| Summary: | No right he I h ca e RE: Eri csmoen's 3/5 "Divid 404° BY ADAM TWARDOWSKI Freshman Petter Eriksmoen's con-ception of "rights" is starkly different from the one that the Founding Fathers articu-lated. The great achievement of the American political sys-tem was that it was the first in history to recognize most consistently that rights are negative in nature, which means that they limit what the government can't do, not what it can do (e.g., it can't infringe upon a person's abil-ity to speak or to practice the religion of his choice). In calling health care a right, Eriksmoen has turned the American conception of rights on its head. Values such as health care, food, education, etc., can't be con-sidered rights because they can be achieved only through the violation of another per-son's rights (i.e. through the expropriation and regulation of another person's property and material values). In a free society, a per son is free from the coercive powers of others, but he is not free to coerce others to provide for him values that he wants. Eriksmoen's error is the principal cause of the rise of the Welfare-Warfare State in America, which does not balk at the idea of using its awesome power to regu-late human life and expropri-ate private property in the name of an egalitarian ideal. Do you tweet? Stay connected throughout the week by following us , (1•CcincordianPaper on Twitter! About /0 second, ago from the web ConcordianPaper Straient-nel ne.02,47 al Contr.,' SkerhoLl 1C1 Dare to challenge yourself BY JEFF BROWN Sophomore Martin Luther once wrote, "Parents cannot pre-pare a more dependable trea-sure for [their) children than an education in the liberal arts." For Luther, education was a must, and parents had the joyous responsibility to grant their children an edu-cation. But note that Luther talks about a liberal arts edu-cation — a diverse, well-round-ed, make-you-think-outside-of- the-box education. Concordia's purpose is grounded in this thought. Concordia is strong in the liberal arts, as an ELCA col-lege. This place ensures that our brains and our souls work in partnership to better our-selves and better our world. However, I have noticed dif-fering thoughts in some stu-dents toward this liberal arts idea of education. There is a lack of challenge, a lack of risk-taking, a lack of vulner ability Nowhere do I see this more prevalent than in reli-gion classrooms. A religion major myself, I have witnessed on occasion some students adhering rigid-ly to their own opinions and ideas, as if the issues, texts, and ideas could be easily "an-swered," so to speak. This is not the Lutheran tradition that Concordia was founded on. In his book "Lutheran High Education: An Intro-duction," Dr. Ernest Sim-mons commented on this idea: "The Lutheran tradi-tion is the commitment to ecumenical (communal) dia-logue. It was the tradition of Luther and his colleagues to debate vigorously with one another and engage in dialogue with other reform-ers. The way of Lutheranism contributes to ecumenical dialogue and also affects the way faith and learning are exemplified in institutions of higher learning." I am not writing to call anyone out on anything done in the classroom, but I am urging my fellow Cobbers to give these religion classes and professors a chance. I am not writing on behalf of the religion repartment or any professor(s). I have simply seen enough negativity to-wards these classes that I feel a voice needs to be heard. These classes are designed to enrich your education and you, not to make you ques-tion your faith or convic-tions. These professors have studied deeply for years in biblical texts, ethics, history, etc., and deserve the utmost respect for what they present to us, as do all professors. According to Concordia's academic catalog, "The study of religion is an essential com-ponent of the academic pro-gram at Concordia. Religious beliefs and practices organize human life around ultimate commitments and concerns. Understanding the varied forms and ele-ments of the religious life contributes to quality liberal arts learning, and to per sonal enrich-ment through engagement with peren-nial questions about mean-ing, truth and value." It seems to me that Concor dia's religion department is right on track with Martin Luther's idea of a liberal arts education. Now, I do understand that to set aside deeply held convictions in the classroom can be very difficult. I can honestly say I have struggled with it myself, and this is coming from a pre-seminary student, planning on becom-ing a pastor. Yet, I have found that, as difficult as it can be at times, these classes actually can — and do — enrich one's faith and convictions. Concordia President Emeritus, Paul). Dovre, com-mented in his book "Holy Restlessness: Reflections on Faith and Learning," "As a college, we speak of the lib-eral arts as a means of freeing people from ignorance and equipping them for a mean-ingful life. These classes are designed to bet-ter one's self — to be a better, more educated Chris-tian, Jew, Mus-lim, whatever the case may be. Even if one does not adhere to a faith, these classes offer a chance to broad-en horizons and experiences, making for a better-rounded individual — for the sake of the world." We are enriched by those around us, and even more so by those who share expe-riences and ideas different than what we might have. Dr. Simmons expanded: "The [Lutheran) tradition pro-vides colleges with both the freedom and the responsibil-ity to confront culture. Jesus moved about in the culture of his day.Lutheran colleges are freed, indeed obliged, to follow this example." This is the firm foundation on which Concordia stands. Should we, as students at this place, not also stand on that same foundation? Dare to challenge yourselves, Cob-bers. Dare to make yourselves vulnerable. Dare to enhance your faith and values. CONCORDIAN OPINIONS „„,,,,„,o9 Even if one does not adhere to a faith, [Religion] classes offer a chance to broaden horizons and expe-riences, making for a better rounded individual for the sake of the world. Shepherds o the Earth We all bleed red: PETTER ERIKSMOEN Why discrimination should end Opinions Columnist On his visit to Concor dia's campus last year Wegger Strommen, the Norwegian Ambassador to the United States, delivered some star-ding news: we cannot save the polar bear. As the ambassador of one of the eight nations whose borders extend north of the Arctic Circle, Mr. Strom-men is in a privileged position both in information and con-cern for the climate changes that we are seeing take place at the poles. This April will mark the 4orh anniversary of Earth Day, a movement that started six decades ago when Aldo Leo-pold wrote, "The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and ani-mals, or collectively: the land." His ideas were not borne out of a radical leftist political agenda or anything even re-sembling political motivation. Leopold loved the wilderness and sought a deeper spiritual connectedness to it. He also believed humans were both capable of, and responsible for, good stewardship of this, our collective and diverse commu-nity. Today, however, conflicting agendas and polarized view-points have led to yet another opportunity to unite being turned into an opportunity to divide. Jerry Falwell, the late, abrasive founder of the Moral Majority, one of Amer-ica's largest lobbyist groups, wrote a position paper several years ago after Al Gore's `!An Inconvenient Truth" gained notoriety for its explanation of global climate change and its human impact. An upstart group formed, known as the vangelical Climate Initia-ive, a group of rominent church leaders who called for reforms to combat global warming based on their under-standing of scripture calling men and women to be "shep-herds of the earth." In typical Falwellian fash-ion, he condemned this group on the basis that other groups linking themselves to Mr. Gore's film support "abortion-on- demand and population control organizations," which surely means that the ECI must be a detriment to God's will on Earth. He goes on to tout his Interfaith Stewardship Al-liance, a group he formed to fight the "bad science of global warming alarmism." The problem here is nei-ther the believers nor the detractors of global climate change; the problem is that we are missing the fundamen-tal point that climate change affects everything: humans, plants, animals, and in the big picture, even our sacred econ-omies. Whether you choose to believe that climate change is of anthropogenic causes or not, there are volumes of em-pirical data that should at the very least worry us. In early 2002, the now infamous Larsen Ice Shelf B sheered off of the Antarctic Peninsula. In just three short weeks, an ice sheet the size of Rhode Island and over 700 feet thick simply disappeared into the ocean. Land-based glaciers worldwide (which do shrink and grow season-ally) are shrinking faster than they can regenerate. The Vatnajokull glacier in Iceland is equal to the size of all the glaciers on Europe's mainland put together, roughly 3,12$ square miles. It is retreating on average one meter per year around its entire edge, and ex-perts in Iceland as well as gla-ciologists agree that the gla-cier will be gone in 300 years if it continues to retreat at its current rate. These are just two in-out of hundreds that • ustrate the broad global climate crisis. Global temperature and weather cycles are con-trolled by thermohaline circulation, better known as the ocean conveyor belt. Warm water near the surface, which has a lower salt content than the cold water below, travels to-ward the poles pushed by gulf-stream and prevailing wind patterns. As it does so it cools and sinks into basins like the one in the North Sea off the coast of Norway and the Unit-ed Kingdom. In its travel, it moves heat energy as well as solid matter and is the largest contributor to the stability of our climate, as well as keeping the ocean waters in a healthy balance. As glaciers melt and fail to regenerate properly, their freshwater desalinates the ocean and causes the con-veyor belt to slow down. Sci-entists contribute the last ice age to such a heavy desalina-tion of the ocean waters in the north that the conveyor belt stopped moving, drastically altering the earth's climate as a whole. In a twist of irony (and poetic justice), global warming threatens global freezing as its aftermath. I'll return now to the po-lar bear. As I mentioned, the Norwegian Ambassador told us that climatologists and biol-ogists alike see the polar bear as becoming the first notable casualty of a global climate crisis. This is because the sea ice on which• the polar bear conducts his hunting is disap-pearing, and with that, the po-lar bear must take greater risks and venture further out into the frigid waters to feed itself I don't believe we are truly in touch with our earth if we are not interested in the plight of our fellow earth dwelling crea-tures. Perhaps the polar bear does not directly benefit us in the same way that trees do in giving us clean air to breathe, but it represents the threat to other, "more important" re-sources, that are on the hori-zon. That danger is something we all share as members of the earth community, and no po-litical or economic line ought to be drawn to separate an is-sue that is truly going to take the world to solve. KAT MELHEIM Opinions Columnist Since 1983, homosexual men have not been able to donate blood. This ban was due to the HIV/AIDS scare and its predominance in the gay community. However, many years and scientific advances later, this ban has not yet been removed. Our own Minnesota Senator Al Franken, along with 17 other senators, is attempting to remove this ban. John Kerry, senator from Massachusetts and previous presidential nominee argues that "not a single piece of scientific evidence supports the ban." Even the American Red Cross supports the eradica-tion of this ban. Neverthe-less, it is still in place and gay men cannot give blood. It may have been rea-sonable to prevent gay men from donating blood de-cades ago when it was very expensive to screen blood for HIV. Today, though, all donated blood undergoes two different tests to ensure it is safe and HIV-free. This automatically completed procedure de-tects unsafe blood. Because of this, it is unnecessary to tell all ho-mosexual men that they can-not donate. By banning all gay men from do-nating blood, we decrease the number of possible do-nors. Not only does disallow-ing gay men from donating blood decrease the possible supply, it continues a stigma about homosexuality that is not true. When HIV/AIDS emerged as a problem in the United States, attention was largely focused in the gay community. Nowadays, it continues to be thought of as a primarily "gay disease," even though people with all sexual orientations have the disease. Banning homo-sexual males from donating blood maintains that being a gay man somehow means that you are HIV positive. There are many gay men who are in monogamous relationships, practice safe sex, and do not have HIV, though. There is a large differ ence between the amount of blood donors and the amount of people who need blood. Preventing gay men from donating blood only increases this gap by nar-rowing the eligibility for donors. Selective eligibility for blood donors is important. We need. to insure that the blood donated is safe, healthy, and usable so it can fully benefit the recipient. There are many restrictions, such as people who donate blood cannot weigh less than 110 pounds, have trav-eled to an area in the world deemed a disease risk, have used intravenous drugs re-cently, have had cancer five years previ-ously, be sick at the time of donation, be under the in-fluence of alco-hol at the time of donation, or have gotten a tattoo in the past year. All of these, and oth-er, restrictions arc backed by scientific rea-sons as to why it would be unsafe to donate. Also, all of these restrictions are de-pendent on a behavior, not on an identity. Simply being a homosexual male is unlike any of these other restric-tions because it is based on a person's identity, who he is. This is discrimination at its core. We must not propagate the stereotype that being HIV positive means you are gay and that being gay means that you are HIV positive. Our nations blood banks are running dry. Not enough of our eligible donors are contributing and we are ex-cluding a population who could increase the amount of blood available to those who need it. Consider this a literal call to arms, my friends. A call to open your arms, open your veins and give blood. Every two sec-onds, someone needs blood. Most of us will eventu-ally receive donated blood sometime over our lifetime. Campus Service Com-mission (CSC) is holding a blood drive from Monday, March 15, until Thursday, March 18, in Grant Center. Monday through Wednes-day, the blood drive runs from 12:3o until 5:3o p.m., and Thursday it goes from 2:3o until 7:3o p.m. Walk-ins are welcome and wanted. Make sure to eat health-fully, sleep, and drink a lot of water the day before you donate. We have a long way to go before the supply of blood equals the high demand for it. Allowing gay men to do-nate can help close this gap, as can donating yourself in this coming week. Consider this a literal call to arms, my friends. A call to open your arms, open your veins and give blood. Every two seconds, someone needs blood. PHOTO FROM AMERICAN RED CROSS
|
|---|