| Summary: | THE CONCORDIAN • February 13, 1987 D PAGE 9 OPINION Greenpeace's ethics questioned Guest Column by Peer Svenkerud Greenpeace representative Peter Dykstra apparently found it a little improper that someone attempted to criticize Greenpeace. "Can't you. see all the good things we're doing? I can't even afford to raise a kid!" We certainly know that Greenpeace is both struggling hard and that most of the things they're doing are good and absolutely necessary. However, even an appeal-ing, idealistic and non-profit organization is made up of human beings (Lutherans should know what that means), and should therefore be subject to constant critical in-vestigation. This is all the more im-portant if the organization is power-ful and influential (power corrupts). Greenpeace has grown to be such an organization, and should therefore expect questions and in-quiry into what it is doing. A Danish newspaper, Information, has done just such an inquiry, and the results are not that flattering for Greenpeace. The reporting has stir-red intense debate both in Denmark and in other European countries about the idealism of the organization. The newspaper focused mainly on Greenpeace's campaigns against seal and kangaroo hunting. These campaigns have had strong elements of sensationalism and emotionalism, which is understandable since their goal is to stir public opinion. But, according to Information, Greenpeace has crossed a certain moral border in this respect. This border is called truth. For some years, Greenpeace has been using a film about the sealing, showing among other things two hunters skinning baby seals alive. Certainly a terrible sight. However, hunters have never used this method of torture except once: in front of a camera and for a con-siderable payment. Greenpeace bought these film sequences from the photographers. Later the actors regretted their sin and told the story to a Canadian newspaper. Greenpeace continued to use the film in Europe. An almost identical story was brought by Information about a film picturing kangaroos be-ing slaughtered in Australia. How can an organization like Greenpeace do such things? How can this fit with all the obviously praiseworthy things that are being done? Information thought the answer was simple and logical: like any other organization, Greenpeace is dependent on income to pay for bureaucracy, the ships, the cam-paigns and the research. Last year the budget was over $10 million, of which almost everything came from private donations. It is money in cute baby seals and kangaroos, whether they are shown being tor-tured to death or staring helplessly at you from advertisements. In 1985, after the victory was won in the bat-tle for protection of the harp seal, Greenpeace continued their cam-paign in Europe. Millions of letters were sent to households in Den-mark, West Germany, France, etc. The letters urged people to give money to the struggle. The response was enormous. In this way, says In-formation, Greenpeace got their in-come, even after the struggle was won. The baby seals paid off. Another side of the story: if the harp seal was out of danger, others were not, such as some eskimo com-munities in Greenland and Canada. Nobody wanted to buy their seal products anymore. Whole com-munities are breaking down as a result. In 1985 an eskimo chief in Greenland spoke to a Greenpeace delegation, which was there to apologize. "Everybody can see that the fjords around here are full of seal," he said. "The only species that is en-dangered here is us, the humans." In our country, Norway, we have a parallel situation in the whaling communities. This year we have also had a regular seal invasion along our coast. Thousands of seal have destroyed fishing nets for millions of dollars and eaten up lots of fish. This is threatening the economy for thousands of fishing communities. Dykstra accused us of talking "crap." Why, then, has Greenpeace recently changed its mind about seal hunting in Scandanavia? They are now allowing a limited hunt (we are grateful). As Norwegians we are also deep-ly hurt when the U.S. can threaten Norway with a boycott of fishing pro-ducts unless we do not stop the whaling. Is Norway worse than South Africa? Equal to Libya? Every year American tuna fishermen kill thousands of dolphins in their nets. How about boycotting your own tuna industry, Mr. Reagan? We noted that some people reacted when Dykstra said that he was also against deer hunting. See what proximity means to us humans? Remember though, that while sealing and whaling are (were) ways to make a living, deer hunting is a leisure sport. Please understand that sealing and whaling are hard to give up, especially when it is not considered necessary. Now is the time for heart health NOTES CAR FROM es by Leah Knotek and Dave Ellefson Since this is the week that we think about hearts, it is also a good time to think about your heart's health. Cardiovascular diseases, primari-ly heart attacks and strokes, are the number one killers of adults bet-ween the ages of 24 and 65. Cardiovascular disease has become so widespread in this coun-try that the public has come to ac-cept heart attacks and strokes as an inevitable part of growing older. It does not have to be that way. The United States, as compared to other countries, has a much higher rate of heart attacks and strokes. The American lifestyle has led to this high rate. It is true that an individual's chance of heart attack or stroke is determined in part by heredity, but America's high rate of heart disease is due largely to the influences of our culture and environment. By mak-ing several positive changes in our lifestyle, we can prevent heart at-tacks and strokes. The following suggestions should help you on your way to a healthier heart: 1. Eat right. Eat foods with less cholesterol, which will keep blood pressure down. Eat more fresh fruits and vegetables, beans and foods made with whole grain and cereals. Staples in your diet should include lean meat, fish and poultry and lowfat dairy products, including skim or low fat milk, low fat yogurt and low fat cheese. Try to cut down on foods that are high in saturated fats, calories and cholesterol. Limit use of salt and sodium. 2. Watch your weight. Lose weight if you need to and then main-tain your ideal weight. 3. Exercise regularly. The best exercise for the heart should last at least 30 minutes, three times a week. The large muscles in the arms and legs should be maintained at a steady rhythmic movement. Such activities include cycling, swimming, brisk walking and dancing. 4. Don't smoke. Twenty-five per-cent of all cardiovascular diseases can be attributed to cigarette smok-ing. Tobacco smoke is a "chemical soup" full of poisonous substances — more than 4000 in all — that can lead to serious health problems, in-cluding damage to heart and blood vessels. The good news is that your body starts to repair itself the day you quit smoking. The nicotine and carbon monoxide in the bloodstream will begin to clear out after a single day away from cigarettes. 5. Have your blood pressure checked regularly. Have it checked as part of your yearly physical ex-amination, even if you do not feel sick. In most cases, hypertension is painless and produces no symptoms. If a sign does crop up, it may be bothersome headaches now and then, characteristically in the back of the head and upper part of the neck. It is not helpful to rely solely on symptoms or to try and diagnose and treat them yourself. To be safe, have your pressure checked regularly. Tacky lines refuse to die through decades The Road Not Taken by Paul Finlayson Guys and girls are truly different — even beyond their physical ar-rangements. Society generates dif-ferent roles. It is not a scam. For in-stance, the guys approach the girls first.usually. Back in the "Brady Bunch" era, ft was different Wear a bow tic.knock on the door.meet the parents.,give the girl a handful of sweaty , daisies and/or chocolates.talk about weather with parents for half an hour while the girl gets dressed.then tell the girl she looks "swell" as she pauses at the top of the stairs. In the later 70's you were born to .boogie, tt was the disco thing — gold chains and wide lapels. Come up next to the woman who was drink-ing by herself at the bar.say something generic about the weather (boy, that slush is bad), and "What's your sign?" (one out of twelve chances to match),.order a drink from a bartender who is always known by name.ask her to dance by saying something like, "Let's disco, baby, you n' me'\.ask'her, after five minutes o£ conversation, "Your place or mine?" Today, pick-up lines and rituals seem to have lost popularity. I thought so, at least, until recently, when I overheard a guy at a party. "You wanna make a system baby. .you n' me?" was what he said. Hey, let's all try that one. I'm not sure, but I thought guys had stop-ped reading "How to Pick up Girls." This guy probably had a copy waiting in the bathroom with bookmarks for quick reference. Girls don't tend so much towards the tacky lines. Further differences: girls talk high, loan out clothes and go to the bathroom in groups, Guys go it alone. Imagine rf some guy would say, "Hey guys, let's hit the washroom!" No way. Guys have their macho image. It's cool to roll down a car window at stop lights and shout "Party!" or €fRock n1 Rolll" It's also macho to cruise the street in packs looking for people to beat up. If you're walking alone at night and some car pulls up and someone screams out something obscene — you'd better be macho. Find a telephone booth and see if you can bang your head on the glass until you bleed. Then go to the car and say, Tm not gay. I break things/' At bars, guys and girls are still quite different Girls like to order colored drinks with lots of fruit juice and little paper umbrellas. Guys like to get a beer with lots of head- Girls can dance together. Guys'? can't. The only rule for girls is that they don't slam. Girls like candlelight, roses and wines with names they can't pro-nounce. Girls blush and say they don't know how. Sure. Ghls cough differently. When they cough, ifs delicate — "chirp, chirp." When guys cough, they clean out •See page 19, column 1 Lady Cobbers lacking solid fan support Guest Column by Tim Harlow Last Saturday night Concordia's men's basketball team played host to league-leading St. John's. There was nothing atypical about the even-ing; everything was normal. The pep band played, and, as usual, a large crowd of faithful fans gathered in Memorial Auditorium to cheer for a team buried in the middle of con-ference standings. But seriously, it was great! With Concordia trailing by a few points late in the game, the crowd came to life. "DEFENSE!" clap clap. "DEFENSE!" clap clap. The en-thusiasm spread around the gym and even some of the Cobber reserves joined the chant "DEFENSE!" clap clap. It was loud. It was exciting! Yes, the advantages of the home crowd — when there is one. Unlike the Concordia men's team that has received tremendous fan support all season, the Concordia women's team has been playing in front of virtually no one. It must be disheartening, for a team that lost only its third conference game in two years last weekend, to play game after game, week after week, look-ing at those ugly tin bleachers and awful-looking permanent chairs. These women are super athletes! And they know how to play basket-ball the way it is supposed to be played — with enthusiasm. Their record speaks for itself. FACT: The Lady Cobbers are 16-1 in conference play and hold first place. FACT: The Lady Cobbers have not lost a home game in over two seasons. FACT: Concordia has qualified for the national tournament for six con-secutive seasons, and will again this year. Over the years, Concordia ha* built up one of the best all-time records in all of college women's basketball — including Division I, II and III. So what is the problem? Have we become habituated, expec-ting that every time the women's basketball team takes to the court they are going to win? That doesn't seem logical, in fact it is preposterous! If winning is the best •See page 18, column 1,:P
|
|---|