|
Post by saxacalhoya on Apr 16, 2009 21:20:49 GMT -5
To put this into context, the Jesuit seal is routinely covered up for different events in held in Gaston Hall. This is why there is a triangle made specifically for that section of the alter. This has occurred for musical performances, television show tapings, student productions, non-Catholic religious ceremonies, etc., so let's not act as though this is the first time it has happened.
We must realize that the University and the Jesuit order have as much right not to have its symbols used to endorse or support views that it may not necessarily agree with, at the same time as having those views represented on campus in order to engage the critical tensions of the day. So let's be honest, those complaining would have had just as much of an issue with Georgetown for allowing the exploitation of the symbols in relationship to Obama's address.
What I don't understand is the blatant racism, anti-Catholic/Muslim, extreme political views and other baggage that many of those criticizing Georgetown are bringing to bear against our community (I've seen more than 150 messages that contain such sentiments). Students interns answering the phones on campus should not be told that since they are not Catholic they are to blame for this shameful behavior.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 16, 2009 23:20:58 GMT -5
What I don't understand is the blatant racism, anti-Catholic/Muslim, extreme political views and other baggage that many of those criticizing Georgetown are bringing to bear against our community (I've seen more than 150 messages that contain such sentiments). Students interns answering the phones on campus should not be told that since they are not Catholic they are to blame for this shameful behavior. I only had the pleasure of answering one such call today. The gist of it was "Shame shame SHAME on Georgetown for covering the image of our Lord Jesus Christ and inviting the anti-Christian so-called President to defile blah blah blah..." My response that the Office of Undergraduate Admissions had nothing to do with this had little effect. I'm sure the folks in the President's Office have had quite the week.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 17, 2009 9:13:22 GMT -5
OK, so my initial objection was that it was rude to Georgetown to ask us to cover something that we choose to keep on our walls (regardless of whether it is a religious symbol or not.
But look at 3:09. .
This is a GPB event. As a 2006 participant, I have a soft spot in my heart for Mr. Georgetown, and the 3 years I saw the event, it was really quite funny. GPB has done a nice job with it. And I assume that GPB does not specifically request that the University put up the black triangle.
So there you have it. Maybe the White House requested, and maybe they didn't. Maybe the University defaults to having the black triangle up there, and only take it down when there is something going on in Gaston that they think affirmatively fits w/ something the University wants to endorse. I don't know the details, but I now know that this story is ridiculous and got blown out of proportion.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 17, 2009 9:46:46 GMT -5
My problem is that you do Catholicism a disservice by restricting its identity to a single issue. BINGO! I consider myself a non-practicing Catholic. I was raised in this tradition, and attended Catholic school all my life, including Georgetown. I believe in a lot of Church teachings, such loving your enemies and treating others as you would like to be treated. However, I do not attend church often, and I do not give up anything or refrain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. I believe my actions towards other people are more important than doing these things, which is why I have issues with all of organized religion, not just Catholicism. I am pro-choice, and this is one of many issues that I disagree with the Church on (also premarital sex, contraception, and gay marriage). However, I still am anti-war, anti-death penalty, and think giving to the poor and disadvantaged is probably the most important thing that Catholics can do, especially in regards to Jesus' teachings in the Bible. For these reasons, with all my issues with the Church, I still consider myself Catholic. And I feel that there are a lot of Catholics out there like me. EasyEd, please feel free to tell me why I am not Catholic, and how Georgetown has failed me. And finally to get back on topic, although I disagree with them and their tactics, the pro-life protesters have a right to their free speech, and I think Georgetown is best served having speakers of all political persuasions and viewpoints on campus. I'm choosing to respond to this because I believe it came from the heart. I'll start with the fact you state you have issues with organized religion. The fact of the matter is that Jesus established his religion as an organized religion. He appointed 12 apostles. He told Simon he was Peter and He would build his church on him; and He gave him enormous powers: the keys to the kingdom of heaven, the power to forgive sins or to retain them. He told him He would be with him until the end of time. He gave the apostles His Body and Blood and told them to do the same in remembrance of Him. He sent the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Paul addressed the church in Ephesus, the church in Corinth, the church in Philadelphia, etc. Paul returned to the apostles to iron out difficulties between the gentile church and the Jewish church, such as circumcision. In summary, Jesus established an organized church. Second, you seem to be in what I will call a "humanistic" approach to religion, seeing your main thrust as being doing things for others and loving everyone. It neglects the main thrust as Jesus said the most important commandment is to love God with your whole heart, soul and mind - and we do that by prayer, by receiving the sacraments, and by obeying His commandments, one of which is you shall not kill. Third, and last for this response, too many people think they can figure everything out through reason but that misses the boat on what faith actually is. Faith is a belief when you have no proof. It's a gift from God. Jesus warned He would hide the truth from the learned and reveal it to the less learned. Since Jesus promised the apostles He would be with them until the end of time, I am much more comfortable relying on their successors in the Church to tell me whether premarital sex or abortion are right or wrong than someone like myself who does not have 2,000 years of study and tradition behind me. I'll say more later.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,301
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 17, 2009 10:12:38 GMT -5
BINGO! I consider myself a non-practicing Catholic. I was raised in this tradition, and attended Catholic school all my life, including Georgetown. I believe in a lot of Church teachings, such loving your enemies and treating others as you would like to be treated. However, I do not attend church often, and I do not give up anything or refrain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. I believe my actions towards other people are more important than doing these things, which is why I have issues with all of organized religion, not just Catholicism. I am pro-choice, and this is one of many issues that I disagree with the Church on (also premarital sex, contraception, and gay marriage). However, I still am anti-war, anti-death penalty, and think giving to the poor and disadvantaged is probably the most important thing that Catholics can do, especially in regards to Jesus' teachings in the Bible. For these reasons, with all my issues with the Church, I still consider myself Catholic. And I feel that there are a lot of Catholics out there like me. EasyEd, please feel free to tell me why I am not Catholic, and how Georgetown has failed me. And finally to get back on topic, although I disagree with them and their tactics, the pro-life protesters have a right to their free speech, and I think Georgetown is best served having speakers of all political persuasions and viewpoints on campus. I'm choosing to respond to this because I believe it came from the heart. I'll start with the fact you state you have issues with organized religion. The fact of the matter is that Jesus established his religion as an organized religion. He appointed 12 apostles. He told Simon he was Peter and He would build his church on him; and He gave him enormous powers: the keys to the kingdom of heaven, the power to forgive sins or to retain them. He told him He would be with him until the end of time. He gave the apostles His Body and Blood and told them to do the same in remembrance of Him. He sent the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Paul addressed the church in Ephesus, the church in Corinth, the church in Philadelphia, etc. Paul returned to the apostles to iron out difficulties between the gentile church and the Jewish church, such as circumcision. In summary, Jesus established an organized church. Second, you seem to be in what I will call a "humanistic" approach to religion, seeing your main thrust as being doing things for others and loving everyone. It neglects the main thrust as Jesus said the most important commandment is to love God with your whole heart, soul and mind - and we do that by prayer, by receiving the sacraments, and by obeying His commandments, one of which is you shall not kill. Third, and last for this response, too many people think they can figure everything out through reason but that misses the boat on what faith actually is. Faith is a belief when you have no proof. It's a gift from God. Jesus warned He would hide the truth from the learned and reveal it to the less learned. Since Jesus promised the apostles He would be with them until the end of time, I am much more comfortable relying on their successors in the Church to tell me whether premarital sex or abortion are right or wrong than someone like myself who does not have 2,000 years of study and tradition behind me. I'll say more later. 1) I respectfully disagree with your first point. I don't think Jesus had any intention of setting up anything quite like the Catholic church. 2) I also respectfully disagree with your second argument. I would argue that Jesus' central commandment was to love one another as he has loved us. He specifically preached on numerous occasions, particularly on the mount, his disdain for empty ceremony. 3) I agree with your last point on faith. It is something beyond reason. Something that requires you to abandon the world of senses and proofs and step into the unknown. However, just because someone disagrees with your opinion of what one should believe does not mean that person lacks faith. As faith goes beyond reason, faith also goes beyond individual principles, laws, doctrine and dogma - it sits at the heart of belief, it is not specific, it is not easily defined. To limit faith to the mere supplication to specific rules and dogmas belittles faith and transforms it from a metaphysical act of trust and courage to a simple exercise in obedience. I believe this is precisely what Jesus' sermon on the mount and in the plain was all about, so I respectfully disagree with your thoughts on faith.
|
|
sead43
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 796
|
Post by sead43 on Apr 17, 2009 10:47:52 GMT -5
So there you have it. Maybe the White House requested, and maybe they didn't. Maybe the University defaults to having the black triangle up there, and only take it down when there is something going on in Gaston that they think affirmatively fits w/ something the University wants to endorse. I don't know the details, but I now know that this story is ridiculous and got blown out of proportion. that really makes no sense. the big sign that says "Georgetown University" sits right under the IHS/black triangle almost all the time and is almost never covered up (except, of course, for the Obama speech)...why wouldn't they remove that every time they covered the IHS if it was simply a matter of the University not wanting to "affirmatively endorse" an event?? Gaston is packed with "symbols that represent Georgetown" that never get covered up, even for Obama's speech. my initial point was that I didn't really buy the University’s line that the White House asked them to cover up all symbols...to do that they would have had to cover the entirety of all four walls. they covered what was in the line of sight of the camera with the curtain and flags. the paintings along the top of the back wall are just as "Georgetown" and even just as "religious" as the IHS, and both were out of the camera's line of sight...so why would the IHS be covered and the paintings not be?? as i said from the beginning, the question isn't one of whether the White House asked for symbols to be covered or whether it is SOP to do so...it is why the University even has that black triangle and why it uses it at a seemingly random and high number of events, including the President's speech. If there is a legitimate answer, great, but it just doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Apr 17, 2009 11:23:01 GMT -5
2) I also respectfully disagree with your second argument. I would argue that Jesus' central commandment was to love one another as he has loved us. He specifically preached on numerous occasions, particularly on the mount, his disdain for empty ceremony. Matthew 22:36-40 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He said to him, “’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 17, 2009 12:36:49 GMT -5
2) I also respectfully disagree with your second argument. I would argue that Jesus' central commandment was to love one another as he has loved us. He specifically preached on numerous occasions, particularly on the mount, his disdain for empty ceremony. Matthew 22:36-40 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He said to him, “’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Fair enough, but why is it that "loving God" somehow means: (1) opposing abortion, (2) decrying homosexuality, (3) fighting against contraception, no matter how beneficial it might be to a society, and (4) (in the case of the Obama speech) exhibiting an absurd amount of PRIDE in our one symbol on one wall at one University? Aren't these things ALL ultimately very petty ways to show love for an all-powerful God? How better to show love for God—a God that we can't possibly know how to please—than to follow that second commandment as closely as possible and love one another in the best ways we can based on what we do know about human life? (And don't say that we do know that God is pleased with our disdain for homosexuality. We can cherry-pick scripture all we want, but God would be no more pleased with my owning a slave (allowed in the Bible) than he is with my thinking less of homosexuals (supposedly "required" by the Bible). I understand faith. Even believing in a God, and His son, and so on requires enormous faith. But what justifies having "faith" in the fact that God opposes homosexuality? Why not have "faith" in the complete opposite and "faith" that God loves the people He created, regardless of what that means about their sexual orientation? Finally, why are we expected to blindly follow the words of PEOPLE—flawed, human PEOPLE (popes, priests, bishops, etc.)—to lead us to such conclusions as the ones listed above? If someone can explain to me what makes a priest better equipped to understand the desires of God than you or I, I'd like to hear it. And again, I will not accept that there is any sort of divine hand that touches priests and makes them superior to the rest of us in terms of ability to understand God's will. That went out the window (for me, at least) when priests were found to use their "divine hands" for their own recreational purposes.
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Apr 17, 2009 12:58:19 GMT -5
People can be wrong. People are wrong. I am wrong.
I don't disagree with your assertion that fallible people will be fallible. However, humility requires me to realize that I myself am also fallible and that my understanding of God is incomplete. I want others experience with God to inform me to a more complete understanding.
The two parts of the summary of the law (love God and love your neighbor as yourself) I don't believe are meant to be mutually exclusive. To me, love of neighbor should ideally flow from your relationship with the everloving, merciful and forgiving God.
It's somewhat akin to the faith and good works dynamic. It's not "either or", it's "both and". Utraque unum, if you prefer.
For the rest of your assertion, I don't see how you can equate the primacy of a person of faith's relationship with God to somehow condoning actions that are abominable.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 17, 2009 13:01:51 GMT -5
Shame on Georgetown and its administration. They should welcome everyone to speak as the free excgange of ideas is only good. Denying the University's identity to accomodate such a speaker (any speaker, not just this one) is disgraceful.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 17, 2009 13:08:28 GMT -5
Shame on Georgetown and its administration. They should welcome everyone to speak as the free excgange of ideas is only good. Denying the University's identity to accomodate such a speaker (any speaker, not just this one) is disgraceful. Again, I assert that this was NOT A DENIAL OF IDENTITY. 3:09 This is a random Georgetown student event and the IHS is covered. I don't know why in this context they covered it, but they did. I don't see anyone attacking the University or this juggler for covering the IHS. It's just happening in the Obama context b/c it's politically charged, and so it's easy for people with anti-Obama religious positions to throw stones at everyone involved (school and Obama). Nodak—I'll respond when I have a second to think about your answers. But I already can tell that where we are going to disagree is in your last word..."abominable." We agree on human flaws and lack of perfect knowledge. And so I just am not as comfortable as you seem to be with labeling certain things as "abominable," despite the fact that they may be GOOD for people, depending on life circumstances (in the case of contraceptives, allowing expression of love without spreading disease; homosexuality even allows for the expression of love between people who otherwise would not).
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 17, 2009 13:15:17 GMT -5
Had I known about this random juggler, I'd be equally upset. If you want to perform,speak, appear at Gaston Hall, you should appear in Gaston Hall as it is, not as you'd like it to be. I don't blame the President of the United States, I blame the President of the University.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 17, 2009 13:22:31 GMT -5
I meant to post this review of GU grad James Carroll's book, Practicing Catholic, on the B&G Board last weekend, but forgot. However, it seems at least tangentially relevant to the current discussion. www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/books/review/Miles-t.html?ref=booksI have a lot of respect for ed, who is often the lone voice of (usually) reasonable dissent on this board, but I think this article indicates what I have long suspected: that not all of Georgetown's older alumni take the same positions he does with regard to the University's mission and policies. Also, fantastic post by Cambridge above (on page 4). Most of what he said applies to myself as well.
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Apr 17, 2009 13:38:05 GMT -5
Shame on Georgetown and its administration. They should welcome everyone to speak as the free excgange of ideas is only good. Denying the University's identity to accomodate such a speaker (any speaker, not just this one) is disgraceful. Again, I assert that this was NOT A DENIAL OF IDENTITY. 3:09 This is a random Georgetown student event and the IHS is covered. I don't know why in this context they covered it, but they did. I don't see anyone attacking the University or this juggler for covering the IHS. It's just happening in the Obama context b/c it's politically charged, and so it's easy for people with anti-Obama religious positions to throw stones at everyone involved (school and Obama). Nodak—I'll respond when I have a second to think about your answers. But I already can tell that where we are going to disagree is in your last word..."abominable." We agree on human flaws and lack of perfect knowledge. And so I just am not as comfortable as you seem to be with labeling certain things as "abominable," despite the fact that they may be GOOD for people, depending on life circumstances (in the case of contraceptives, allowing expression of love without spreading disease; homosexuality even allows for the expression of love between people who otherwise would not). If I may be a bit less obtuse, the "abominable" reference is to priests sexually-abusing children and distorting a belief in God to justify hate of your neighbors. I am Catholic by upbringing, but am now an Episcopalian in-law. I am not opposed to contraception or civil unions for anyone. I am, however, opposed to the practice of abortion as birth control. I regret using the word "abominable", since its meaning may have been co-opted or have connotations of homophobia that I didn't intend.
|
|
hsaxa2010
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 408
|
Post by hsaxa2010 on Apr 17, 2009 16:26:48 GMT -5
3:09 This is a random Georgetown student event and the IHS is covered. I don't know why in this context they covered it, but they did. I don't see anyone attacking the University or this juggler for covering the IHS. It's just happening in the Obama context b/c it's politically charged, and so it's easy for people with anti-Obama religious positions to throw stones at everyone involved (school and Obama). This clip is from the Mr Georgetown Pageant and, to my knowledge, this was covered independently from the event and was not asked to be covered.
|
|
hsaxa2010
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 408
|
Post by hsaxa2010 on Apr 17, 2009 16:31:15 GMT -5
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on Apr 17, 2009 17:03:54 GMT -5
I'm choosing to respond to this because I believe it came from the heart. I'll start with the fact you state you have issues with organized religion. The fact of the matter is that Jesus established his religion as an organized religion. He appointed 12 apostles. He told Simon he was Peter and He would build his church on him; and He gave him enormous powers: the keys to the kingdom of heaven, the power to forgive sins or to retain them. He told him He would be with him until the end of time. He gave the apostles His Body and Blood and told them to do the same in remembrance of Him. He sent the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Paul addressed the church in Ephesus, the church in Corinth, the church in Philadelphia, etc. Paul returned to the apostles to iron out difficulties between the gentile church and the Jewish church, such as circumcision. In summary, Jesus established an organized church. Second, you seem to be in what I will call a "humanistic" approach to religion, seeing your main thrust as being doing things for others and loving everyone. It neglects the main thrust as Jesus said the most important commandment is to love God with your whole heart, soul and mind - and we do that by prayer, by receiving the sacraments, and by obeying His commandments, one of which is you shall not kill. Third, and last for this response, too many people think they can figure everything out through reason but that misses the boat on what faith actually is. Faith is a belief when you have no proof. It's a gift from God. Jesus warned He would hide the truth from the learned and reveal it to the less learned. Since Jesus promised the apostles He would be with them until the end of time, I am much more comfortable relying on their successors in the Church to tell me whether premarital sex or abortion are right or wrong than someone like myself who does not have 2,000 years of study and tradition behind me. I'll say more later. I feel very lucky to have attended a university like Georgetown, and to be a member of a chat board like HT, where civil discourse on topics such as defensive rebounding, politics, recruiting and faith are commonplace. Now, I disagree with ed on a variety of issues, but on this I believe he is making a very strong point. I am as liberal as they come. I am also a practicing Catholic, and I feel very connected to the Church. Like ed wrote, no matter the failings of organized religion, we cannot avoid the fact that Jesus did establish His religion as an organized one. I also agree that in addition to the humanistic message, Christ gave us specific ways to commune with Him and each other. As sophisticated, intelligent, informed and independent people, sticking to any sort of organization whose rules are old is difficult. But it does not diminish the importance of the divine messages, orders and teachings we were given. I often hear folks say "I'm not into organized religion," or "I'm not religious but very spiritual." If you're into a certain religion or faith tradition that lets you do that, wonderful. But that is not how Jesus set the table. Despite my connection to the Church, I am not blind to its shortcomings. But what I find irritating is that so many intelligent people that have aimed to change the world, politics as usual, the environment, etc. often neglect to put that same energy and fervor into the Church. And I'm not talking about taking that same energy only to become a mindless follower. If you feel like something ain't right within the Church, well then work within it to effect change. I feel it is the least I (and we) can do.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 18, 2009 12:46:38 GMT -5
My problem is that you do Catholicism a disservice by restricting its identity to a single issue. BINGO! I consider myself a non-practicing Catholic. I was raised in this tradition, and attended Catholic school all my life, including Georgetown. I believe in a lot of Church teachings, such loving your enemies and treating others as you would like to be treated. However, I do not attend church often, and I do not give up anything or refrain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. I believe my actions towards other people are more important than doing these things, which is why I have issues with all of organized religion, not just Catholicism. I am pro-choice, and this is one of many issues that I disagree with the Church on (also premarital sex, contraception, and gay marriage). However, I still am anti-war, anti-death penalty, and think giving to the poor and disadvantaged is probably the most important thing that Catholics can do, especially in regards to Jesus' teachings in the Bible. For these reasons, with all my issues with the Church, I still consider myself Catholic. And I feel that there are a lot of Catholics out there like me. EasyEd, please feel free to tell me why I am not Catholic, and how Georgetown has failed me. And finally to get back on topic, although I disagree with them and their tactics, the pro-life protesters have a right to their free speech, and I think Georgetown is best served having speakers of all political persuasions and viewpoints on campus. To finish commenting on your post, you say you have a problem with organized religion; you do not attend church often; call yourself a non-practicing Catholic; you have no problem with women choosing to have their babies done away with; you have no problem with premarital sex; you are in favor of gay marriage; you have no problem with contraception; and, you ask me to tell you if you are a Catholic or not? It is incredible you attended a Catholic university and came away with an outlook on religion that is at so far at odds with Catholic Church structure, liturgy and teaching. In my opinion, Georgetown did you a disservice. Your beliefs or non-beliefs tell me you were not presented with Catholic beliefs in a manner that was supportive of those beliefs. Lip service may have been given to these beliefs, but no supportive apologetics. Correct me if I'm wrong. Some other items, not specifically addressed to you. I am not a single issue person as I've been accused of. I support all the teachings of the Catholic Church even those where I have trouble understanding the "why". I rely on the judgement of the Church in matters of belief just as I rely on the judgements of a doctor in medical matters or of a lawyer in legal matters. But, even though I am not a single issue person, the matter of life is number one on my list because of the enormity of the problem where over a million babies are sacrificed each year. No other issue reaches this level of importance. I also realize that the same number of abortions took place during the Bush administration as are now taking place under Obama but the only real avenue possible is the courts and Bush would have attempted to install justices who were pro-life and Obama will do the opposite. As to the belief that God would not have created homosexuals with the intent of denying them the right to love and marry - well, God created people who were attracted to children too. He also created people who would murder. He also created Mother Teresa and Hitler. I do not claim to have a clue as to why God does certain things and neither do any of you.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Apr 18, 2009 12:47:48 GMT -5
Shame on Georgetown and its administration. They should welcome everyone to speak as the free excgange of ideas is only good. Denying the University's identity to accomodate such a speaker (any speaker, not just this one) is disgraceful. Again, I assert that this was NOT A DENIAL OF IDENTITY. 3:09 This is a random Georgetown student event and the IHS is covered. I don't know why in this context they covered it, but they did. I don't see anyone attacking the University or this juggler for covering the IHS. It's just happening in the Obama context b/c it's politically charged, and so it's easy for people with anti-Obama religious positions to throw stones at everyone involved (school and Obama). Nodak—I'll respond when I have a second to think about your answers. But I already can tell that where we are going to disagree is in your last word..."abominable." We agree on human flaws and lack of perfect knowledge. And so I just am not as comfortable as you seem to be with labeling certain things as "abominable," despite the fact that they may be GOOD for people, depending on life circumstances (in the case of contraceptives, allowing expression of love without spreading disease; homosexuality even allows for the expression of love between people who otherwise would not). I feel compelled to talk about this issue. Just a warning I won't be quoting scripture or trying to go through an exegesis of the New or Old Testament. Instead I'd like to talk about the more hot button issue of how University facilities operates - or at least operated when I was in GPB planning similar events to the one that has been discussed. I planned an event in Gaston in 2004 (maybe 2005, I forget) - so this may have changed in the last 5 years (wow, I feel old). When you reserve a room for an event through the Office of Campus Activities and Facilities they get the room ready for you and turn it over to you when the set-up time for your event is supposed to start. Often times this is as simple as cleaning up the room in ICC where your club is meeting. With Gaston its a little more complicated. There is a holding room/green room in New North that needs to be opened. Access for 4-way plugs for sound needs to be set up. Depending on the event OCAF will move the podium on the stage to its desired location. They also quite frequently put the triangle up. This is done quietly and there is no real discussion on this point. You can't ask a OCAF to put it up or down. Its either there or it isn't. For instance, to the best of my knowledge when Mike Birbiglia came to Gaston Hall to talk about pandas, sun chips, and crackers that year the triangle was up. I have no idea what that means about this performance or who made the decision. It was just there when we began set-up for the event.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Apr 20, 2009 8:59:04 GMT -5
BINGO! I consider myself a non-practicing Catholic. I was raised in this tradition, and attended Catholic school all my life, including Georgetown. I believe in a lot of Church teachings, such loving your enemies and treating others as you would like to be treated. However, I do not attend church often, and I do not give up anything or refrain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. I believe my actions towards other people are more important than doing these things, which is why I have issues with all of organized religion, not just Catholicism. I am pro-choice, and this is one of many issues that I disagree with the Church on (also premarital sex, contraception, and gay marriage). However, I still am anti-war, anti-death penalty, and think giving to the poor and disadvantaged is probably the most important thing that Catholics can do, especially in regards to Jesus' teachings in the Bible. For these reasons, with all my issues with the Church, I still consider myself Catholic. And I feel that there are a lot of Catholics out there like me. EasyEd, please feel free to tell me why I am not Catholic, and how Georgetown has failed me. And finally to get back on topic, although I disagree with them and their tactics, the pro-life protesters have a right to their free speech, and I think Georgetown is best served having speakers of all political persuasions and viewpoints on campus. To finish commenting on your post, you say you have a problem with organized religion; you do not attend church often; call yourself a non-practicing Catholic; you have no problem with women choosing to have their babies done away with; you have no problem with premarital sex; you are in favor of gay marriage; you have no problem with contraception; and, you ask me to tell you if you are a Catholic or not? It is incredible you attended a Catholic university and came away with an outlook on religion that is at so far at odds with Catholic Church structure, liturgy and teaching. In my opinion, Georgetown did you a disservice. Your beliefs or non-beliefs tell me you were not presented with Catholic beliefs in a manner that was supportive of those beliefs. Lip service may have been given to these beliefs, but no supportive apologetics. Correct me if I'm wrong. Just to clarify, Ed, I DO have a problem with abortion, I think it is a serious issue and extremely sad when it happens. However, I think it should be legal because women performing their own risky abortions on their own with a coat hanger would be much worse. Also, what about cases of rape and incest? Safe, legal and rare. I hope that less abortions happen, which is why I am such a strong component of contraception. Also, I think that responsible adults can make their own decisions about sex, as long as they are safe and use the proper precautions. Ed, I respect your beliefs but I think that you are off-base in your expectation that everybody leave Georgetown as a devout and practicing Catholic. The world and higher education is not like that anymore. An approach like that would drive more people away from the Hilltop than towards it. I had many of these issues before coming to Georgetown, so I do not feel that Georgetown "failed" me. Georgetown enriched my life greatly in so many ways that I cannot describe. And who knows, I may come back to the Church later in my life. But these are my beliefs now, and I embrace them, while I understand they will continue to evolve over the course of my life. Reasonable questioning is not a bad thing - it is a very important part of the human experience. I was a Theology minor and took several courses on the Catholic religion, as well as on Hinduism and Islam. So if anything, attending Georgetown made me more in tune with religion. The courses on Catholicism were indeed supportive of Catholic teaching, but also critical of some approaches. I think Georgetown should not be in the business of trying to convert everyone, but instead explaining Catholic theology and practice, and letting the student come to his or her own conclusion. I think this is the proper approach of any Catholic institution of higher learning. Lastly, if you are so concerned with life, Ed, what is your stance on war and the death penalty? A lot of life is lost there too. Abortion is not the only life issue.
|
|