|
Looking down
I don't think I'm looking down at Duke -- I think these alums are. I think the fraternity men at Duke deserve a lot more credit than they're getting here. I don't think they're all helpless alcoholics who are socially paralyzed when sober. I don't think they're too stupid to understand the consequences of breaking rules. Based on those I've met at law school, I think they're extremely bright and capable young men.
As it happens, I don't agree with the drinking age in this country. I think it's absurd, and I think it's incompatible with our other expectations of 18-to-21-year-olds (that they vote, serve in the military, etc.). I also don't agree with the legal liability structure which makes someone other than the drinker financially responsible for a drinker's foolish acts.
But if the law is wrong, there are two ways to handle it. One is to vote and lobby the N.C. legislature until the law is changed. The other is to openly defy the law and swallow the punishment you have coming to you. The choice these alumni are making -- whining that the university ought to turn a blind eye to illegal activity which is going to get the UNIVERSITY sued (not just the fraternity) -- is not an alternative that I respect.
>Providing a bar on campus where groups can hold parties (and someone else can check ID's), is a good way to keep kids from driving off campus
I agree. And if Kappa Sigma had been checking ID's, there wouldn't have been a problem. The reason it was supposed to go dry was that a PLEDGE was hospitalized for alcohol poisoning. (I haven't heard of many over-21 pledges at Duke.) The alumni claim that the university just wants to get rid of fraternities. That may be true (I have no idea), but there's no evidence of it here. The Kappa Sigmas broke the law and then repeatedly defied the terms of their probation. If the Pitchforks a cappella group did the same, they'd be up a creek, too.
Ivy
|
Threaded Mode