions. He has shown he doesn't comprehend the Chronicle" ii an independent student newspaper published daily during fall, winter and spring quarters, excluding test weeks and quarter breaks, by the The "Daily Utah University Publications Council. Editorials reflect the opinions of the editorial board, and not necessarily the opinions of the student body or the administration. Subscriptions: 120 a yeer. $6 an academic quarter. All subscriptions must be prepaid. Forward all subscription correspondence, including chenge of address, to: Businesa Manager, Daily Utah Chronicle. 240 Union, University of Utah. Salt Lake City. Utah 841 12. Editorial Board: Steve Francis, Lincoln Hobbs. Patrick Klingeman, Joan O'Brien, Jean Armani Orme. Bill Raines Editor-in-Chie- checks and balances of our system of government by attempting to prevent a Supreme Court decision from standing because of its unpopularity. He finds it disgusting when people use their First Amendment right to assemble and protest peacefully. It should not be surprising that he would ignore the people's right to watch whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes. The Supreme Court issued an opinion (now called the Stanley standard) that gave a citizen the right to view what he wants in the privacy of his own home. Selleneit wants to invalidate this interpretation of the Constitution. He also ignores the principle of prior restraint: judging something obscene before it has been ruled as such by the courts. find this attempt to regulate the moral lives of the citizens interesting in another light (looking at the Legislature as a whole). In the 1 981 General Session, was an intern for the chairman of the Business and Consumer Concern Committee for the House. Almost every time the committee met, you could count on someone objecting to a bill that was being proposed because, in some way, it interfered with the free enterprise system. "Get the government off the back of business" was the rallying cry (both in committee and on the floor of the House). Yet, this I I Patrick Klingaman Uncoln Hobbs Steve Francis Robert McOmber f Associate Editor Managing Editor Business Manager Copy Editor News Editor Asst. Newt Editor Editoriel Editor Entertainment Editor Sports Editor Photography Editors Asst Copy Editors Raines Josn O'Brien Kim Osborn .Jean Arment Orme Anne Arway Asst. Sports Editor Senior Reporters logic is not carried through and applied to morality issues. the Utah Legislature, it is absolutely unacceptable for government to interfere with business, but acceptable to regulate what watch on cable TV. Too bad our legislators are not consistent. As a parent, object to this attempt to regulate my life. My wife and have decided what we will and won't let our children watch on TV. In fact, all the families that we know have decided what their children can and can't watch on television, without the help of Selleneit. And, even more surprising, our choices are working. Our children are not turning out wild, do not fight, etc. Sofar, we have been very pleased with our results. All this without the moral guidance of the Utah Legislature. In the upcoming election year, we need to pay attention to what the candidates for the Legislature stand for. We need to challenge the incumbent legislators and find out where they stand on the issues. It is imperative that, once and for all, we finally elect people who are interested in making Utah a better place to live, not in making it a mirror of a few people's values. Steven L Hill is a student at the University majoring in biology with a journalism minor. To I I I Tony Tsakakis John . Kim Osborn Brian Wilkinson . Paul Bearce Karen Juell Kirk MiMscn Matt Adelman senior Photographers Photographer logos Backihop Foreman Backshop Assistants Ad Representatives Diane Sewell Mike Prater Deve Allred Merk Ssal Reporters Bill Joe Baird John Jelte Ned Mike johnson Jeen Nolle . . . . . . . Traci O'Very Ron Varela Traci OVery Accountant Typesetters Office Staff Nadina Dial Ric Hallock Julia Jenkins Sheila Hamilton Scott Pitt Karin Stone Debbie Vaughn Lisha Youngberg Beth Budd . . Sandra Garcia Judy Alexander Peg McEntee Sua Jennings . Christie Metcalf Erik Olcese . . |