^ontinu
ed'itoriais^
Co-ed Dorms at MHC
- Finally
ligious SI
dividuals
Wunity n
of tensioi
ond all o
f'ostile ac
Thus,
Pro:
Co-ed dorms, as defined by a majority, means simply male and female housing
in the same building, or even on the same floor. To another majority it means letting
loose of the reins.
I remember my first impression of an open house at MHC: stereos thrashing out
territorial disputes, people of both genders running up and down the hall ’til late,
and general mayhem not conducive to scholarly endeavors. I noticed, though, that
as the open dorm became more commonplace, things quieted down quite a bit, and
wasn't so bad after all.
Co-ed living would probably make many people more careful of their conduct
for the sake of making a good impression. It would be nice to be able to go to a
friend's room and study without having to use the library or student union, especial
ly when these facilities are closed or too crowded. Finally, housing arrangments
of this kind would let students, many perhaps for the first time, get a taste of living
in a "real world” situation.
If someone is old enough to live away from home, and is able to demonstrate
this, why can’t he or she be expected to conduct himself as a responsible adult.
Eighteen year olds have the privileges of voting, buying alcoholic beverages, killing
people and/or dying for their country, and going to prison for any crimes com
mitted. Let’s let the example of the Dickson-Palmer Apartments and the Town-
houses be an indication that we students are responsible enough to live in the pre
sence of the opposite sex.
David Bowerman
I
15e
Dear Editors:
If Mr. Barbour’s reply to Mr. Knight’s
letter was intended as an exercise in
vituperous tongue scathing, he has
shown the extent of his talent. However,
as a formal rebuttal, it sorely lacks the
qualities which render a serious foren
sic suitable for public discussion and
debate.
A rebuttal seeks to logically expose the
falsity of a given argument. It is also a
vehicle for experessing a contrary
opinion. Neither of these objectives can
be realized, either honorably or well,
with remarks of petty slander.
Mr. Knight’s letter on the subject of
community is not insidious propaganda;
it is merely the expression of a personal
opinion. It is food for thought. If Mr.
Barbour deems it meager fare, he is
welcome to offer his own well-seasoned
comments. Instead, he has published
a letter of questionable taste.
Mr. Barbour labels Mr. Knight’s letter
"infectious”, and states that it is, ...
the apparent result of an infectious dis
order.” This is tantamount to labeling
(and libeling) a personal opinion as a
vile pestilence to be feared and avoided.
Deductively, The Hilltop functions as
the carrier of this dread pathogen. If
this is the case, I would like to know
what sort of innoculation program is
being devised to protect our commun
ity from such a dire threat to its moral
and spiritual well-being.
Furthermore, a sophistic argument
may sometimes undermine itself.
Through his use of the term "infectious”,
Mr. Barbour credits his opponent’s argu
ment with more influence than an opin
ion deserves. Webster’s New Collegiate
Dictionary defines “infectious ’ as,
“capable of being easily diffused or
spread: readily communicated.” Is
Mr. Knight’s case so devastatingly
agree? Voltaire must have believed this
Con
^6ed for re
•Vanity m(
necessity
^ends of
Mars Hill College, or any college for that matter, hasn’t the authority to deci'Pnse to ea
if its students should live in a co-ed dorm situation. That decision should I
and ultimately is, in the hands of the student body and the pocketbooks of thf
parents. If there is a general consensus by the students that co-ed dorms are bo
needed and desired at Mars Hill, the administration will decide to impleme
them, not because they will suffer a-sudden change of moral or ethical beliefs, C
because they will suffer a sudden change, from black to red, of ink color in tb
budget when the enrollment drops. This has been demonstrated throughout t^ear
country during the last fifteen years. When the students at any given mstituti
felt they were ready for a co-educational living environment and made such teihown in \
ings known, in no uncertain terms, the college administration either complied ,vas
the college folded financially. ‘'^'11 am si
As Mars Hill students have not as yet taken the initiative to demand a co|(j
housing system, it would seem evident, to me at least, that they are not emotiona.Qjnpg^^.^^
when he said, “I disagree with what you
say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it.”
Sincerely certain,
John Stribling
ready for the pressures and responsibilities that such a living environment '''’^'jharacter
place on them. Evidence of this assertion can be seen reflected in the animalishe vigj. 'r
behavior of students in the cafeteria, the childish immaturity displayed when^t^ojj^
powerful that not even the staunchest
personal beliefs constitute a defense
against it? Mr. Barbour creates a para
dox by simultaneously railing his op
ponent for his “lack of enlightenment”
and yet warning us that this is a man to
be taken seriously.
Mr. Barbour states that Mr. Knight,
“. . . affronts (sic) an issue that really is
not aii issue at all.” Any point that can
be contested is a potential issue. What
must be remembered is that an issue
needs to be well defined. This criterion
is essential to produce a meaningful
and intelligent debate. All great battles
have at least one thing in common:
They take place on the same battlefield.
I contend that Mr. Barbour does not
respond to Mr. Knight’s issue, but rather
uses it as a springboard (or camouflage,
if you will) for his own. If the purpose
was not to deal with Mr. Knight’s letter,
why was his name mentioned at all?
What end is served by making an attack
on someone presumed to be a lost soul?
I chasten to criticize without offering
an alternative. If Mr. Barbour’s issue is
faith, he is certainly entitled to submit a
letter which constructively expounds his
thoughts on the matter.
Finally, remember that the life of a
community is dependent upon the inter
action of its members. Sometimes this
interaction takes the form of dissent and
dialogue”. Our protestant tradition has
its roots in dissent against the universal
authority of the Pope. At one time it was
the heretic who preached justification
by faith alone. Thus, is it not important
to respect your neighbors right to dis-
are confronted with sex at a campus movie, the lack of respect for both man and thing qujte
ture when they carpet the ground with beer bottles and paper, and the lack ot ini
est in campus and community affairs. Surely such irresponsible individua s q adjust to
these, who can hardly cope in a situation where virtually all major decisions tally
made for them, cannot be expected to last more than a day in an environmccurg
where they shoulder some of the burdens themselves. And although there maymnday
a few who would willingly do such, until they are in a majority, there is no pomVere g
attempting a co-ed housing system. ;
Maybe someday, years hence, there will be a group of students at Mars ‘_Uring the
that will be mature, self-directed, responsible, and respectful for other peoHoa
Maybe someday these students will discard their archaic sexual hangups andjgeace_
cide that men and women were meant to live together. And maybe, just ^lyPpreciate t
all man will live in peace and harmony, and the world will . . . naaah, forget it. I realize t
Darryl Gosshn, ‘
Dear Editor: tid th^^ ^
The HILLTOP published in its last such hi
editions letters on community. ^“Crow'
munity is defined as “an interadi,erye
population of different kinds of i ‘
dividuals constituting a society or Unjoroy^^ •
sociation or simply au aggregatioflot jjn, ^ *
Dear Editors:
Our periodical community meetings
mirror the format of typical Baptist wor
ship services. During the “meetings”,
concerns of the college are preached.
They are decided upon by the Speaker
Selection Committee, which probably
meets on the third floor of Blackwell
Hall in the Dean’s Conference Room.
These are not the student’s issues, but
the administration’s attempt to tell us
what we ought to be thinking about!
Therefore, these are not meetings; they
are planned events to hand down speci
fic ideas to the lowly mass. They are, in
a sense, coercive propaganda.
After spending over three years at
this institution and several gruelling
hours of reading and reflection, it is my
judgement that “community meetings”
are occurring for two major reasons.
First, it is the last resort to bring a sense
of togetherness between the students
and staff at the college. But does this
mean we are falling apart at the seams?
Since the Wake Forest University dis
agreement with the Southern Baptist
Convention, Mars Hill College has been
placed in the limelight. The adminis
tration is feeling the pressure. Does this
indicate past slip-ups and iniquities?
Second, “community meetings” take
place in the form of authoritative wor
ship services, instead of democratic
meetings, because the upper echelon
(decision makers) fear the potential
power of the students. We outnumber
them at least 100 to 1. (However, there
is only power in numbers which consent
to be governed). Does the administra
tion want to have its cake and eat it
too? Does it want community without
dissent? Ideas without discussion?
Control without consent? Does it expect
morality and honor cultivated by deceit
and hidden agendas?
Joe Knight
mutually related individuals in a g')e jjj .
I——- jgjg interaction is not
location.
ized at the Community Meetings.
As Mr. Knight stated, the objective
this gathering is the affirmation of
members as important individuals '
their beliefs as important.” It is to ►
each member to grow from his or
experience within this community (r
the Statement of Community).
^aturit
Sine
Nan
Ilea
- Editor
social interaction requires an awake>,^‘n the pa
of conscious and purposive shat^itiRients i
This entails freedom for discussion £
criticism. ^8 in Decer
At present, one must agree with n trouble
observations of Joe Knight as to 'nilg viewi
format of the community meet'^ntered jyj
Those who attend the meeting are ndeut aln
upon by the speaker without havingSo, g
opportunity to respond. It has no Ptivegeti,
lowed for dialogue. It has require^ g, screai
awakening of conscious. Yet, one (,y ^
recognize Mr. Barbour’s closing ®L®®^>nen, ■]
ment. Unfortunately, Peterson J ihose fr
ference Center has not the phy*.^*'inrs, au(
facilities to contain the population h
. - - "Hve O
Mars Hill Community (but that >■ .f^tions
little relevance).
lie icicvaiiL,cj. il
Furthermore, it is pertinent to o* '''•duals
the mutually unifying bond of this others.
One must be careful not to‘^ 'Oes and
munity. ....... . - ana
fuse the subsystems in this commi*^' out
with its mutually unifying bond, j wre enoi
bond is “Education”, not Christis'^^others.
Yet, the Christian community is in sui
tegral subsystem of Mars Hill CO ^Ppropj.j
and its historical heritage. But th^ ^^ninasi
dencies exist for overconformity tOj
subsystem in the community, ^ Sini
leads to the disorganization of
con. on paS
society.