Nov 152005
 
Authors:

Tyler Wittman begins to say some intelligent things about why one extreme denomination is way out of line with even the Bible, and he calls us to reserve judgment until next week.

But one notable statement stands. How can one base their concept of truth on a book? I understand how one can believe in a God, even an omniscient and omnipotent God, but we are talking about a book!

Tyler, you probably believe we are all sinners. I hope in your conclusion you indicate how you are essentially no better than the people you condemn, and condemnation of others is really no different than hypocrisy. From what the Pharisees did to Jesus, we see that hypocrisy really is a selfish attack on love based on deep ignorance.

It boggles my mind that a book that sort of survived the middle ages, no doubt due to the same political alliances Jesus condemned, can become a foundation for all truth. Don't get me wrong – the Jesus we depict in the Bible is a truly inspiring figure who represents good in tumultuous times. The real message is to do what one feels is right, no matter what the consequences.

Finally, a warning: unholy alliances, a Faustian bargain. Think how this drives people away from the message of love. A message from deep inside, that we know is true, only transferred from one person to another and will be attacked by ignorance. A message that not only matters but is the only thing that matters in the end.

Mike O'Brien

graduate student

biomedical engineering

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Nov 152005
 
Authors:

Kudos to Tyler Wittman on his brilliant and well-versed, double-spoken editorial in Tuesday's Collegian. Tyler may want to start praying for my soul as it is very likely I will commit some kind of sin as I describe his appraisal of kind, charitable, hardworking, loving individuals who happen to be (GASP!) gay, lesbian or transgendered.

First, Tyler's disingenuous and co-opted use of a "friend," to illustrate what point I don't exactly know, is offensive and myopic almost beyond comprehension. I am not opposed to belief in religion, but I am opposed to a person pushing their "beliefs" onto me as if it were the only way to see that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. What I find offensive and ironic is that persons who subscribe to a religion whose inception came from a persecuted and humble agent (AKA Jesus) will so willingly become the persecutors themselves.

Second, at what point is Tyler's judgment of GLBT persons different than our beloved Westboro Baptist cretins? Actually, I would posit that the Westboro folks are very efficient at communicating ("God Hates Fags"); what takes the Southern Baptist Convention almost 9,000 words contained in their Web site on what homosexuality is, and how to "deal" with it. Either way there's a judgment based on a "truth" that invariably affects good, honest, loving people, whom desire/deserve equal rights. I can think of a pretty efficient way to characterize that phenomenon – it's called bigotry.

I look forward to Tyler's editorial next week in an attempt to bolster his position and gain favor amongst his readers, though I am doubtful that either act of grace will occur. I think his rhetoric fits into a nice blend of myopic-neo-conservative-religious-americana that further divides and distracts the country from issues that are truly of concern (i.e. Iraq, Supreme Court nomination, etc.).

Jonas Feinstein

graduate student

forestry

 Posted by at 5:00 pm