Spring Break
Preaching to a campus full of questions
Abstract:
The presence of God was palpable on the OSU campus yesterday, when Rev. Shawn David Holes, a traveling reverend from Lake Placid, New York, preached in front of the Valley Library from 12:30 p.m. until after dark to a growing crowd of students.
Holes brought along his wife and seven children who sat nearby with bags of McDonald's, watching as he gave his informal sermon and was rebutted publicly by several students and members of the community....
- Displaying 1 - 4 of 4
Kyle
posted 12/05/08 @ 11:30 PM PST
Renee,
I would have to agree with you. It was depressing to see the sort of viciousness that people displayed when they attacked the man on the pulpit. People were making comments intended only to hurt and mock him. What kind of religious freedom or freedom of speech is that? Since when did expressing religion deserve public humiliation? Do people really no longer have the scruples to treat other people as if they have any value? The evangelist served as a lightning rod for all the hatred that secularists have toward organized religion, evangelical christianity in particular, inspires. Not too many of the skeptics even gave him a chance. Few respected the rights that he, as an American, deserved.
What disappointed me most on Wednesday was not that people were skeptical, but rather, that they treated him so poorly. Public forums seem to have have degraded to the same level as internet forums. In internet forums, attacks are made behind the veil of anonymity. Attacks can be ignorant and personal, and none of it matters, because in the end no one is accountable for their words. The rules that govern reasonable debate do not apply to internet forums.
What I saw was that these sort of anonymous, personal, and ignorant attacks, which are so common online were frequently directed at the evangelists. They were made in the form of both comments and questions. Whether it was a mocking interruption or an ignorant question, the attacks were meant to undermine his position by showing him a lack of respect. What it came down to that afternoon was that people dehumanized the speakers. They were made out to be targets for the all the anger that their ideas can inspire in the secular bloc. They should have been given the respect that common courtesy dictates. They should have been listened to, and given the respect that our constitution argues is granted to all people, no matter their circumstances. Instead, they were treated in a truly reprehensible manner.
It's really sad that our society has stooped to this level. Although, I suppose, it's just the natural progression of the way our society has seen fit to operate. We live in a cynical society, where a crowd of people can attack a single man with all the mercy of a pack of dogs.
Yes, we all have a right to our personal freedoms, and included in those freedoms is the right to form one's own ideas about religion. But included in those rights is the right to freely express one's self. So, who is right when another's freedom of speech is attacked? We all have the right to a speak in a public forum. With that comes not just a right to speak, but a right to be listened to as well. It is one thing to define your own beliefs, but it is quite another to beat down someone else's with all the brutality of a crude club. Those preachers on Wednesday deserved not only our attention, but our respect as fellow Americans and human beings.
Those evangelists did not represent the system of beliefs that I believe in very well. However, unfortunately, the skeptics did not represent the country or the system of values that I believe in very well. As a fellow American, and as a humanist, I felt very let down.
I would have to agree with you. It was depressing to see the sort of viciousness that people displayed when they attacked the man on the pulpit. People were making comments intended only to hurt and mock him. What kind of religious freedom or freedom of speech is that? Since when did expressing religion deserve public humiliation? Do people really no longer have the scruples to treat other people as if they have any value? The evangelist served as a lightning rod for all the hatred that secularists have toward organized religion, evangelical christianity in particular, inspires. Not too many of the skeptics even gave him a chance. Few respected the rights that he, as an American, deserved.
What disappointed me most on Wednesday was not that people were skeptical, but rather, that they treated him so poorly. Public forums seem to have have degraded to the same level as internet forums. In internet forums, attacks are made behind the veil of anonymity. Attacks can be ignorant and personal, and none of it matters, because in the end no one is accountable for their words. The rules that govern reasonable debate do not apply to internet forums.
What I saw was that these sort of anonymous, personal, and ignorant attacks, which are so common online were frequently directed at the evangelists. They were made in the form of both comments and questions. Whether it was a mocking interruption or an ignorant question, the attacks were meant to undermine his position by showing him a lack of respect. What it came down to that afternoon was that people dehumanized the speakers. They were made out to be targets for the all the anger that their ideas can inspire in the secular bloc. They should have been given the respect that common courtesy dictates. They should have been listened to, and given the respect that our constitution argues is granted to all people, no matter their circumstances. Instead, they were treated in a truly reprehensible manner.
It's really sad that our society has stooped to this level. Although, I suppose, it's just the natural progression of the way our society has seen fit to operate. We live in a cynical society, where a crowd of people can attack a single man with all the mercy of a pack of dogs.
Yes, we all have a right to our personal freedoms, and included in those freedoms is the right to form one's own ideas about religion. But included in those rights is the right to freely express one's self. So, who is right when another's freedom of speech is attacked? We all have the right to a speak in a public forum. With that comes not just a right to speak, but a right to be listened to as well. It is one thing to define your own beliefs, but it is quite another to beat down someone else's with all the brutality of a crude club. Those preachers on Wednesday deserved not only our attention, but our respect as fellow Americans and human beings.
Those evangelists did not represent the system of beliefs that I believe in very well. However, unfortunately, the skeptics did not represent the country or the system of values that I believe in very well. As a fellow American, and as a humanist, I felt very let down.
Kyle
posted 12/05/08 @ 11:41 PM PST
If you looked at the reply to Renee's post, you'll see that I just posted this comment. But I did not want this comment to be hidden (because I'm interested to see how people respond) so I'm re-posting it as a general comment.
original comment:
...
I would have to agree with [Renee]. It was depressing to see the sort of viciousness that people displayed when they attacked the man on the pulpit. People were making comments intended only to hurt and mock him. What kind of religious freedom or freedom of speech is that? Since when did expressing religion deserve public humiliation? Do people really no longer have the scruples to treat other people as if they have any value? The evangelist served as a lightning rod for all the hatred that secularists have toward organized religion, evangelical christianity in particular, inspires. Not too many of the skeptics even gave him a chance. Few respected the rights that he, as an American, deserved.
What disappointed me most on Wednesday was not that people were skeptical, but rather, that they treated him so poorly. Public forums seem to have have degraded to the same level as internet forums. In internet forums, attacks are made behind the veil of anonymity. Attacks can be ignorant and personal, and none of it matters, because in the end no one is accountable for their words. The rules that govern reasonable debate do not apply to internet forums.
What I saw was that these sort of anonymous, personal, and ignorant attacks, which are so common online were frequently directed at the evangelists. They were made in the form of both comments and questions. Whether it was a mocking interruption or an ignorant question, the attacks were meant to undermine his position by showing him a lack of respect. What it came down to that afternoon was that people dehumanized the speakers. They were made out to be targets for the all the anger that their ideas can inspire in the secular bloc. They should have been given the respect that common courtesy dictates. They should have been listened to, and given the respect that our constitution argues is granted to all people, no matter their circumstances. Instead, they were treated in a truly reprehensible manner.
It's really sad that our society has stooped to this level. Although, I suppose, it's just the natural progression of the way our society has seen fit to operate. We live in a cynical society, where a crowd of people can attack a single man with all the mercy of a pack of dogs.
Yes, we all have a right to our personal freedoms, and included in those freedoms is the right to form one's own ideas about religion. But included in those rights is the right to freely express one's self. So, who is right when another's freedom of speech is attacked? We all have the right to a speak in a public forum. With that comes not just a right to speak, but a right to be listened to as well. It is one thing to define your own beliefs, but it is quite another to beat down someone else's with all the brutality of a crude club. Those preachers on Wednesday deserved not only our attention, but our respect as fellow Americans and human beings.
Those evangelists did not represent the system of beliefs that I believe in very well. However, unfortunately, the skeptics did not represent the country or the system of values that I believe in very well. As a fellow American, and as a humanist, I felt very let down.
original comment:
...
I would have to agree with [Renee]. It was depressing to see the sort of viciousness that people displayed when they attacked the man on the pulpit. People were making comments intended only to hurt and mock him. What kind of religious freedom or freedom of speech is that? Since when did expressing religion deserve public humiliation? Do people really no longer have the scruples to treat other people as if they have any value? The evangelist served as a lightning rod for all the hatred that secularists have toward organized religion, evangelical christianity in particular, inspires. Not too many of the skeptics even gave him a chance. Few respected the rights that he, as an American, deserved.
What disappointed me most on Wednesday was not that people were skeptical, but rather, that they treated him so poorly. Public forums seem to have have degraded to the same level as internet forums. In internet forums, attacks are made behind the veil of anonymity. Attacks can be ignorant and personal, and none of it matters, because in the end no one is accountable for their words. The rules that govern reasonable debate do not apply to internet forums.
What I saw was that these sort of anonymous, personal, and ignorant attacks, which are so common online were frequently directed at the evangelists. They were made in the form of both comments and questions. Whether it was a mocking interruption or an ignorant question, the attacks were meant to undermine his position by showing him a lack of respect. What it came down to that afternoon was that people dehumanized the speakers. They were made out to be targets for the all the anger that their ideas can inspire in the secular bloc. They should have been given the respect that common courtesy dictates. They should have been listened to, and given the respect that our constitution argues is granted to all people, no matter their circumstances. Instead, they were treated in a truly reprehensible manner.
It's really sad that our society has stooped to this level. Although, I suppose, it's just the natural progression of the way our society has seen fit to operate. We live in a cynical society, where a crowd of people can attack a single man with all the mercy of a pack of dogs.
Yes, we all have a right to our personal freedoms, and included in those freedoms is the right to form one's own ideas about religion. But included in those rights is the right to freely express one's self. So, who is right when another's freedom of speech is attacked? We all have the right to a speak in a public forum. With that comes not just a right to speak, but a right to be listened to as well. It is one thing to define your own beliefs, but it is quite another to beat down someone else's with all the brutality of a crude club. Those preachers on Wednesday deserved not only our attention, but our respect as fellow Americans and human beings.
Those evangelists did not represent the system of beliefs that I believe in very well. However, unfortunately, the skeptics did not represent the country or the system of values that I believe in very well. As a fellow American, and as a humanist, I felt very let down.
wayne
posted 12/30/08 @ 5:14 PM PST
well, it has been written in the past that "youth is wasted by the young". Not sure about that but I have come to realize that some of my "youthful" thoughts and ideals have evolved over the years, and quite sure will continue to do so as each year passes by. The once carefree and laid back attitude that once directed my thoughts has given way to serious evaluation of "life after death" and it may come upon me when I least expect it. Jesus said that the end will come like a "thief in the night". That could mean my own personal end or the world as we know it but non the less, the end will eventually come for each of us. You think about it, everyone will die and all this individual wants you to do is at least consider. But I ask you, is this man, or others like him, very much different than John the baptist who preached the same message to the same defiant crowd prior to Jesus time? You can come up with all of the answers yourself that will make you feel 'comfortable' but the truth is, where will you spend eternity? And for those that say that hell doesn't exist, well then good luck! I too was much like you, thinking that I knew most of the answers or at the very least, wasn't far from the truth. BUT, I was off base and now am comfortable with the death of the life as I now know it because I know where I will be. I know that it is going to sound arrogant but there really is only one way to heaven despite what Opra says and I hope AND pray that you discover it before it is too late. Yes, God is love and that is why He gave His only son Jesus Christ, so that those that believed in him would have life everlasting. It is tough for one to humble themselves and get on their knees and ask Jesus into their lives, but he is the ONLY way. As you lay in bed at night and open your eyes to the darkness, ask yourself.........."do I want to spend eternity alone and in the dark like this"?
If you question what I have just said, then take a risk and read the book of John in the New Testament of the Bible.
Wayne
If you question what I have just said, then take a risk and read the book of John in the New Testament of the Bible.
Wayne
- Displaying 1 - 4 of 4
Renee
posted 12/03/08 @ 4:32 PM PST
Considering the people that disagree with this man, they sure let their feathers get ruffled and agitated. Maybe they're afraid that what he's saying might be true?
It's too bad the main topic of his oration is side-lined by people's animosity toward his freedom of speech, choosing to assault his character to detract from the topic.