Re: An idea for an amendment
Seth David Schoen (schoen@uclink4.Berkeley.EDU)
3 Feb 1998 08:17:11 GMT
Kevin Dempsey Peterson writes:
>>As libertarians, we deplore coersion and discrimination. We also deplore
>
>I would suggest "although we deplore coersion and discrimination, we
>also..." to make it more clear that all we oppose is the government
>forcing such things. As worded, someone who doesn't read it carefully
>enough could misinterprett it to mean that we support hazing. Keeping
>it in a single sentence make it harder to quote out of context also.
Yes, that's a better phrasing. (I like the "as libertarians", which the LP
has used, so "Although we, as libertarians, deplore coersion and
discrimination, we also...".)
>The entire clause could probably be rewritten to not mention any state
>law, though that's more questionable in terms of complience with SAS and
>ASUC policies (since we will be seeking funding).
I think we could try it. We need to find the exact prohibitions in CA
state law and then incorporate them verbatim (thus guaranteeing in practice
that "we will not haze in accordance with California state law"), without
actually mentioning that it is state law.
That might turn the clause in our Constitution into a much better protest
item.
--
Seth David Schoen L&S '01 (undeclared) / schoen@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Magna dis immortalibus habenda est atque huic ipsi Iovi Statori, antiquissimo
custodi huius urbis, gratia, quod hanc tam taetram, tam horribilem tamque
infestam rei publicae pestem totiens iam effugimus. -- Cicero, in Catilinam I