Ranney is a second-year sociology and women’s studies
student.
By Trisha Ranney
I was reading Brighid Dwyer’s submission (“USAC
president shows bias in event promotion,” Viewpoint, Feb.
22), and there’s one word for my reaction to Elizabeth
Houston — disappointment.
To put it bluntly, Houston has failed — failed miserably. She
has failed to reach out to the minority communities, who she knew
before coming into office were the proponents of the Praxis slate.
I think a lot of people were waiting to watch her stumble and fall,
and she has done just that. She could have reached out to this
community and proved them wrong in their feelings that she would do
nothing to help. But instead she has turned her head as well as her
back to them and alienated a part of UCLA’s community.
I found her contradictory statements to be self-serving, at
best. In the article “Student
leaders strive to meet goals for year,” (News, Feb. 14),
Houston says, “My personal beliefs, whether they are
political or religious, should not get in the way of my job.”
Well, it’s mighty big of her to state that, but then she
backpedals later on in the article when she says, “the Bible
says that homosexuality is a sin, just like promiscuity, like
adultery, just like robbing someone,” and goes on to say,
“(I) was raised to believe morality belongs in
government.”
Perhaps Houston is mistaking the meaning of the word
“minority.” While she says that she has made efforts to
reach out to the minority community (which is obviously blatantly
untrue to those who have followed the daytime soap opera-like saga
of USAC), Houston is forgetting the gay population.
How dare she interpret the Bible and use it as a tool for
alienation? Houston should have at least granted TenPercent,
UCLA’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender newsmagazine,
an interview earlier this year. That again would have given her an
opportunity to show that she is not the narrow-minded lame duck
president that many believe her to be. Instead she has succeeded in
widening the chasm between herself and minority populations.
As far as morals in government are concerned, Houston once again
shows that she is intolerant and not capable of being the president
of a multiethnic, multiracial and diverse institution like UCLA.
Morals are a subjective term, and while her “morals”
may prevent her from being open-minded, my morals say that one
shouldn’t use the Bible to perpetuate hatred and use it as an
excuse to express repugnance toward a segment of the population. As
the president of USAC, her job is to reach out to all groups, not
just the ones she agrees with morally.
Also, as a Christian, I must raise an eyebrow toward Houston
pointing to the Bible as a reason for not making an effort to
bridge the gap between herself and the gay community. I always find
it disgusting when people use Christianity as an excuse to hate
people. It’s sad that people like Houston can use a religion
named for a man who stood for tolerance, love and acceptance and
twist his words to fit their own agenda. Your father is a pastor,
Miss Houston. Surely you know who Christ is and the fact that he
taught love not hate.
Houston’s stance on the gay population alone is reason
enough for why I will not support her during this administration.
In fact, I’m somewhat disappointed there hasn’t been
more of an outcry against her public condemnation of the gay
community. If she had said her religious beliefs provided her with
the foundation upon which she could unequivocally state she
didn’t think being Chinese or African American or Chicano was
morally acceptable, there would have been cries to have her tossed
out of office immediately. Does the fact that it’s
“only gay people” make it right?
I am not a member of the gay community at UCLA, but as a
biracial female I know exactly what it’s like to be
underrepresented and looked upon with scorn. The fact of the matter
is that if Houston was just one of the regular 33,000 students here
at UCLA, she would have no forum in which to publicly vent her
condemnation of the gay community. But as USAC president, it is
Houston’s duty to serve all undergraduates. No matter how
offensive she finds homosexuality to be, it is her job to listen to
the voices of all students.
I ask President Houston now to amend her ways and make an effort
to represent all of the undergraduates here at UCLA. There is still
time left in the year to turn her presidency around. If she does
change her ways, it will make for a more harmonious working
environment for herself, as well as a less divisive campus climate
for the students.
If she decides that she will not change, then my year-end
analysis of her will be the same as the analysis I am making now:
Elizabeth Houston has failed.