OCR Text |
Show THE PARSON Vol. 9 Editor-in-Chi- Salt Lalte City, Utafi, March 15, 1963 Editor Business Manager Newt Editor .. Feature Editor ... Managing Sports Editor ... . Political Science Commentator 1 Letters To The Editor No. 10 Ken Denne ef Managerial Staff Photographers March 15,'1963. The PARSON Page 2 Kathy Schwerti ..Dick Homrighoute fenny Goldsworthy .Judy Durfee Allan Burkhalter Jim Leap Sue Loomer . Stan Clark, Bill Cook, Ray Leonard Contributors: Larry Reynolds, James A. Smith, Jr., Louis Campbell, Ed Jones, Fred Pinkerton, Judy Chamberlin. February Editor, .The Parsoh Westminster College Salt Lake City Dear Editor: 5, Utah As I hear of recent events on Westminsters campus I am reminded of a Sioux InGreat Spirit, dian prayer: to judge anme never help other until I have walked two weeks in his moccasins. There seems to be in most . Student Judicary Forthcoming The Westminster Student Government has a Student Judiciary that is on its last lap before being presented to the studentbody for its approval It will be the purpose of this editorial to inform you as to specific type of student court that is being planned for Westminster, and it is hoped that you as members of the studentbody will better understand the reasons why faculty members are included in the proposal. Student Faculty Judiciary, this is the title given to a judiciary system as planned by the SGAC. A joint body of this nature usually indicates broad jurisdiction and final powers subject to appeal only to the Dean or to the President. The reasons for this are fairly obvious. First, joint bodies of this type have added strength because of the Faculty participation; it makes it representative of the entire campus and of the distinctive resources that both students and faculty have. Second, faculty participation consumes the time of valuable people; and it would be rather an expensive symbol to have three professors on a judiciary which had minor jurisdiction and no real business. The important distinction about a joint judiciary is that students and faculty do not sit as advisers to one another but as full members with equal rights and similar responsibilities. Before a joint judiciary of this nature can function, two essentials are needed. First, you must have a mutual confidence and adequate rapport among all of the elements on the judiciary. Second, promotion of student continuity is needed to insure that the proceedings will continue to be active, because little time will be needed in orienting new student members to their functions and roles on the judiciary. If you have any questions concerning the proposed Student Judiciary contact any one of the following three people for information: John King, Fred Pinkerton, or Ken Denne. It is for your own welfare that you take an active interest in this forthcoming Student Judiciary pro- posal. KEN DENNE, Editor of us a drive to lambast those in authority. We question their wisdom and judgment because we feel we have gained sufficient knowledge of their responsibility. The Sioux Indians have a point concerning this. When we have walked two weeks in anothers moccasins, then we can intelligently judge one in authority. In two weeks time we can understand his point of view, his problems, and his attitudes. Individuals in an academic atmosphere can become so obsessed with judging others that they lose sight of why they are in an educational environment. This same obses- sion can cause a backfire when dynamic and dedicated leaders leave the college. Many people do not desire to be a part of an educational drama that has its setting on a battlefield. say put down the weapon of inefficient, judging, and take up the tools to build a more influential Westminster College in the Rocky Mountain region! I Sincerely yours, James Carleson Hall Westminster College 25, 1963 A. Smith, Jr. Minister March 2, 1963 Letter to the Editor The Parson Westminster College Salt Lake City 5, Utah I am regretful that under another the circumstances comment concerning the walkout must be made. But it seems that the Editor of the Parson has seen it fit to, in effect, divide the campus once again along its traditional lines of difference. It is strange that the man, who up until now was known as a radical or extremist, now makes such a statement. In an effort to clarify my objections, I have chosen to take points made in Mr. Dennes editorial (I have assumed that it is his editorial from his comments the day of the walk-ou- t since he did not sign the editorial) and same some short comments. Was the walk-out- , indeed, a last resort (what ever that means)? I can think of worse things to do, for example a across Thirteenth East. Since Mr. Denne graciously conceded that a problem exists, I will not attempt to justify the cause. As I see it there are two phases to responsible student action concerning these problems. First ,we need an ear (as one student put it the doors were open but the minds seemed to be closed) but it was almost impossible to get an idea across (perhaps for good reasons due to past radical action on the part of some seemed students). A walk-ou- t to be the answer. Second, constructive suggestions had to be made. This has taken place, and it must continue to take place. I did not attend the dorm which in part meetings and it planned the walk-ousit-dow- n t, The critics be damned! was to my surprise that the action was so well planned; furthermore, it is the opinion of many that there could not have been a better time for a walk-out- . It seems that the real division concerning this issue was not along lines but class lines. Juniors and Seniors were initially most active in planning which if it yieldthe walk-out- , ed good results would most affect the underclassmen and little for the upperclassmen. With Mr. Denne waving the conservative banner, it. is funny that he gave any weight to a rumor concerning Dr. Duddys resignation. I saw reason to believe that Dr. Duddy might resign but what has that got to do with our problems? Mr. Denne seems to be saying that when Dr. Duddy town-dor- m soon-to-depa- rt goes our problems will go with him. I doubt that this is true. Never has anything been so vague than who were the true leaders. It is true some political science majors spoke durbut for a ing the walk-outime long many people outside the political science det, partment have been actively working on the problem, a problem that traditional radicalism could not solvel West-minstersi- c Who is going to criticize the The administration did not say anything publicly and Dr. Duddy admitted an walk-out- ? important point that it was no longer a loud few who had complaints. Mr. Denne said that he thought . . . before an action of this nature wks carried out that all elements that might effect the success of the operation would be carefully checked out. We are beginning to see signs that was a indicate the walk-ou- t success. Let us keep in mind a comment made by President Pink- erton in the same newspaper that the editorial appeared. Now that it (the dissension) expressed itself so vividiy by the walk-out- , perhaps the magnitude, depth and seriousness of the problem Wall be recognized and handled in an atmosphere of desire by all parties to make Westmirster College the institution we want to see. I hope Mr. Denne keeps this in mind while the whole student body presents a united front. Fun her comments such as made in the editorial could hurt our efforts to accomplish the goals so well placed by our student body president. were Additional comments made by the editor but they were so vague and general that it is difficult to pin down a point to consider. Mr. Denne, I am sorry you were left out of the final planning feel-stages; I know how you was left out, too. Larry J. Reynolds I Need Letters |