| Oh Baby! Is a student always a student? Not according to TCU. Residence hall regulations stipulate that once on-campus women become pregnant, they are given access to programs at University Ministries and the Health Center but can no longer reside in a residence hall after the birth. Director of Residential Services Roger Fisher said the university's policy is in the best interest of the mother and the child. "A residence hall is not the proper place to raise a child," Fisher said. "There are community bathrooms, not an appropriate place to bathe a child. And it is not fair that other residents should have to hear the baby cry. Residence halls are designed for a single student." But there is room for improvement. The issue here is what message the university is sending to those who decided to become parents. The current TCU policy creates an uncomfortable environment for expectant mothers. How many times have you seen a late-term pregnant student at TCU? If a student was to become pregnant, she would feel unwanted in an environment that looks down on her. That is the impression we are giving to students by having a policy that would kick them out of residence halls. We should let students decide for themselves if a residence hall is an ideal place to raise a child. But what implications does a TCU student's pregnancy have on the male student who is just as responsible? He would not be kicked out of his residence hall. We have to strongly consider the message that TCU is sending. And currently, that message is that if students get pregnant, then they better not expect to live here.
History not just black or white Black history isn't white history. So what's all the fuss about? Why should white people participate in a celebration that clearly has nothing to do with them? Why should February mean anything but candy and flowers for the white man whom some blacks won't even call brother? And besides, doesn't it seem like blacks are always complaining about something? First they want freedom, then it's civil rights. Now they want publicity and support for the short month devoted to their history and heritage. A celebration of black accomplishments, they call it. Don't we recognize Martin Luther King Jr. Day? Why can't they be satisfied? I'm not saying black history should not be acknowledged, but there are places for history lessons. We learn about black writers, inventors and pioneers in the classroom. For instance, after we cover Pound, Frost, Hemingway and Faulkner, we eventually get to Langston Hughes. And who are Dunbar, Giovanni, Hurston and Wright anyway? If they really made any great literary contributions, wouldn't we know who they are? Besides, after studying the important people, there just isn't enough time to get to anything else. That's why we have special classes for that kind of thing. No. Black history isn't white history, although both whites and blacks have benefited from the accomplishments of black innovators like Granville T. Woods who developed the incubator or Garrett A. Morgan who invented the stop signal. And let us not forget black pioneers like Daniel Hale Williams who performed the first successful open heart surgery, Charles R. Drew who developed a way to preserve blood plasma for use in blood banks and Percy Julian who developed drugs to treat glaucoma as well as a low-cost method of producing cortisone to relieve arthritis. But these aren't American accomplishments. They are black accomplishments. For there truly to be a connection between black history and white history, there would have to be a connection between black people and white people. But just because you cannot have a slave without a master, doesn't mean there's a link. And there's no connection simply because people cannot fight for civil rights if there is no one to fight against. There's no common history because there's more black blood flowing through white veins and white blood flowing through black than most would care to admit. More importantly, however, is that the black struggle to freedom says nothing about the white struggle to grant it. If that were the case, then maybe it could be said that we've all been to the mountain top, blacks and whites together, and we've all made it over. So the next time you hear a black person complaining about the poor coverage of Black History Month or trying to promote white involvement in black history activities, just remind them that black history isn't white history. If they start saying that, then the next thing you know, they'll be saying that Jesus was black with his hair like wool and his feet like brass. Oh, no. Black history isn't white history.
Shavahn Dorris is a junior English major
from Joliet, Ill. 'Pop Christianity' can distort God Veggie Tales. The Left Behind series. Christian video games. What do these have in common? They can all be found in burgeoning Christian bookstore chains, and they are all symptoms of what some call "pop Christianity." While I have felt unsettled with the way Christianity in America works for as long as I can remember, it wasn't until lately that I have been sickened over several issues. I am often embarrassed to say I am a Christian and not because of its claims. I am embarrassed at how it has passed the point of becoming culturally relevant to Americans and now reflects a lot of unpleasant things about our culture. This is a country filled with mega-churches, Christian bookstores and Christian video games, and don't even get me started on Christian music. The word "Christian" is so loaded with commercial value that one can stick it on any nasty old product, and it'll sell. A friend made a rather profound statement about American Christianity a while ago, saying it was like assembly-line faith, or processed. With our minds getting bloated from living in a commercially driven, self-indulgent society, it's no wonder that this attitude carries over into our spirituality. It would be preposterous for me to claim all Christians in America display these attitudes, but it seems quite widespread. An article by Hanna Rosin of The Washington Post stated six out of 10 pastors say they lead "seeker-sensitive" churches. To those not familiar with this phrase, it refers to the attempt of churches to make their services, and often theology, relevant to our culture in order to draw attendance. This is not necessarily a bad idea. The problem comes when the spirituality and theology of churches are reduced solely to the cultural standards of society. This is a difficult balance. At what point should a pastor decide to avoid words like "God" in his or her sermons in order to avoid sounding fundamental? At what point does it become acceptable to trivialize worship into "Wheel O' Prayer" or "Prayer Bingo"? On both ends of the spectrum, it seems a wave of what some call "home-brewed faith" is flooding the country. It emerges in strange ways, too. A couple in Virginia recently decided to construct their own version of God. Ed and Joanne Liverani (featured in the Rosin article) displayed stunning brilliance in their description of this new god. They kept Jesus in this new faith because "Jesus is big on love," while chucking the idea of God being an angry God because, you know, an angry God might do something like care about the injustice in the world. My all-time favorite of their new found beliefs is their stance on the nature of God. "We discovered God within," Joanne said. "That's why we need God. Because we are God. God gives me the ability to create my own godliness." The logic follows just marvelously. At the same time, I realize I do the same things in my perspective of God. I tend to minimize unpleasant spiritual quandaries, like how an omnipotent God can co-exist with evil. It's easy to mentally form God into a sensitive sort of New Age guy than find out who God really is (which, of course, is a lifelong process). While many American Christians will continue to approach God with their own assumptions of who or what God is, it is worth it to stop and examine what we're thinking and ask how utilitarian our faith is. Then we can go out and spend $40 on the latest Christian novel.
Anita Boeninger is a junior social work
major from Colorado Springs, Colo. Excel, AutoTrader.com do not live up to expectations I need a new car. This says nothing about my ability to afford, let alone purchase, a new car, but my current car creates within me certain feelings of inadequacy, not to mention envy of others and hatred for my car itself. Right now I drive a 1994 Hyundai Excel, which I refer to as my Little Korean Friend. It's my third car, following a '66 Jeep CJ-5 I called Buford Badass. He ate pedestrians and old people and ran best when I used high octane Everclear for fuel. I had to put him to sleep eventually, but going from a rugged four-wheeler to a timorous compact is a bit of a letdown. There is nothing inherently wrong with my car, except that I think Hyundai representatives goofed when they named it. "Excel" is a misnomer because it doesn't excel in anything. You might try to argue this point, given that the car is an Asian import, and Asian imports generally excel in things like fuel economy and reliability. Not so for my Excel. I got better gas mileage in my '74 Super Beetle, which had a leaky tank. That they named it Excel is additionally irritating when one considers that the meaning of the word has to do with surpassing competition. Given my Excel's diminutive four-cylinder engine, I have trouble surpassing anything. You know how Hyundai brags on TV about having the best warrantee in America? Well, that sounds pretty excellent, except that the warrantee doesn't cover the powertrain, which doesn't sound like a big deal until your alternator needs to be replaced. When you go to take advantage of that wonderful warrantee, the dealership mechanic informs you that alternators are part of the powertrain. If I had the initiative, I would lobby Hyundai to change its name to something like the "Humble," the "Mediocre" or the "Just Sucks." I like the ring to that one. Imagine Big Billy Barret slashing prices on all 2000 Hyundai Just Sucks. So anyway, I hate my car. I know I can't complain when some people don't even have a car. I should be lucky that I don't have to walk to school, though this happened during the whole alternator fiasco. But just for kicks, I checked out AutoTrader.com because I was really impressed by the commercial, what with its indecisive married couple changing their mind and the SUVs and minivans flipping over and over according to their caprices. To its credit, AutoTrader.com was reasonably helpful, but it didn't work quite like it did on the commercial. On the commercial, the husband wants a minivan (which is a fallacy itself, because no husband really wants a minivan), but then his wife decides she wants an SUV, so the minivan disappears into the floor, and an Explorer pops up. They quibble over the color, and I assume that they settled on something, but I changed the channel. The Web site is a little different in that the cars don't roll over like they do on TV, and there aren't really any spaces for options. For instance, I set out to find a 1981 DeLorean with 31-inch tires, a flow master and dual missile launchers, but my search was fruitless, save for an '85 DeLorean, and its only extra was a driver side cocaine mirror. I did, however, find a 1986 Yugo which was described as a "pimp mobile." Call me unimaginative, but I have trouble picturing Petey Wheatstraw driving one of these. In any case, I will probably drive my Little Korean Friend for a long time, and even when I can get a new car, I will keep it around in case I have any dead bodies I need to stuff in a trunk. At that point, my unexcellent Excel and I will part ways, as I will push it into a lake.
Steve Steward is a senior political science
major from Lodi, Calif. Letter to the editor After seeing TCU come together to do a great service for a fellow Frog, Robbyn Kindle, I bring a proposal that would help many Frogs. Horned Frogs are not just the students of TCU, but the staff, faculty, administration and alumni of this institution as well. When one part of the community is in need, the rest need to bond together to help. Right now, non-exempt staff at TCU need our help. People are having to compromise the basic needs of life in order to continue working for TCU. Parents should not be forced to choose between working for the university and providing child care for their children. TCU should provide day care for these families. Not only would it be a service, but also it would distinguish TCU as a caring community and would be fulfilling for those who participated. I challenge TCU to support this endeavor by providing facilities and allowing the use of school property for our TCU family. Let's not waste our talents and resources by watching the people who love this university leave. Let's allow our actions to show concern for fellow Horned Frogs. Felicia Garman junior finance and accounting major |
The TCU Daily Skiff © 1998, 1999 Credits |