Now I know the standard I've been holding Houghton to that they didn't meet. It's in their own words:
We also believe the Scriptures condemn certain attitudes, such as greed, jealousy, pride, lust, bitterness, needless anger, harmful discrimination and prejudice whether of race or gender, and an unforgiving spirit. We will seek to repudiate these attitudes in ourselves and in our community. We will seek God's forgiveness and help to grow in grace.
We believe Scripture condemns certain acts, including drinking alcohol to excess, stealing, speaking or writing profanely or slanderously, acting dishonestly, cheating, engaging in occult practice, and engaging in sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage
We believe that Scripture calls us to submit to the authority of government except on those rare occasions in which obedience to the civil authorities would require us to act in conflict with our consciences as they are informed by Scripture. On such occasions, we will submit voluntarily to the civil penalty for our behavior. Behavior resulting in civil or criminal proceedings on or off-campus is subject to review within the college's disciplinary procedures.
...instead of 'be more Christ-like' I'll now simply ask for Houghton to follow their own rules.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Stealing is still wrong, right?
Just like every other student, I can pay for my own food and know to do so when I’m hungry. It shouldn’t take a Shirley Mullen to come to that conclusion. But for some reason, students are required to pay for their own meals in advance, like we’re too stupid to eat when we’re hungry and need the motivation of “I’ve already paid for it” to get us to get a meal.
Not that it does. If you really wanted to starve yourself, there's nothing they can do, but they still get the money. That way everyone wins! You starve like you want, and they get paid, like they want, win-win! What's better is that those that live in the dorm are ‘more stupider’ than those in CLO’s. That’s why they’re required to be on a higher meal plan meal plan.
This is the policy that has personally cost me more than $500 wasted dollars.
Next time you're at breakfast, (ha-ha, yeah right, I know) take a look around. 50 people, max, but to be generous, let’s say 100. Freshmen are required to be on the 21 meal plan. That’s 15 weeks, $1,610 a plan, and $5.11 a meal. Assuming that no upperclassmen are on this plan (which isn’t the case), 300 people are paying for breakfast and not getting it. That means that every morning, Pioneer is making 1,533 that they don't earn. That translates into $161,000 every semester of unearned profit, 1/3 of a million a year.
Freddie L. once complained to me that students who take food from the cafeteria were like those who steal a book from the bookstore. Which it is, if ‘stealing’ means you get what you pay for. If I pay for 3 books, I either get those 3 books or I get my money back. Maybe the cafeteria should be like the bookstore. Whatever you do, just don’t have a ‘steal from students’ policy and call it paying for the rights to maybe come and possibly eat unless you forget, miss a meal or have already eaten. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take two doctorates to realize that ‘thou shall not steal’ applies to tHou-ghton College, too.
Not that it does. If you really wanted to starve yourself, there's nothing they can do, but they still get the money. That way everyone wins! You starve like you want, and they get paid, like they want, win-win! What's better is that those that live in the dorm are ‘more stupider’ than those in CLO’s. That’s why they’re required to be on a higher meal plan meal plan.
This is the policy that has personally cost me more than $500 wasted dollars.
Next time you're at breakfast, (ha-ha, yeah right, I know) take a look around. 50 people, max, but to be generous, let’s say 100. Freshmen are required to be on the 21 meal plan. That’s 15 weeks, $1,610 a plan, and $5.11 a meal. Assuming that no upperclassmen are on this plan (which isn’t the case), 300 people are paying for breakfast and not getting it. That means that every morning, Pioneer is making 1,533 that they don't earn. That translates into $161,000 every semester of unearned profit, 1/3 of a million a year.
Freddie L. once complained to me that students who take food from the cafeteria were like those who steal a book from the bookstore. Which it is, if ‘stealing’ means you get what you pay for. If I pay for 3 books, I either get those 3 books or I get my money back. Maybe the cafeteria should be like the bookstore. Whatever you do, just don’t have a ‘steal from students’ policy and call it paying for the rights to maybe come and possibly eat unless you forget, miss a meal or have already eaten. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take two doctorates to realize that ‘thou shall not steal’ applies to tHou-ghton College, too.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Ode to 'Emailer #2'
Questions were raised regarding the 'Let the Pseudo-Houghtoning Begin!' post and they are as follows:
1) "The President likely signs the letters" - this point i will partially concede. I knew this to be the case with President Chamberlain because my wife was asked to sign letters in his name but refused because she thought it was unethical to do so. However, i do not know for sure that the same is true of President Mullen - 30 years of history doesn't necessarily mean the same is true this year
2) "Name ONE school that doesn't put its' best foot forward" - this is really two arguments, that the school is actually putting its' best foot forward and that other schools do it, too. If it's only putting the best foot forward, why is the other foot denied existence? Quoting Michelle (the tour guide who commented) "We are supposed to ignore all flaws, no matter how big they are. [O]ne of the reasons people transfer out of Houghton is because of the false picture we paint." As for the other schools, since when is "everybody else does it" an acceptable excuse?
3) "Does he not have friends in professors, no discipline or classes he loves?" Yes, I do. Why?
4) "Why does he hate Houghton so?" Besides the fact that my hatred is an assumption that i'll deny, the heart of the question is answered by the fact that there are so many inconsistencies in what Houghton is and what Houghton is claimed to be.
5) "How many friends with Blacks, Hispanics and Orientals does he have?" Five that i can think of, and one of them is having their birthday today (4/12) thanks for reminding me.
6) "Does that answer why there are few here [?]" No. My friendship with minorities has never been considered when judging acceptance for prospectives into houghton.
7) "Where is this guy coming from?" Rochester, NY
8) "Does he accept mentoring from [Professor Hegeman]?" Yes, I believe he's been my mentor for two and a half years now.
9) "Why?" Because I believe it is wise to learn from men who have greater knowledge and experience with being in this world, as both a man and a man of God.
10) "What are their motives -- to make profit? The pay? To seduce people into a scam?" 'Their' is referring to everyone involved in Houghton. Where would Houghton be without making money? The higher purpose in mind wouldn't be able to exist outside of the mind without it. I have no knowledge regarding the pay of any faculty or staff member - is it motivating? I think hearing that money is the motive for Houghton is shocking because it is termed as something else- enrollment. I've heard goals for enrollment increases - 1400 students is the mark. Are there salvation goals? 50 new christians every year? If there are, I've never heard a single one.
11) "Why do the hardworking Pioneer staff work -- to make horrible meals?" No, it's to make a profit, of that I'm sure. It'd be hard to argue that they serve week old pizza or brown fruits and vegetables because they're working for the Lord, not for men (Col. 3:23). More about this in a future post.
12) "Do any of them actually like to think they are serving Jesus?" I'm sure they do.
13) "How many staff members and adminsitrators have someone like [you] and sat and talked to about their motives?" No idea. Does lying make you feel better if you have good motives?
14) "Why do we even work here -- for sinister, falsifying, evil reasons?" Again, i have no knowlege in this area to speak intelligently on the issue. However, if I were Satan sending a person with sinister, falsifying, evil reasons to work someplace, it would be an area without built in temptations of a city, a Christian place where I, as Satan, would have the most to gain.
HOPE THESE ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, KIND SIR.
1) "The President likely signs the letters" - this point i will partially concede. I knew this to be the case with President Chamberlain because my wife was asked to sign letters in his name but refused because she thought it was unethical to do so. However, i do not know for sure that the same is true of President Mullen - 30 years of history doesn't necessarily mean the same is true this year
2) "Name ONE school that doesn't put its' best foot forward" - this is really two arguments, that the school is actually putting its' best foot forward and that other schools do it, too. If it's only putting the best foot forward, why is the other foot denied existence? Quoting Michelle (the tour guide who commented) "We are supposed to ignore all flaws, no matter how big they are. [O]ne of the reasons people transfer out of Houghton is because of the false picture we paint." As for the other schools, since when is "everybody else does it" an acceptable excuse?
3) "Does he not have friends in professors, no discipline or classes he loves?" Yes, I do. Why?
4) "Why does he hate Houghton so?" Besides the fact that my hatred is an assumption that i'll deny, the heart of the question is answered by the fact that there are so many inconsistencies in what Houghton is and what Houghton is claimed to be.
5) "How many friends with Blacks, Hispanics and Orientals does he have?" Five that i can think of, and one of them is having their birthday today (4/12) thanks for reminding me.
6) "Does that answer why there are few here [?]" No. My friendship with minorities has never been considered when judging acceptance for prospectives into houghton.
7) "Where is this guy coming from?" Rochester, NY
8) "Does he accept mentoring from [Professor Hegeman]?" Yes, I believe he's been my mentor for two and a half years now.
9) "Why?" Because I believe it is wise to learn from men who have greater knowledge and experience with being in this world, as both a man and a man of God.
10) "What are their motives -- to make profit? The pay? To seduce people into a scam?" 'Their' is referring to everyone involved in Houghton. Where would Houghton be without making money? The higher purpose in mind wouldn't be able to exist outside of the mind without it. I have no knowledge regarding the pay of any faculty or staff member - is it motivating? I think hearing that money is the motive for Houghton is shocking because it is termed as something else- enrollment. I've heard goals for enrollment increases - 1400 students is the mark. Are there salvation goals? 50 new christians every year? If there are, I've never heard a single one.
11) "Why do the hardworking Pioneer staff work -- to make horrible meals?" No, it's to make a profit, of that I'm sure. It'd be hard to argue that they serve week old pizza or brown fruits and vegetables because they're working for the Lord, not for men (Col. 3:23). More about this in a future post.
12) "Do any of them actually like to think they are serving Jesus?" I'm sure they do.
13) "How many staff members and adminsitrators have someone like [you] and sat and talked to about their motives?" No idea. Does lying make you feel better if you have good motives?
14) "Why do we even work here -- for sinister, falsifying, evil reasons?" Again, i have no knowlege in this area to speak intelligently on the issue. However, if I were Satan sending a person with sinister, falsifying, evil reasons to work someplace, it would be an area without built in temptations of a city, a Christian place where I, as Satan, would have the most to gain.
HOPE THESE ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, KIND SIR.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Spirit: Obey Your Thirst
So I've had the following topic presented to me and I think it's a good one: "Does going to a christian college hinder your faith or spark a greater fire"
Like all good answers, I believe it depends. I think being in a "christian" environment holds the potential to spark a greater fire. There are weekly global prayer meetings, chapels three times a week, a praise service on sunday nights and numerous forums for spiritual enlightenment regarding a number of different areas. I hear going of campus and studying abroad is particularly inspiring in a spiritual sense
However, it is only potential. One cannot reasonably expect to attend each of these events and succeed at what you came here to do: get a degree and good enough GPA to impress people to give you a job or acceptance into their grad school.
Personally, it's hindered my faith. I expect that in a christian environment that I will see a reflection of the one that they claim to serve in Christ. What I see if it is in fact accurately reflected is not a God I would wish to serve. This dichotomy is particularly troubling to me and if somewhere along life's journey that I end up not being a Christian, Houghton's "christian" atmosphere will be the reason.
That's not to say that it can't spark a fire, one would simply need to be willing to sacrafice other things such as an hour of social time here or an hour of studying there to make an effort to commit to spiritually enlightening events.
Follow Up Question: "Does living with a bunch of females including one that is going to get married force you to look at your own future and then you panic when you realise [sic] you are going to graduate in a year and your boyfriend may be interested in marriage in the next three to five........ the female perspecitive."
Answer: From a female perspective: "yes."
Like all good answers, I believe it depends. I think being in a "christian" environment holds the potential to spark a greater fire. There are weekly global prayer meetings, chapels three times a week, a praise service on sunday nights and numerous forums for spiritual enlightenment regarding a number of different areas. I hear going of campus and studying abroad is particularly inspiring in a spiritual sense
However, it is only potential. One cannot reasonably expect to attend each of these events and succeed at what you came here to do: get a degree and good enough GPA to impress people to give you a job or acceptance into their grad school.
Personally, it's hindered my faith. I expect that in a christian environment that I will see a reflection of the one that they claim to serve in Christ. What I see if it is in fact accurately reflected is not a God I would wish to serve. This dichotomy is particularly troubling to me and if somewhere along life's journey that I end up not being a Christian, Houghton's "christian" atmosphere will be the reason.
That's not to say that it can't spark a fire, one would simply need to be willing to sacrafice other things such as an hour of social time here or an hour of studying there to make an effort to commit to spiritually enlightening events.
Follow Up Question: "Does living with a bunch of females including one that is going to get married force you to look at your own future and then you panic when you realise [sic] you are going to graduate in a year and your boyfriend may be interested in marriage in the next three to five........ the female perspecitive."
Answer: From a female perspective: "yes."
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Employee of the Year
This week students got an email telling us Kate Ambrose was selected as the student employee of the year and i can't rightfully complain about SGA's award giving without looking at this one, too. Here's the justification for giving Kate the award:
-Kate has served in [the Office of Student Life] for three years
-and has also served for three years on the Residence Life staff, most recently as Assistant Resident Director at Gillette Hall.
-she maintains a challenging course load
-while giving of her time to various functions and organizations
-and she volunteers at a local church and at the King Center in Buffalo
-She is extremely loyal
-highly creative
-and unfailingly reliable
Keep in mind this award is for being the best employee, so lets see... the first point is irrelevant, and she has also irrelevant, most recently as irrelvant. She maintains irrelvancy while giving her time to irrelevant functions and organizations. And she volunteers (also irrelevant). She is loyal (fantastic, but doubtfully in her job description), creative and reliable. That leaves us with two actual adjectives: reliable and creative. If you do your job, like you should, that would make you reliable, meaning she got the award because she is creative.
Thats fantastic, good for Kate. She works at the only job on campus that asks for creativity. Maybe Pioneer is looking for a creative person to mop in pretty little circles after meals or Janitorial is looking for someone to vacuum in a highly artistic manner.
I realize that being the best at my proctoring job doesn't mean much when one girl counts the quarters and comes up with 5.29 only to have the girl right after her get one more quarter and end up with a total of 5.34. However, being only one of two people (the other being my wife) that does their job in this whole department seems more deserving in someone that does their job creatively, not that they actually had examples of her creativity proving that it wasn't just another word they were grasping for in looking for justification in giving her the award. This isn't to say that Kate doesn't deserve an award, but the least they can do is figure out why.
-Kate has served in [the Office of Student Life] for three years
-and has also served for three years on the Residence Life staff, most recently as Assistant Resident Director at Gillette Hall.
-she maintains a challenging course load
-while giving of her time to various functions and organizations
-and she volunteers at a local church and at the King Center in Buffalo
-She is extremely loyal
-highly creative
-and unfailingly reliable
Keep in mind this award is for being the best employee, so lets see... the first point is irrelevant, and she has also irrelevant, most recently as irrelvant. She maintains irrelvancy while giving her time to irrelevant functions and organizations. And she volunteers (also irrelevant). She is loyal (fantastic, but doubtfully in her job description), creative and reliable. That leaves us with two actual adjectives: reliable and creative. If you do your job, like you should, that would make you reliable, meaning she got the award because she is creative.
Thats fantastic, good for Kate. She works at the only job on campus that asks for creativity. Maybe Pioneer is looking for a creative person to mop in pretty little circles after meals or Janitorial is looking for someone to vacuum in a highly artistic manner.
I realize that being the best at my proctoring job doesn't mean much when one girl counts the quarters and comes up with 5.29 only to have the girl right after her get one more quarter and end up with a total of 5.34. However, being only one of two people (the other being my wife) that does their job in this whole department seems more deserving in someone that does their job creatively, not that they actually had examples of her creativity proving that it wasn't just another word they were grasping for in looking for justification in giving her the award. This isn't to say that Kate doesn't deserve an award, but the least they can do is figure out why.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Miss Direction
Before break, the winter intramurals ended. It was said to have been kicked off "under Coach Webb's direction" and it's that phrase i'd like to take a look at
I've played three intramural sports: Soccer, Water Polo, and Flag Football and in each of them the referees sucked. Soccer refs were invisible because the players knew more about the game then they did. Polo is the only sport to boast one decent ref. I wont name names, but we're Luckey to have him. In polo, I've seen players mount anothers' tube without being called and the ball being held under water with both hands for at least 5 seconds before being called a foul on a player who knocked it out of their hands. If that's not proposterous to you, its illegal to hold it underwater and to hold it with both hands for more than 3 seconds, both of which were ignored to make the call.
In football, my team lost to the Ligers on a last second play. It was a fade to the left corner of the endzone with only a few seconds left. The corner fell down and the receiver made the catch. However, it was ruled that the corner fell down because of a push off and the receiver caught the ball out of bounds anyways. It should've meant that out team moved on. Instead, we were victims of Coach Webb's "direction". The referee on the opposite side of the field reversed both calls to give them the touchdown. To put it in perspective, that is never done in any sport on any level in any time frame of history
I emailed Webb hoping that he'd overturn this obvious oversight error. He didn't feel like it. I emailed him again saying that i'd rather not have the answer to the question "Why is my team no longer in the playoffs?" answered by "The Intramural Director was apathetic." Instead of doing the right thing and making the right call, I was banned from intramurals until I knew who was boss.
Those value-laden posters in the gym? To Webb they must be BS because he neglected each of them in choosing a feeling of power over a fair call. If the intramurals are indeed under his direction they need a new one. If he's not directing the intramurals and the failures aren't his fault they need a new director anyways, one who will do their job.
I'm no longer allowed to play intramurals because I asked for Justice. Justice would be a good place to start in finding a competent human being to make intramurals respectable again.
I've played three intramural sports: Soccer, Water Polo, and Flag Football and in each of them the referees sucked. Soccer refs were invisible because the players knew more about the game then they did. Polo is the only sport to boast one decent ref. I wont name names, but we're Luckey to have him. In polo, I've seen players mount anothers' tube without being called and the ball being held under water with both hands for at least 5 seconds before being called a foul on a player who knocked it out of their hands. If that's not proposterous to you, its illegal to hold it underwater and to hold it with both hands for more than 3 seconds, both of which were ignored to make the call.
In football, my team lost to the Ligers on a last second play. It was a fade to the left corner of the endzone with only a few seconds left. The corner fell down and the receiver made the catch. However, it was ruled that the corner fell down because of a push off and the receiver caught the ball out of bounds anyways. It should've meant that out team moved on. Instead, we were victims of Coach Webb's "direction". The referee on the opposite side of the field reversed both calls to give them the touchdown. To put it in perspective, that is never done in any sport on any level in any time frame of history
I emailed Webb hoping that he'd overturn this obvious oversight error. He didn't feel like it. I emailed him again saying that i'd rather not have the answer to the question "Why is my team no longer in the playoffs?" answered by "The Intramural Director was apathetic." Instead of doing the right thing and making the right call, I was banned from intramurals until I knew who was boss.
Those value-laden posters in the gym? To Webb they must be BS because he neglected each of them in choosing a feeling of power over a fair call. If the intramurals are indeed under his direction they need a new one. If he's not directing the intramurals and the failures aren't his fault they need a new director anyways, one who will do their job.
I'm no longer allowed to play intramurals because I asked for Justice. Justice would be a good place to start in finding a competent human being to make intramurals respectable again.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
...you never get a second chance...
Image management is always a stressed field in business, politics, and really anything else. So I began thinking about how people see Houghton. What's the first thing, the first mental note you make about houghton? Okay, so the first thing you notice is probably the really purple sign on route 19. But the second thing is the roller coaster of a ride your car gets due to the eight and a half inch difference between route 19 and the beginning of Genesse street.
"...oh, what a lovely sign, it looks very purp- HOLY COW WE'RE BEING ATTACKED BY TERRORISTS! ...oh, it's just the road, maybe they need our money more than we thought"
then of course there's the mine field in the road leading up to the gym, guaranteed to pop a tire or your money back (restrictions apply, purchase necessary, see inside wallet for details). If you are not a frequent visitor of the gym, there are (I kid you not) more than a dozen, each approaching a solid foot deep. I used to try to dodge them all, but now i just drive on the hill, it's much safer.
As we're striving to improve our enrollment to 1,400 students, perhaps letting them arive at the college before giving them reason to turn around and go home is a good idea. And remember, you never get a second chance to make a first pothole - er, impression.
"...oh, what a lovely sign, it looks very purp- HOLY COW WE'RE BEING ATTACKED BY TERRORISTS! ...oh, it's just the road, maybe they need our money more than we thought"
then of course there's the mine field in the road leading up to the gym, guaranteed to pop a tire or your money back (restrictions apply, purchase necessary, see inside wallet for details). If you are not a frequent visitor of the gym, there are (I kid you not) more than a dozen, each approaching a solid foot deep. I used to try to dodge them all, but now i just drive on the hill, it's much safer.
As we're striving to improve our enrollment to 1,400 students, perhaps letting them arive at the college before giving them reason to turn around and go home is a good idea. And remember, you never get a second chance to make a first pothole - er, impression.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
And the award for worst chapel goes to...
...the SGA awards chapel. SGA stands for Student Government Association but perhaps a better name would be the Spiritualy God Awful. Most people are smart enough to avoid the awards chapel. I, however, was unaware that the chapel i was attending was the awards chapel and paid dearly for my mistake
You know its bad when you need a 7 minute disclaimer on everything else you plan on doing for the rest of chapel. You know its really bad when its Kate Hamilton doing the disclaiming (a bad idea in itself) To summarize the disclaimer, they're giving out awards but dont know what the qualifications they're looking for are, they just know that people have done things that sound like they fit with the title of the award.
What's worse is that they take from an extremely small minority to offer the award. Blind choosing would yeild better results. For example, for being the best communicator, the Commissioner of Communications was chosen. whoa, way to go out of the box, but the only reason she fits the bill is because of her title. (nothing against her, but there are plenty of better communicators out there, they just dont have a fancy title)
If you really want to hand out awards, give it to the most qualified person, taking many more people into account and no, title isn't a qualification. Neither is Kate Hamilton.
You know its bad when you need a 7 minute disclaimer on everything else you plan on doing for the rest of chapel. You know its really bad when its Kate Hamilton doing the disclaiming (a bad idea in itself) To summarize the disclaimer, they're giving out awards but dont know what the qualifications they're looking for are, they just know that people have done things that sound like they fit with the title of the award.
What's worse is that they take from an extremely small minority to offer the award. Blind choosing would yeild better results. For example, for being the best communicator, the Commissioner of Communications was chosen. whoa, way to go out of the box, but the only reason she fits the bill is because of her title. (nothing against her, but there are plenty of better communicators out there, they just dont have a fancy title)
If you really want to hand out awards, give it to the most qualified person, taking many more people into account and no, title isn't a qualification. Neither is Kate Hamilton.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Let The Pseudo-Houghtoning Begin!
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, its that time of year again - when Houghton is most frequently portrayed as a christian liberal arts school and least frequently exemplifies it.
Yep, its that last chance that the admissions office has to convince prospectives not to take the blue pill and not attend Houghton before the red pill is shoved down their throats. Similar to being released from the matrix, the real thing is not nearly as pleasant as the fake.
No, the meals are never as enticing, the movies and concerts only happen when other prospective students are on campus and people aren't nearly as accommodating as they are when you firmly clasp that all revealing blue folder in your arms.
No, that presidential signature on your letter from Houghton isn't actually from the president, the chapels aren't always that entertaining and you can certainly bet that the picture in the Houghton brochure that contains several multi-cultural students happily enjoying each others company isn't real. In fact, Houghton is almost as far from that truth as possible, being about 98.5% non-black.
Yes, come to houghton - we have all these things that you'll never see again. As long as we have your money, that's all that matters. Why do we do it? If you ask, you'll get the three year old "because everybody else does it," the answer that has had parents rolling their eyes for decades. Likewise, I'm sure God does the same with us - assuming of course that he's not pulling the Matrix over our eyes with this world we're in.
Yep, its that last chance that the admissions office has to convince prospectives not to take the blue pill and not attend Houghton before the red pill is shoved down their throats. Similar to being released from the matrix, the real thing is not nearly as pleasant as the fake.
No, the meals are never as enticing, the movies and concerts only happen when other prospective students are on campus and people aren't nearly as accommodating as they are when you firmly clasp that all revealing blue folder in your arms.
No, that presidential signature on your letter from Houghton isn't actually from the president, the chapels aren't always that entertaining and you can certainly bet that the picture in the Houghton brochure that contains several multi-cultural students happily enjoying each others company isn't real. In fact, Houghton is almost as far from that truth as possible, being about 98.5% non-black.
Yes, come to houghton - we have all these things that you'll never see again. As long as we have your money, that's all that matters. Why do we do it? If you ask, you'll get the three year old "because everybody else does it," the answer that has had parents rolling their eyes for decades. Likewise, I'm sure God does the same with us - assuming of course that he's not pulling the Matrix over our eyes with this world we're in.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Time to (Smart)en Up
If the Star truly edited for decorum, Houghton would be the last place a pro-smoking argument would appear. If you’re reading this, you likely know of the two articles which I refer to. Professor Meilaender asserted that “there are no good reasons for a ban on smoking,” and “Smoking threatens harm to no one other than the smoker.”
As for there being no good reasons to ban smoking, Will’s article on the following page is a good resource. Smoking is fiscally taxing (pun intended), reduces life expectancy and smokers “receive poorer medical treatment.” Meilaender’s arguments against drinking also apply, such as sickness, wasted weekends and social (olfactory) negatives. Who wants to hang around someone that smells like smoke? “Not I” said the duck.
As for the absurd claim that smoking only threatens the smoker, the American Lung Association and I would disagree. According to the ALA, second hand smoke is responsible for nearly 40,000 deaths a year (more than car accidents), 176,000 cases of lung cancer (which, by the way, went unmentioned in both articles) and 140,000 cases heart disease – I’d say that’s harmful. Even if they smoke outside, it would still aggravate two growing trends in America: asthma and allergies. By the way, why do you support kicking smokers outside, I thought smoking only threatens the smoker.
If we truly want students with “healthy minds, bodies and hearts” then you’d be foolish to think that smoking will aid that goal – we want to increase our numbers, not kill them off. “What cruel person would wish to punish these poor souls any further?” Apparently you and Professor Meilaender would by desiring that they be allowed to continue smoking. Each article stated that smoking was its’ own punishment. If so, why do we want to allow Houghton students to punish themselves?
There’s this work of Christian literature called the Bible which contains this fragment called a verse letting us know that ‘our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit’. Most readers will know that Jesus didn’t take too kindly to a defamation of His temple last time around and smoking isn’t exactly spraying Febreeze around the place.
If either of you know anything about your field, you’d know image is everything. If Houghton allowed smoking, they wouldn’t be very qualified to claim a healthy, environmental Christian campus. The ‘Houghton Puff of Smoke’ isn’t as alluring as the ‘Houghton Bubble.’ In President Mullen’s advice suggesting we try to “be Houghton” to others, I don’t think giving them lung cancer is what she had in mind.
Will, this is the second article of yours that has been pointed out to be poor. I’d say stick to poli-sci, but from Professor Meilaender’s lack of wisdom, it doesn’t look like his tutelage will get you very far. Don’t worry Professor Meilaender, there’s at least one more prejudice in the world, especially in the academic community – that against unintelligence, like that displayed by uneducated statements like “there are no good reasons for a ban on smoking.” We don’t need to get high from smoking. This is Houghton, we’re high on Jesus.
As for there being no good reasons to ban smoking, Will’s article on the following page is a good resource. Smoking is fiscally taxing (pun intended), reduces life expectancy and smokers “receive poorer medical treatment.” Meilaender’s arguments against drinking also apply, such as sickness, wasted weekends and social (olfactory) negatives. Who wants to hang around someone that smells like smoke? “Not I” said the duck.
As for the absurd claim that smoking only threatens the smoker, the American Lung Association and I would disagree. According to the ALA, second hand smoke is responsible for nearly 40,000 deaths a year (more than car accidents), 176,000 cases of lung cancer (which, by the way, went unmentioned in both articles) and 140,000 cases heart disease – I’d say that’s harmful. Even if they smoke outside, it would still aggravate two growing trends in America: asthma and allergies. By the way, why do you support kicking smokers outside, I thought smoking only threatens the smoker.
If we truly want students with “healthy minds, bodies and hearts” then you’d be foolish to think that smoking will aid that goal – we want to increase our numbers, not kill them off. “What cruel person would wish to punish these poor souls any further?” Apparently you and Professor Meilaender would by desiring that they be allowed to continue smoking. Each article stated that smoking was its’ own punishment. If so, why do we want to allow Houghton students to punish themselves?
There’s this work of Christian literature called the Bible which contains this fragment called a verse letting us know that ‘our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit’. Most readers will know that Jesus didn’t take too kindly to a defamation of His temple last time around and smoking isn’t exactly spraying Febreeze around the place.
If either of you know anything about your field, you’d know image is everything. If Houghton allowed smoking, they wouldn’t be very qualified to claim a healthy, environmental Christian campus. The ‘Houghton Puff of Smoke’ isn’t as alluring as the ‘Houghton Bubble.’ In President Mullen’s advice suggesting we try to “be Houghton” to others, I don’t think giving them lung cancer is what she had in mind.
Will, this is the second article of yours that has been pointed out to be poor. I’d say stick to poli-sci, but from Professor Meilaender’s lack of wisdom, it doesn’t look like his tutelage will get you very far. Don’t worry Professor Meilaender, there’s at least one more prejudice in the world, especially in the academic community – that against unintelligence, like that displayed by uneducated statements like “there are no good reasons for a ban on smoking.” We don’t need to get high from smoking. This is Houghton, we’re high on Jesus.
Monday, February 11, 2008
SPOT
Situation: This semester's spot theme was "finding a spot theme"
Outlook: Besides being incredibly unorigional and lame, I kept thinking of a much more appropriate SPOT theme: Discretion. Theres always been some discrepancy as to whether SPOT is a talent show or a comedy show. However, if an act has neither talent or humor, dont waste our time by making a longer show filled with acts that waste time.
The math poem was interesting im sure to math majors but displayed neither talent nor humor. The song about the hick girl who just 'caint say no was talented in the broad sense of the word, but lacked humor and enough talent to use up the 10 minutes it took (some of which was setting up, not just the act)
This SPOT was one of the best in the four years i've been here but three hours was too long, especially considering many people waited an extra half hour or so in the lobby waiting to get in. Next year, try and show some discretion
Outlook: Besides being incredibly unorigional and lame, I kept thinking of a much more appropriate SPOT theme: Discretion. Theres always been some discrepancy as to whether SPOT is a talent show or a comedy show. However, if an act has neither talent or humor, dont waste our time by making a longer show filled with acts that waste time.
The math poem was interesting im sure to math majors but displayed neither talent nor humor. The song about the hick girl who just 'caint say no was talented in the broad sense of the word, but lacked humor and enough talent to use up the 10 minutes it took (some of which was setting up, not just the act)
This SPOT was one of the best in the four years i've been here but three hours was too long, especially considering many people waited an extra half hour or so in the lobby waiting to get in. Next year, try and show some discretion
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Chapel Scanning
Situation: people don't go to more than 2/3 of chapels and the last 1/3 is embarassing. However, Houghton feels it is necessary for students to have spiritual nourishment (appropriately so).
Outlook: A certain prof suggested we go back to assigned seating and hope that those who truly want to be in chapel will positvely influence those who do not. It will also prevent the 'homework doing' in the back of the balcony. However, I think it will more likely disrupt those who try to get something out of chapel and make things seem more authoritarian. As I said in the first post, I dont think Will's idea will work. It's essentially what happens the second and third last weeks of the semester - after people have largely completed their requirement (and no longer have to go to chapel) and before those who have put it off to the end are required to attend the rest.
What I suggested to the aforementioned prof is that we have a chapel on monday and wednesday, and require faculty to lead small groups as an analysis and application time. This will allow for faculty participation, increase the funding for the chapels by 33% (hopefully making them better), allow for a more realistic "what can we do?" application, allow us to interact with students that we wouldn't normally get to know, and still have time to get to our 11:50 classes :-)
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Outlook: A certain prof suggested we go back to assigned seating and hope that those who truly want to be in chapel will positvely influence those who do not. It will also prevent the 'homework doing' in the back of the balcony. However, I think it will more likely disrupt those who try to get something out of chapel and make things seem more authoritarian. As I said in the first post, I dont think Will's idea will work. It's essentially what happens the second and third last weeks of the semester - after people have largely completed their requirement (and no longer have to go to chapel) and before those who have put it off to the end are required to attend the rest.
What I suggested to the aforementioned prof is that we have a chapel on monday and wednesday, and require faculty to lead small groups as an analysis and application time. This will allow for faculty participation, increase the funding for the chapels by 33% (hopefully making them better), allow for a more realistic "what can we do?" application, allow us to interact with students that we wouldn't normally get to know, and still have time to get to our 11:50 classes :-)
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Over the past few weeks, there has been some discussion regarding the chapel attendance policy. There have been a few suggestions, through editorials to the star and through individual conversations, such as requiring faculty attendance, reducing the skip count, and Will’s test of will (to go to chapel). But then, the conversation stopped. I’d like to prevent that. I’ve created a blog/forum so that this and other similar conversations like it, don’t stop, that they continue to either a mutual understanding or a change in policy.
I think requiring faculty attendance will accentuate the lack of participation in the last third of the semester and that people will not voluntarily go to chapel (whether for busyness or other reasons). What do you all think? Perhaps through these conversations your opinion may be heard. I plan on posting different issues similar to this, like the fiscal responsibility of SGA to fund or not to fund ROTC, among others on a regular basis.
I think requiring faculty attendance will accentuate the lack of participation in the last third of the semester and that people will not voluntarily go to chapel (whether for busyness or other reasons). What do you all think? Perhaps through these conversations your opinion may be heard. I plan on posting different issues similar to this, like the fiscal responsibility of SGA to fund or not to fund ROTC, among others on a regular basis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)