Louisiana’s version of spring must be in the air. How else can one explain the sheer dizziness of two recent resolutions passed by the Student Government Senate? One condemned Iran’s attempts to develop nuclear weapons and the other opposed an attempt to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Like many of you, including a writer of one of our letters today, I was rather surprised by these resolutions. Not because I support Iran’s acquisition of nuclear arms or am against gay marriage, but because of the sheer asininity of University students embracing causes they have no remote influence over in any form or fashion.
I sincerely doubt Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei will shudder in their sleep knowing a third-tier university’s Senate in the homeland of “The Great Satan” gives a flying squirrel about their weapons program, let alone disapproves of it.
Perhaps the less said about the Iranian condemnation the better. I’m sure everyone in the Senate feels better that they have confronted evil and walked away victorious. Good job.
The issue of marriage is, at least, one of local importance. If someone wants to marry a man, woman or a multitude of either (the famous “polyhomolygomy” cited by the Daily Show’s “America: the Book” comes to mind) isn’t my business, nor do I believe marriage should be the interest of the state. Wasn’t, after all, traditional marriage originally polygamous? But I digress.
Voters in Louisiana saw fit to ban any type of same-sex union in 2004 – hardly the Dark Ages. Whatever the wisdom of this decision, and given that many of these same voters elected a crook like Edwin Edwards and an obvious winner like Kathleen Blanco it is doubtful, I think the issue is settled for now. A bunch of college kids aren’t going to change anything; and in this case, I wouldn’t be surprised if the student senators voted their conscience on the issue rather than that of their constituents.
The president of the College Republicans got it right when he said “I feel like this is wasting [the Senate’s] time by trying to pass something that doesn’t have an effect.”
He’s right, though naturally the Senate’s unanimous vote on Iran failed to follow this logic.
I cannot offer the Senate much advice against looking ridiculous. After all, I based my last column on the premise that squirrels, led by Lord Skwelthor the albino squirrel (general studies sophomore), are attempting to overrun the school. Still, at the very least, the Senate might just be able to salvage whatever credibility it ever had – not much outside of their august meeting room and their circle of friends – by simply refusing to vote on things they cannot control. Maybe instead of lending their voices toward foreign policy or attempting to stand up against 80 percent of those who voted on a state ban, they could do what they’re elected for: make sure The Terms don’t play at Groovin’ on the Grounds or ineffectually try to stop the CCCC.
I understand that many of those in the Senate have future plans involving moving up the political food chain. I wish them luck in this. After all, when the old hands retire, die or become lobbyists and/or felons, it’s always nice to see another group of fresh-faced idealists standing up for what they believe in.
Still, for decency’s sake, wait until you get elected to a real office before you go about proposing and passing resolutions that will be received with laughter by nearly all those who read about them.
Do it for the children, and do it to fight the squirrels.
 
Ryan is a history senior. Contact him
at [email protected]