Anderson historically incorrect, biased
In regards to Hannah Anderson’s viewpoint on October 20, she is mistaken on several points. While she does have her historical facts correct, she has misinterpreted and torn them from their historical context.
Yes, there have been atrocities committed by Christians (as well as non-Christians) throughout history. As a Christian, I do not condone or defend such actions; they are wrong.
Jefferson’s quote is true, but one should look at the historical context of it.
The context presented in the First Amendment is that no government should coerce specific Christian ideas upon other Christians.
The idea that the Christians of the time were forcing a religion upon those opposed to religion does not apply. Look from where the colonists came.
These “innocent men, women, and children” came from European nations that demanded its people adhere to specific Christian beliefs.
Even the examples presented by Hannah are all of Christians against other Christians, not Christians oppressing non-Christians.
It was with Christian terms in mind that the First Amendment was penned.
Saying the founding fathers intended Hannah’s interpretation reads into the document with a modern bias.
I am not for forcing religious ideas on anyone, and I agree with Hannah’s interpretation as long as one realizes it is a modern view.
Besides wrenching Jefferson’s quote from history, Hannah has also showed that she does not understand the relation between Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.
Yes, the religions differ on many theological issues, but the God is the same for all.
The fact the religions use different names is immaterial. “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” So to say “under God” is offensive to Muslims is inaccurate.
Also, to say “Christianity validated” slavery is extreme.
This idea supposes that Christianity began slavery globally, only Christians participated in slavery, and that all Christians supported slavery. All three ideas are preposterous.
I am not saying whether the pair of words belongs in the Pledge, but if Hannah would like them removed, she should do so on grounds other than the “phrase goes everything American” and the word “God” is offensive to Muslims.
James Rodi
sophomore
physics/ astronomy
We should be thankful for Pope
I am writing to express my admiration for Tim Basilica’s recent column praising the work of Pope John Paul II.
In his piece, Basilica described the Pope as having accomplished his mission as leader of the Catholic Church and being, “a living example of the life of Christ.”
However, I must point out that Basilica neglected to mention the greatest example of the Pope’s compassion and faith.
On May 13, 1981 while riding in his car in St. Peter’s Square the Pope was shot three times by Turkish terrorist Mehmet Ali Agca. The Pope was quickly taken to a hospital where he endured a six hour surgery in which some of his intestine was removed. Despite being near death, the Pope at once issued a public statement forgiving his would-be-assassin.
Later the Pope visited Agca in his prison cell.
During their meeting the Pope held Acga’s hand and forgave him. The two talked for 21 minutes during which the Pope managed to make Acga laugh twice.
After they had finished speaking Acga took the Pope’s hand and touched it to his forehead, a Muslim sign of respect.
Any man who so exemplifies the qualities and values of a belief
system as Pope John Paul II has earned the right to lead as long as he lives.
Catholics, and indeed people everywhere should be thankful for his leadership and admire his character.
Elliott Brown
sophomore
mass communication
IDs easy to come by no matter what age
I am writing in response to the article about the new Louisiana license. Do the people really think that a sketch of the capitol building will change anything?
I mean come on! To start, I have had the same license since I was sixteen and won’t be getting it renewed until a few years.
So unless you get your license renewed or are getting your first license, this really won’t affect you at all.
Not to mention that the Internet is not the only way too get a fake ID.
When I was sixteen, my sister found a license in her pocket after a night out, and gave it to me. The girl had the same eye and hair color but besides that looked nothing like me.
I even bought beer with it and the girl on the idea was only twenty at the time.
The problem is not that the IDs are too convincing but that people just don’t care.
There have been many times that I used my fake ID and gave my ID to my friend right after me in line for a bar and we had no problems getting in. It would have taken two seconds for the doorman to notice that my friend’s ID had a picture of me, but they don’t care.
The new license will not affect under-age drinking in the least bit. I am not 21 yet and I can get a drink in a bar by simply asking someone of age to buy it.
I can drink it right in front of the bar workers and THEY DONT CARE.
So to make my point even more clear: The bar owners and workers are the only people that can put a stop to minors in bars and minors drinking.
Lauren Chustz
sophomore
mass communication