What are the implications of the ‘Jesus stomp?’
To the editor:
According to the professor, one student in the class had an objection and refused to participate. The professor said the student asked repeatedly, “How dare you disrespect someone’s religion?”
The student was disciplined, and reports vary as to why. He said it was after he threatened to take the exercise public, which he did. Others said it was after the professor reported the student to the school, saying the student had come up to him and said, “I want to hit you.”
The university later dropped all academic charges related to the incident and issued a formal apology to the student. The professor was placed on administrative leave, and the governor of Florida has demanded an investigation.
This incident, a type that has become all too common, has generated more questions than answers. Many are troublesome. I challenge you to consider some: How could this happen in America? What does this say or affirm about academia and its disdain for Christianity? Why conduct this “lesson” so near the Christian holy week? Is this a microcosm of the nation at large? Have we sunk this low?
The human race saw fit to crucify Jesus. Even Jesus said 2,000 years ago, “they hated me without a cause.” Why then does academia, among other groups, feel obliged to stomp on his name even now? Would a professor dare use names such as Mohammed, Buddha or Martin Luther King for such lessons?
On a much grander scale, what does it say about our society when just one in a university class stands up and refuses to desecrate the one who many of us deem sinless and holy — God incarnate? Does this constitute a severe falling away from our Judeo-Christian values and the church itself? And lastly, if these numbers do indicate a falling away, can we not believe that the imminent return of Jesus the Christ is much sooner than we think?
‘What difference does it make now?’
To the editor:
“What difference does it make now?” Hilary Clinton snapped when asked who it was who changed “terrorist” to “stupid video” when describing the reason for the slaughter in Benghazi as reported in the intelligence memo.
“What difference does it make now?” that Stephanie Cutter, President Obama’s campaign chief, blathered on with the charge that Mitt Romney was a felon.
“What difference does it make now?” that during the final debate Candy Crowley backed up the president’s claim that he called Benghazi a “terrorist attack” “right from the beginning,” which was patently false. That falsehood was proved when CBS belatedly released a portion of the sit-down interview with Obama right after the attack, revealing him claiming a “video” prompted the murders. He continued to state that falsehood for two weeks.
“What difference does it make now?” when one reflects on Michelle Obama, the night her husband clinched the nomination, claiming this “is the first time in my adult life I have been proud of my country.”
“What difference does it make now?” that the president said to an adoring crowd on his last campaign stop when they booed the name of Romney, “Oh no ... don’t boo ... vote ... vote ... that is the best revenge!” Interesting word isn’t it? Revenge.
“What difference does it make now?” that Harry Reid, on the floor of the Senate, insisted he knew Romney had paid no income taxes for the past 10 years. An untruth, of course.