Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 24, 1999)
kittalion O PINION Page 13 • Wednesday, February 24, 1999 omething’s fishy... rwin fish, Jesus fish battle it out on the highways for the crown of doctrinal supremacy battle is being waged on the roads of Ag- ■Lgieland. Evangelical Mitians and humorous volptionists have taken up ins The battle of adhesive- ilastie car fish has erupted itoen all-out holy war. Wliile the initial fight was ik’d to plain Jesus fish Ills the footed Darwin Glenn TANIK xj athrem i the event • t to win the i three fresh hey'11 respor i to play the pia; hon otir rnamen llnv still] ishJDarwinists have provoked Christian soldiers (ito|a conflict so insipid that the Jesus fish propo- lents are left looking silly, hypocritical and defini- ively unchristian. | For those not familiar with the fish wars, here is brief recap. To show their devotion to their reli- jon, enterprising Christians began marketing car ttadhments in the shape of a fish. LTlio fish — a formerly pagan symbol co-opted lyalcult of Roman Christians — is attached to the earpf a car as an outward symbol of love for their eligion. Some non-Christians and Christian evolutionists yes, they do exist) took the fish symbol as yet an ther attempt by pushy Protestants to inflict their eliefs on the unwashed masses. They struck back nth their own Darwin fish magnet. This Darwin tagnet is a Jesus fish with legs added to the body fthc fish and the word “Darwin” inscribed in it. With the initial shots fired in the fish wars, both ides reloaded and attempted to further humiliate aeir opponents. The Darwin camp, many of whom hold great isdain for pushy Protestantism, began to modify iiejriginal “Darwin” fish. One version of the fish changed the word “Dar rin” into “Evolve” and placed a tool in the hand 'f the fish. Two of the more tacky modifications of the Dar- i mfish are the dead fish and the procreation fish. SOU ' Uv-he ‘ dead” fish is a set of fish bones — the appar- intmessage being “God is Dead.” The procreation 11yfy/iis%- rated NC-17 — depicts a Darwin fish CUU-i Ur'nounting a Jesus fish. Given these inflammatory fish, how would .. KVIi i!. V; m will not have:'f|| yers to help hi: v hearing WedK ;onierv County i an uillh.weKC yiinst allegation- lion set ufterh jfc . iTany people at a guardluir:Mvl think materi- he was using, |V Aalism, or cov- vyer Paul Kent! iting new objects, is ecu me depres: 'bad thing, ken aft an antic-- But there are few ■en takingforfi People who would ictually choose a life vithout the material benefits that come rom “wanting ob- Christians be expected to react? The Bible would urge Christians to respond with loving arms and understanding. However, in this war, challenges to Christian dogma have been met with intolerant counter-strikes. The first retaliatory Jesus fish de picts a large, plain Jesus fish eating a miniature Darwin fish. This innocuous response pales in comparison to the second Jesus attack fish. The second Jesus attack fish depicts a Darwin fish being eaten by a Jesus fish with the word “truth” inscribed in side the Christian fish. Could the Jesus fish folks pick a more insensitive, intolerant and inflam matory word? First, the one thing the Jesus fish peo ple do not have on their side is truth. Thuth is a secular and scientific word meaning accordance with fact and prov able. Religion — Christian or not — op erates through faith which is defined as a belief that cannot be proven. Second, to claim truth trumps Dar winist theory is to ignore provable facts. Opposable thumbs and natural selection are indisputable. Third, if Christians are so strong in their faith, how can a fossil record or a plastic magnet challenge their faith? Ultimately, these insecure Christians showing off their ignorant revenge fish need to lighten up. What the Jesus fish people need to realize is the Darwinist backlash has been brought about by their actions. Religion, at its core, is an ideological battle, but how can zealous Christianity reconcile itself with its professed belief in love, tolerance and understanding? If Darwinist really are pagans on a highway to hell, why would Christians berate them? These statements are made in the context of the fish wars, but the same arguments can be made in re gards to religious intolerance for people who have abortions, for homosexuals, for non-Christians and for atheists. Something can be said about hating the sin, but these revenge fish seem to be attacking the so- called sinners. It seems there is no truce in sight for the fish wars. However, if the Jesus fish people truly want to be consistent with their words and actions, its time to abandon the attack fish. It is time for Christians, who profess love, to accept all people, not just those who agree with them. Glenn Janik is a senior political science major. Materialism actually source of positive change, not problems Lisa FOOX NERS ined fromnjji j Materialism is not a bad thing for a va iety of reasons. >n Jan.2J,™r: ; One advantage of materialism is it “victory”play, arises people to work hard so they can vn 56-54with2 ifford what they want. People will strive freshmancenit pr success because they want the latest a full-courtinbi :echnology and the shiniest new car. guard Jerald 1 Take, for example, an average college he ball toawic: jtudent who is working her way through he left wing, Cl tchool. Assume she has always desired hie 22-footer at: he biggest, most beautiful red and black a stunning torsche. Unfortunately, new Porsches J Sooners veen the ion. Okla., 102-,.’ 3 ints surrendered ■ on as OU hit WJ t he three-pointlj‘ looking to qul- isecutiveNCAAtJ iuch Kelvin Sanff cost a great deal of money. Materialism — in this case, wanting the new car — will inspire this Aggie to work hard towards a productive and suc cessful job. Making money will become a means to gaining a new car. Needless to say, positive and success ful people are a plus in today’s society. When there are hardworking lawyers, doctors, accountants, bankers or business people, everybody benefits. Hardworking people create benefits that include new jobs, which come from business people who need workers and better service from people who under stand that customers will pay more for a job well done . A common belief held by many pro fessionals is the faster, more efficient and competent somebody is, the more they will get paid. The result of this philoso phy is that professionals strive hard to provide the best service possible. One other benefit of a materialistic so ciety is it allows for the society to step out of its third-world skin and into its fu ture. The society can then start manufac turing faster, have an excess of food pro duction and a higher technology level. More food produced faster means few er starving people. An example of the benefits of materi alism at work can be seen in New Zealand, where only 10 years ago, the country had few strong businesses, little technology, and too many sheep. While it still has too many sheep, aspiring people have used the country’s natural beauty as a tourist attraction, thereby promoting visitation, allowing large companies to take an interest in investing in New Zealand and starting a trend towards the twentieth century. Other aspiring business people have used the strengths of the country — nat ural foods, beautiful wood carvings, nat ural resources, and hard working people — to propel the country out of third- world status. And in all honesty, the sheep are sort of pretty. New Zealand moved from being a country with three television stations and hardly any imports or exports to being a significant competitor for exportation of natural foods and products. This has re sulted in a better society for New Zealan ders, who now are able to watch CNN, the Real World (Maybe this is not neces sarily a benefit.) and have a lower unem ployment rate than before. All thanks to materialism. Besides resulting in a society with more employment and better services, materialism also creates people who are more technologically advanced. If people are craving the latest CD-ROM or the newest DVD technology, they are going to learn how to use it once they own it. With more people desiring the techno logical innovations flooding the market, people are going to get smarter. At least in a technological sense. This is good because technology makes daily living easier, simpler and faster. And that is what everybody needs, because society is fast-paced. Further, with more people wanting the latest technology, business people will re spond by creating more unique and help ful tools for their customers. It is possible that soon, simplicity, stark futuristic beauty, and clever technology will be the order of the day. Without materialistic aspirations, America might not have been discovered, books might be hard to come by, and many occupations, such as computer de sign, electrical engineering, and flight at tendants, might not exist today. So, real ly, materialism is not the frightening, negative or serious problem that people claim it is, but rather provides a step into a better, more streamlined society. Lisa Foox is a senior journalism major. exas governor s powers overrated, Bush nqualified for United States presidency MAIL CALL David LEE )FFER lities, [tests, ■e. G overnor George Walk er Bush. To the aver age Texan,three , B jhoughts come to mind at UUCDOi'pl mention of this name. ^ ' He is Big George’s son, he ised to own the mediocre texas Rangers baseball club tnd he is thinking about tinning for president. Any- Bg else? With most Texans apathetic to the goings n of state government, few people can name ttiy of Governor Bush’s accomplishments dur- ng his term in office. Worse yet, most Texans do not have the ’lightest clue as to how the state government ■vorks. It is just assumed that since things in he state are great, the head honcho should ?et all of the credit. It is this attitude that ex plains Governor Bush’s popularity. However, if one were to do a little digging, Pe or she would discover that the office of the governor of Texas is a relatively weak position. Ultimately, they will discover that Governor Hugh is grossly overrated. I When the current state constitution was “rafted, it was the end of Reconstruction. Newly elected Democrats wanted to erase e very shred of Radical Republican rule that brutally controlled the state after the Civil tyar. i At the top of the agenda was changing the office of the governor whose centralized pow- or had served the Radical Republican’s ruth less agenda quite nicely. The Democrats inten tionally stripped many of the governor’s pow ers. Instead of the governor appointing his cabi net or state judges, they were to be elected by the voters every four years. The lieutenant governor was also made an independent enti ty, running separately from the governor. These changes were made in order to frag ment the governor’s influence over the other branches of government. This system may have seemed fine and dandy at the turn of the century, but it has proven to be cumbersome in today’s fast- paced political world. The governor today is extremely limited in power when compared to his counterparts in other states. Neither the cabinet, the attorney general, the comptroller nor the state judges owe the governor a thing and can disregard his agenda completely if they wish to. The lieutenant gov ernor, also independently elected, runs the Senate at his discretion without having to re port to the governor. In a nutshell, the governor can ask the rest of the state government to follow his agenda, but they are by no means obligated to. The governor can either go toe to toe with the leg islature in a hopeless battle or stay out of its way. In Bush’s case, he has been lucky with the majority of his agenda being promoted by the state legislature. However, the bottom line is that the majori ty of the praise of the good times in Texas should go to the legislature, not Governor Bush. What about the man’s political record? He has had one term as state governor under his belt. That is it. No prior political experience, certainly not enough to prepare him for the re sponsibilities of acting as president. President Clinton served multiple terms spanning decades as governor of Arkansas be fore he ran for the presidency. It has already been established that the of fice of the governor in Texas is more or less a lame duck job. What other qualifications or experiences could Bush possibly bring to the table? In the very different world of the executive branch of the federal government. Bush will find himself in a much more controlled and hostile environment. It is doubtful the piranhas in Congress will be as cordial and cooperative as the state leg islature. Bush would also face the responsibility of appointing his cabinet as well as federal and Supreme Court judges, in addition to a count less number of administrative positions within the executive branch. Granted, George W. Bush is a good man with ambitious new ideas. No one disputes that. But until the voters can look past his name and look at his actual track record and experience in politics, they will vote for him to be president for the wrong reasons. David Lee is a sophomore general studies major. Prostitution needs to be legalized In response to David Now’s Feb. 22 mail call. It is because of these religious beliefs that laws legalizing and regulating prostitution will never be passed in the U.S. It is no matter that it will re duce the risk of sexual diseases for the prostitute or her client. It makes no difference if it could help prostitutes to not live in fear of being raped, abused or at tacked. Because The Bible says it wrong, obviously these laws could not do our society any good, right? All I have to say is this: people who choose to follow the word of God will not engage in prostitu tion, period. People who do not live by the Bible, and who choose to, will engage in prostitution, whether it is legal or not. Elizabeth Sutherland Class of ’02 Prostitution needs to be legalized Patrick Henry, the founding fa ther famous for proclaiming “Give me liberty or give me death,” said it best when he said, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too of ten that this great nation was founded, not by religionist, but by Christians, not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!” To deny the Christian foundation of the United States is to ignore the facts about who the founding fa thers were: Christians. And they built the United States around their faith and on the Bible. George Washington said, “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” James Madison said, “We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart.” Thomas Jeffer son said “The Bible is the corner stone for American liberty.” Our sixth president of the Unit ed States, John Quincy Adams, said “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil govern ment with the principles of Chris tianity.” Brad English Class of ’01 The Battalion encourages letters to the ed itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and In clude the author's name, class and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed Mc Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mail: 1111 Fax: (409) 845-2647 E-mail: batt@tamvml.tamu.edu