You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September, 2008.
It sounds weird to hear myself say “Ron Paul is right,” but he is.
I still believe that he might be just a little crazy (certainly he’s significantly farther to the Right than I am). I still say that I don’t want him for president, but I find myself wishing more and more that Congress was full of Ron Pauls.
On the current state of the economy, and on Government Bailouts – Ron Paul is right. Read his Op-Ed piece for CNN.com Bailouts will lead to rough economic ride
There–I said it. After reading a number of stories like this one maybe you’ll agree with me.
Here’s the headline: “Boy suspended for using broken pencil sharpener”
I’m sure you can think of some other stories like this that you’ve seen in the past. Some have to do with weapons, or violence, or even sexual harassment. I seem to remember a story about a 4-year-old child being suspended for sexual harassment. So again I say, zero tolerance is stupid.
I think the solution to school violence (and a whole host of other problems) is to return to common sense! Kids with weapons should be removed and punished, kids with pencil sharpeners or something that might possibly be used as a weapon should be handled with caution and a large does of common sense. If school districts won’t trust the teachers, at least trust the school administrators. Let principals and teachers decide in cases like this.
I remember the early days of zero tolerance when I was in school. One of the zero tolerance policies at my school was zero tolerance for fighting. I always thought this was dumb. The idea behind zero tolerance for fighting is that both parties involved in the fight were suspended. The reason I thought this was dumb is because fights are not always mutual. Sometimes one person attacks another. Under zero tolerance, people are punished unless they allowed themselves to be pummeled until the fight was broken up. Fight back = get punished. This should not be so.
The biggest problem that I have with zero tolerance policies is that they tend to punish kids who make mistakes (i.e., using a broken pencil sharpener). At the same time, they cannot always and unconditionally protect the students at schools. Zero tolerance for weapons does nothing more to protect students from school violence than another policy, which might differentiate between guns and pencil sharpeners.
What do you think? Is zero tolerance a good policy? Are there any good zero tolerance policies? What about alternatives?
Here’s the story: German insurance and finance giant Allianz has made an offer to fork out some serious cash for the new football stadium which will be the home for both the NY Giants and NY Jets in exchange, of course, for naming rights. The story says
Allianz would reportedly pay $20 million to $30 million per year for the naming rights of the $1.3 billion stadium, which is to open in 2010.
So far, this is nothing strange–many of the major sports venues in the US have sold their naming rights to any number of corporations for vast sums of money. The difference is that this company is being opposed, according to the author of the Daily News story, because of its history. Allianz was one of the companies that served Nazi Germany during the 1930s and 40s. As the author points out, the company’s then CEO served on Hitler’s cabinet and the company insured Auschwitz.
I have no real stake in this story, being neither Jets nor Giants fan, nor even from New York. The author of the story, Oren Yaniv, seems to have a stake and further seems to strongly oppose the proposed naming (and funding) after Allianz. Abraham Foxman, of the Jewish anti-defamation league, also (predictably) labels the potential naming as, “an insult.”
A number of people are upset that Allianz would put their name on the stadium. However, I see nothing inherently evil or wrong about it. Sure it might be painful for some — to deny that would be insensitive at best. The question that the ownership must answered is whether or not they will take money from this company. I can’t help but wonder if such an outcry would have been raised had the company been one of other German companies that aided the Third Reich during WWII if the outcry would have been as great. What if a company such as Volkswagenor BMW were offering to buy the naming rights? Would the reaction be the same? What about companies in the US who insured slaves?
I bring these things up not to cast blame or aspersions upon these companies or the NY fans. Instead, I think it’s important that everyone question their feelings on this matter. Surely there are no Nazis working for Allianz now. The company wants nothing to do with that dark chapter in its history. Still, a choice has to be made. If the ownership of these NY franchises wants to take the money and build their stadium, then they can certainly do that. If they want to reject the money and look elsewhere, that’s certainly their prerogative too. I think this should be about money, and who the Giants and Jets want to own their stadium.
What do you think?
I had a good time being back at Southwestern Seminary last week with my church staff. We were there for their annual Seminary Church Fair. It was a time for churches to come to the seminary and invite students to their churches. More appropriately it was part of the “woo-ing process,” where the churches try to woo the seminarians to get them to their church. Many churches were there, as always, giving out goodies ranging from laundry detergent (very handy to have), to mugs and cups, to t-shirts, to cookies, and many other goodies. This year I resisted the urge to shop the booths for what one of our pastors called “adult trick-or-treating.”
It was a fun time, and it was good to connect with students and friends from other churches in the area. One thing that the staff and I noticed, however, was that many students did not articulate a call to ministry. I found this a bit puzzling.
I remember a time when I knew I was called to ministry, but did not know what area God might be leading me toward. Yet, I still had some idea — a very clear idea by the time I went to seminary. Southwestern has, in the last few years, opened “The College at Southwestern.” This is an undergraduate program for college students and for those anyone who does not have the collegiate degree required to attend seminary studies. Some seminarians and alumni have expressed misgivings about this program, but I have seen some benefit from it, and shall speak no ill of it here.
I spoke to a number of college students at the seminary, and was surprised at how many students (undergrad and graduate) couldn’t articulate a call to ministry. There seemed to be a few who expressed little interest in ministry. This is a frightening thing. Brothers and sisters in the Lord, I love you, but what are you doing at seminary if you don’t have a call to ministry? Why would others go there? I went to seminary in order to prepare for the ministry God has for me. He has called me to pastor and that is what I intend to do. Seminary was just another step in preparation to fulfill God’s calling in my life. It is a means, not an end of itself. I would challenge all seminarians: What has God called you to do? Are you called to a ministry? Examine yourselves and know your calling, otherwise what are you doing there? There are many other ways to get an education. If you don’t have a call, you may just be wasting your time and money when there are other things you should be doing.
(UPDATED: I’ve moderated this last segment after it was pointed out that perhaps I was being a bit too critical. There may be many reasons to attend seminary, but I believe that we all should examine our call to whatever our ministry might be.)
