Soxy

Late term abortion was banned during this administration yes. But it took more than just G.W.

Not surprising--and not much can be done to help the Haitians with the current regime in power. Saw Jimmy Carter (and shook his hand ) and some other speakers talk about this topic this weekend--very enlightening and depressing... Anyway, I believe it can best be summed up with these words of wisdom: "So like, right now for example. The Haitians need to come to America. But some people are all, "What about the strain on our resources?" Well it's like when I had this garden party for my father's birthday, right? I put R.S.V.P. 'cause it was a sit-down dinner. But some people came that like did not R.S.V.P. I was like totally buggin'. I had to haul ass to the kitchen, redistribute the food, and squish in extra place settings. But by the end of the day it was, like, the more the merrier. And so if the government could just get to the kitchen, rearrange some things, we could certainly party with the Haitians. And in conclusion may I please remind you it does not say R.S.V.P. on the Statue of Liberty. Thank you very much."

Oh, men, well continue on then. Gotta even out those stats... And DBAHO, I gotta say I prefer dots to stripes...

I don't even know where to start on this one. Maybe this link is good: http://dailybeacon.utk.edu/article.php/7498 I like the part where it says 40% of men would rape under certain circumstances. Man, that's hot. Or the part about 25% of college women being the victims of rape or attempted rape. Is it Friday yet? Or that both the FBI and the DOJ say sexual assault is THE most underreported violent crime in America with reporting rates varying from 20-30%. Anyway, bring on another rape joke. They're hilarious. Hm, maybe I should add that this to the pet peeve thread...

You know it.

I don't know--I think 420 brings up a good point about trying to get debate going...I've taken my fair share of religion classes (maybe I'm just a masochist after all ). And I've come to believe most of those profs aren't actually atheists, I know that through my interaction with them outside of class. But by saying the sometimes inflammatory stuff they do it really gets kids going. And we get to explore a lot more stuff than if it were just a homogenous class of good Lutherans singing Kyries. So, I do think that's a very valid point. You learn more from disagreements than from a hearty agreement--and you learn more about how to relate to people so I could definitely so profs doing that...

That's hot.

True, I didn't know that it was going to be so conservative...My church was really liberal--as were my Lutheran educated pastors--so I wrongly assumed I wouldn't be in over my head... And the profs here are nothing like 1549's teachers. They're voices aren't silenced because I'm usually the one arguing with them , anyway. As much as they are oppressed they oppress with their condemning of students who hold different views, which, alas did not come out. I love my school, of course, would have transfered if I didn't. But I think this article is really in poor taste--and I talked to one of my friends who was a College Republican--and they lost almost half their membership because of the faction within the group over this stuff... Ah well, I will gladly welcome them over to the darkside...

Actually, it's Lutheran. And the problem with the article is the timing and the way it throws such negative light on the Peace Prize Forum. Which really is a positive thing. It brings loads of money to the school and LOTS of positive press. It's fine to have issues with professors and the atmosophere of the school--but bringing it up now is really just negative mean press.

Definitely more obvious. The problem I have is the timing of the article--it's really sort of suck for it to come out the day before President Carter speaks. This is also the group that has denounced our administration for allowing (for the first time) condoms to be sold on campus this year. (FIRST TIME EVER!!!!) Basically, I think these kids need to chill out--they have the largest College Republicans chapter in the State, and I feel that the administartion has really catered to them. (No condoms until this year!?!?!?!) Anyway, that's my beef...

So, on the Eve of President Carter speaking at my school this was published in the major newspaper up here. We're hosting the major Peace Prize Forum up here, and well, here's a commentary on it (fortunately, my conference on sexual assault is not picked out as offensive to anyone...) BYLINE: Kevin Duchschere CREDITLINE: Star Tribune HEADLINE: Diversity -- of the intellectual sort -- in short supply at St. Olaf, students say They shook their heads over the antiwar signs on the college president's lawn. They rolled their eyes at a professor's long e-mail message to students lambasting President Bush. But the final straw for some conservative students at St. Olaf College came when organizers for this weekend's Nobel Peace Prize Forum rejected a speaker who wanted to talk about peace through strength. There's a lack of diversity at the Northfield, Minn., college, they say. Intellectual diversity. So the conservative students are staging a shadow forum today to protest what they call the overwhelmingly pacifistic, left-wing tilt of the annual Peace Prize conference. They also want to draw attention to a virus they say infects St. Olaf and other campuses: liberal proselytizing by professors and administrators. They're not alone. Across the nation, conservative students are taking their schools to task for what they consider knee-jerk political correctness that stifles the free exchange of ideas. Students who disagree or object to something said by a liberal professor "feel like they're in a hostile environment," said Britt Haugland, a St. Olaf senior from La Crosse, Wis., majoring in social work and a campus leader for conservatives. Some even fear their grades might be lowered if they speak up. St. Olaf officials said they're sympathetic to the students' concerns, but disputed their contentions. Officials noted that the college already has an academic bill of rights that protects students against reprisals for holding unpopular views. And they vigorously rejected the notion that the campus fosters a climate of liberal indoctrination. "I don't believe that happens at St. Olaf," said President Christopher Thomforde, a tall, genial Lutheran minister in his fourth year at the college. St. Olaf has a healthy tradition as an incubator of Republican leaders in the state, said Dean of Students Greg Kneser. Former Gov. Al Quie is an alumnus, as are current House Speaker Steve Sviggum and Majority Leader Erik Paulsen. Recent speakers on campus include noted conservatives Pat Buchanan, Newt Gingrich and P. J. O'Rourke. About 400 students belong to the College Republicans, making it one of the largest chapters in the state. "I don't think there's much question that the faculty's political views tend to lean left," Kneser said. "Whether that translates into bias in the classroom is making a pretty big leap." Rebellion on the right For conservative Minnesota collegians who feel isolated, help is on the way in the form of e-Pluribus, a program that will offer a Web site this fall with information, articles and ideas for students seeking ideological ammunition to use on campus. It's an offshoot of the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative Minneapolis think tank. "We're using the Internet to leapfrog over the intellectual gatekeepers," said Katherine Kersten, a senior fellow with the Center who is organizing e-Pluribus. "This is not a partisan organization. This is essentially an intellectual exercise, about bringing conservative and free-market ideas to campuses where in most cases they're grossly underrepresented." According to several observers, the conservative movement on college campuses has been gaining ground for years. College students have always had a taste for rebellion, and when authorities on campus lean to the left it's natural for students to pull in the other direction. But polls and surveys also show that conservative views among students are rising on issues such as taxes, guns and abortion. And the movement got an unexpected jolt of energy after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. "It shocked people into political advocacy because they realized this can never happen again, and naturally they started to align themselves with the policy of a strong military against those who would threaten us," said Nick Norman, a sophomore from Woodbury majoring in economics and political science. The theme of this year's Peace Prize Forum, which rotates among five Upper Midwest Lutheran colleges, is grass-roots peacemaking. Former President Jimmy Carter, who was awarded the Peace Prize in 2002, will deliver the keynote address today. The two-day conference features workshops on "peace skills" and 55 seminars on a wide range of topics from meditation to genocide. Among the seminar titles: "Peace and Change through Public Art," "Islam and Democracy" and "CEOs and Moral Intelligence: An Oxymoron?" Last fall, Counterpoint, a group of 50 conservative St. Olaf students, proposed a couple of seminars for the Nobel forum. One, by University of Minnesota Prof. Ian Maitland, on sweatshops as a positive force for economic development, was accepted. But another, by Minneapolis attorney and writer Scott W. Johnson, on how the failure to confront Nazi Germany in the 1930s led to World War II, was not. "My proposal is peace through meditation -- on Winston Churchill," Johnson said. Counterpoint members decided to act. They formed the St. Olaf Committee for Intellectual Diversity and sent letters to forum organizers, President Thomforde and the college's board of regents to express their concern about Johnson's rejection and the barrage of antiwar messages sent by college officials. Among those sending such messages was Thomforde, who before the war displayed a protest sign in his yard and joined an antiwar demonstration in the commons. He said that as college president his main job is to make sure faculty members and students feel free to think about issues and act accordingly. Bruce Nordstrom-Loeb, a sociology professor and cochairman of the forum program committee, wouldn't discuss why the committee rejected Johnson's entry but suggested its historical theme didn't reflect the forum's contemporary bent. Yet some scheduled seminars have a historical focus, and two of them center on figures whose life spans intersected with Churchill's: Mark Twain and Thomas Merton. In the end, Johnson will deliver his "teach-in on appeasement" on campus today -- but in a dormitory lounge just down the road from the auditorium where a short time later Carter will be addressing a packed house. Johnson said that he was "a long-hair hippie antiwar protester" while a student in the 1970s at Dartmouth College, where conservatism flourished. But he said he never felt marginalized. "It wouldn't have even occurred to me that a professor would hold my views against me, the way these kids do," he said. "I had no idea what my professors' views were. It was kept out of class."

Oh, no way, not a shot at you, not a shot at anyone. I would say that less than 10% of people actually use non-gendered language to describe God, so no worries. It just always makes my day when people don't. And it doesn't bother me when people use it--but it always gives me a warm fuzzy when inclusionary language is used.

Oh, and props to Jim Flaxx for not using engendered terms to describe God.

Okay, sorry, gotta include this one--people that chew with their mouths open and, consequently, are really loud eaters. CHEW WITH YOUR MOUTHS SHUT PEOPLE!!!!

Shoot, it's 37 today in Minnesota and I've got my windows all open and I'm rejoicing because it's finally above freezing. Wow, I need to get out of this state....

That's a good theological point. I'm just not sure I agree. Just to argue a Christian point--isn't the whole Jesus sent to Earth done to show that God cares and wanted the pos children of the earth in "eternal life?" There are certainly no easy answers--and I guess the road I've taken to where I'm at leads me to a very different conclusion. God is God. Love is Love.

Are you sure you don't go to Olaf...I'm sure I've had a class with you.... Anyway, I consider myself to lean more on the humanistic side here. Some Hindus believe God created the world out of sheer joy--we are expression of Divine happiness. To me salvation should reflect that a godly existence, filled with compassion, empathy, and love for others and a joi de vie is something that is rooted in the spirit in which we were created. I don't consider that selfish--nor do I consider it self-disillusioning. I may not be a Christian--but I realized a very long time ago there is a much larger good than myself that I should be working for...

I just can't imagine a just merciful God that would choose that route. I feel there is a higher power--but there is such a diverse wellspring of people that were created by the Divine I don't know how one path can get all of the Creator's people Home... I have heard that Hell is Eternal seperation from God. And then, if that is true, then yes, I would say God would be eternally sad to be seperated from so much that was created by the Divine Hand...Imagine your own sorrow at never, ever, ever seeing your own child again--there couldn't be a deeper sadness.

Quite true, and see also Apu's post. And, I for one, though not a Pauline scholar (nor a fan), can tell you that when Jesus proclaimed himself the "Bread of Life" (John 6:35-40) he proclaiming himself as a replacment to the Jewish law. So, if we're considering ourselves Christians--then citing OT verses are not entirely valid since JC said they were no longer valid. Pretty much, if Christians accept Jesus as the New Covanent then they are invalidating the Abrahamic covanent...

But if life is sacred and given by God--then only God should taken it away. That's the logic I've heard for abortion being wrong. And I would assume that this logic should hold true for all right-to-life issues: death penalty, euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, etc. But usually it doesn't.

Happy Birthday Super Steve!

Brando, baby, I love you, but I'm afraid to a lot of people slippery slope of choice is definitely a reality. Let's look at the timeline: 1965: Horribly enough birth control becomes available to married couples (via Griswald v. Conneticut). It begins. Note: this is stuff like the pill, not condoms, but this that actually affect hormonal cycles. 1972: The slope continued to allow UNMARRIED women to gain access to birth control in a decision I believe was Eisenstad v. Baird. 1973: Roe v. Wade So, for many people this could actually be considered a slope downward. Of course, many pro-choice people would argue that since Roe v. Wade the pro-choice movement has lost very important ground as well...

I agree more women than men do it (and they aren't doing themselves--or any other women, or their partners any favors)--but men do it too... Askmen.com says 25% of men have admitted to faking it...Flash maybe you're just one in the honest majority... http://www.askmen.com/love/vanessa_60/62_love_secrets.html

People who fake it (from niceness, to being smart, to well, it). Oh, and rudeness. If you don't have anything nice to say--then inner monologue...

It's just rude--that's the only thing that bothers me. I'm sorry, you have no right to call people on honest to goodness facts and then try and shame them over and over. I am just really bothered by the rudeness. I mean 2 personal attacks in 1 thread is a bit much--that's my only problem...