|
I'm against any knee-jerk legislative action in response to a free and voluntary choice made by a person. Binge drinking may or may not be a problem on colleges, depending on how you doctor your statistics and define your subjective standpoints - however, I don't understand what 'stand' the college can take in this way, about this problem.
I think hoosier's drawing a line from pt A to pt B, thinking that one possible course of action is to eliminate the greek system, as one way to bring student drinking "under control" - this is NOT an unreasonable conclusion to draw from such statements, if you look at past movements of this sort.
I find it patently ridiculous that any college should be held responsible for my actions outside of the educational environment, unless specifically condoned or pushed by the university. In few (if any) other situations can a voluntary action (drinking, to excess) lead to the university owing millions of dollars to my family.
I can see fraternal liability, I can see personal liability, etc. Until a link from university policy to me picking up a bottle can be drawn, then I'll consider this logic to be purely a post hoc fallacy, and take Lieberman's position to be grandstanding.
Essentially this is identical to his decrying of the entertainment industry - pointless grandstanding, putting his face in the media, and attempting to rally popular support around a (weak) "new cause."
Quotes from distraught parents, such as "No one sends a child to college to DIE!!!", have no place in reporting - it's an appeal to pity, another logical fallacy, and is implicitly biased.
Combatting excessive student drinking should be placed on the same level as combatting student smoking - both are decisions that can have decidedly negative effects. One is just more sensational in newsprint.
|