Time to Talk

Last month the Faculty of Arts and Sciences decided not to discuss student deferments. Opponents of a Faculty discussion described the issue as too "abstract," and a resolution to declare 2-S "unjust" was tabled before debate could begin.

Now, because one of the sponsors of the December resolution has refused to accept defeat, the Faculty will have another chance to tackle the issue. It should -- for the simple reason that the present 2-S deferment procedure is imbedded in the educational process at Harvard.

There are two reasonable positions the Faculty could take. They could vote that 2-S is necessary, and that Harvard--as an institution affected by 2-S--should support it. They could also decide it is unjust, that it interferes with academic matters such as grading, and that Harvard should oppose it.

Apparently unwilling to adopt either of these stands, the Faculty opted at its last meeting to dodge the issue. But the explanation offered by the proponents of the tabling motion fails to stand up under scrutiny.

To students who may be drafted--and possibly sent to Vietnam--because of their term average, 2-S is hardly an "abstract" issue. To Faculty members whose decisions could determine a student's draft status, the issue should seem equally down-to-earth.