Newspapers / Mars Hill University Student … / Oct. 18, 1991, edition 1 / Page 4
Part of Mars Hill University Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
The Hilltop. Friday, October 18, jjElMav. Qntnhpr 1«^ OPINIONS AND TIMEOUT OPINIONS AND TIMEOUT Letters to Opinions or devotionals to Timeout are to be mailed to; Optinions and TimeOut The Hilltop PO Box 1148-C Mars Hill College Mars Hill, NO 28754 SPIDER WEBBS to BreaV t,p Amy Webb staff columnist October is the official "Break-up" month. Why? Who really knows? But maybe we as college students can come up with some logical reasons. Could it be the changing seasons from summer to fall or the leaves falling? Maybe the first cold front or Fall Break causes us to panic and search for freedom. The next thing we know there’s an argument and it’s "So long Dixie Lou" or "I don’t love you anymore John Boy!" Don’t fear couples if you are still together. Don’t get the "October Blues." I’m sure if you have a strong relationship there is no need to worry. Love is a wonderful thing! MARS HILL A TRADITION OF EXCELLENCE THROUGH SERVICE AND LEARNING Has Mars Hill Become Too Self-Righteous? LETTER TO THE EDITOR To Break-up or Not The term "Self-Righteous" is a many faceted term. There are a few persons on this campus that must hoid this term dear to their hearts. These groups range from the religious to the environmen- taiists and to the "Granolas." At the bot tom of the spectrum are those who spark debate throughout these groups. People are so different and yet so in dividually cloned that it makes me wonder if there is truiy an understanding of the meaning "to be an individual." Firstly there are such people on this campus who are "Religiousiy Self- Righteous." These people tend to think that there is no greater group on this campus but their own. They are the only ones pious enough to go to Heaven. These persons would be great role models of society - they could continue the iineage set by their fore fathers (Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert). Aiso, what do T-shirts that prociaim God in terms of other capitalistic groups’ siogans want to promote? Is this the commercialized Christianity? Thete is a Nike ad that boasts, "Just Do It." And now these budding entrepreneurs come up with a long "to do" list that ends with a piay on this long used cliche. Other copied slogans in clude "God’s Gym" instead of "Goid’s Gym" and then there is the phrase coined by MO Hammer, "Can’t Touch This." This shirt says "Satan can’t touch us." Are these shirts meant to conform ail Christians to be socially accepted by their peers? Or is the unification of the Christian Church trying to bond all youths under some parable? It seems, however, that God is not so much giorified, but the persons who wears the shirt. Now, I know my beiiefs are not anatomicaily correct in the Baptist Fei- lowship, but I don’t care because no one beiief is going to be correct in another’s eye anyway. A person should not as sume that because one goes to church on a regular basis and is seem with other Christians that they wiii naturally be the solitary soui in Heaven. Secondly, there are people con cerned about he environment. It seems everyone these days does their part to make this a safer world. But there are those among us who think that if all humans do not become extinct to save a few animals then domestic animals should be treated unfairly: this includes anything kept by man. But in the same breath I do eat red meat, wear leather products, and I would kill an animal if it endangered a human life. What does it take to be an environ mentalist? Does Green Peace send out a questionnaire labeling the exact path to "Righteousness" for nature. When the Exxon Valdese dumped millions of tons of crude oil into the ocean and didn’t handle the clean-up very well, I banned the use of Exxon products. However, when GreenPeace or any organization that set themselves apart as Mother Nature’s "vigilantes," to patrol the environment and punish those who disobey or misuse her elements, I think that’s extreme. These people are "Enviromaniacs" more then environ mentalist. Environmentalist do not seem to speak in reaiistic terms. A few would sink Nuciear Ships, vandalize iaboratories, and harm certain in dividuals just to save animals’ lives. Is this a humanist theory? No. I don’t think it is. I’m sure that the Environmen tal Protection Agencies should stop using easily multiplying rodents for studies and start on humankind. I’m sure this would be more ethical - we might kill a few people in the process, but what’s a few lives compared to all the mindless, chattering rodents we’ll save. Let’s also break into testing labs and let all of the primates loose. All they have to do is go to the unemployment office and find a good job to support themselves. Its not like America can’t find jobs for apes. Lets also destroy a fishermen’s livelihood when he inadver tently maims a dolphin who swims through his fishing nets. That would be more than fair. All sarcasm aside, Americans are starting to digress into a protection mode in life. Let’s protect the downtrod den, the oppressed. It is one thing to be conscious or aware, it’s another thing to be an antagonist against others. Is this environmentalism a fad? Probably not in the whole sense, but it does change certain parts of people. Some persons have strong beliefs about unfair treat ment of cattle and chickens, yet they eat beef and chicken. The sermon is "Earth First," but then they have things made of wood or paper and wear leather goods. One can’t preach on thing and then turn around and do exactly what is preached about. It’s either all the way or nothing - if not it is considered a double stand ard. Maybe in the year 2010 there won’t be an all out nuclear war that kills humankind. Maybe man will just slowly annihilate one another to save the animal kingdom and the world be ruled by grazing sheep again. The third category (if there were one) is the "Earth Child" or "Granola." These people come from affluent families and business people. The Granolas as sociate only with those like them. A so cial conscience is very important, and yet they will sometimes associate with other people as not to seem bigoted. But their attitude is a very sallow, su perficial fagade that gradually dissolves into a mire of exploitation. These people are Self-Righteous in that anyone who has less money than their family is automatically the peon. Even though Granolas try to escape the affluence of their parents, they get caught using the wealth to fight their battle. This battle is the theme of non-conformity family. Granolas retreat from the id® being a clone of Mom and Dad. TN Granolas simply have the disguise d* non-conformist, not the inward resf sibility to back it up. . These persons are totally againd L. Deator "family" and don’t want any support' taff reporter it. However, in the same token thef^ being supplied and supported fina^ Working," the ly by their nouveau riche parents, ,'ch played October like their motto should be, "Inder Theatre boaste dence through a monthly allowa^^^ces by an extrerr There is a major contradiction v'/it*'f^® show based on tl idea. Real responsibility is ^ and adapte concept to these misplaced childr? Wartz and Nina ! the sixties. workers a Lastly, people associate ^®®lings toward t with agitators, or persons who ^ daily, others. I seem to fall into this cats?, .'he cast of elev I’m by no means perfect. However^j'sty of jobs out in t confront persons with their beliefs . ^rnerica. A fin time to time to see if there is a shr^J^sewife, miiiworke logic or basis for logic in their ® People that agitate others are But it’s not ji to spark debate or get a person actors sine about a different perspective, times what people say have 'VZ.^^^dorm everyde ■ or not. feelings tov sense, but pertaining to these righf or anal retentive individuals I tend fhroughout the pla agree. I don’t know the answers performances, the questions I have brought to ®\artable job I’ve e\ I would entertain feedback. If Pxj.^ .'f’s despicable," stay in this mode of Self-RighteoH •is trapped in her then they will eventually alienate'^ yhAngei) Thewm Thewor selves from the things they are try so much more, help instead of helping the thinP*^ ®^ause she can re’e are being exploited. d^ If I have offended anyone Wg®askherwhosh( letter, then maybe you should 's Nora Watson. why you took offense. My objed- ' do things for £ W..W..W.W. ...J , « vjw IWI *. to bring these topics to light i^.^jive. °Jder sensatione them back in the fagade from wh'^' iij^l^ by Owen^ were retrieved. J. Scott Bennett CHAPEL REMINDED litior,’"!® ro tears with I las „,®'^be housewife ‘ Tav riattg^f to some >sewi{° ^ T®® PI or belittlin ’Oil pleads, "It m df it’s not to m for October 1991 . Dr. Thomas Graves, Preside of the Theologi^ Seminary at Richmond wiii ^ speaking in Chapei
Mars Hill University Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 18, 1991, edition 1
4
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75