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