Criticism enjoyed

I want to respond to two letters I read in the online version of Chimes.

The first is in response to Adam DeHoek and Michael Scholtern's letter, which criticizes the college's allocation of funds toward improving the grounds of the college instead of increasing the salaries of the faculty.

The letter is well written, but these two fellows are basing their rather satirical judgement on the assumption that the administration is faced with an ``either/or'' situation: either pay faculty more or improve the appearance of the grounds. This may be a false dichotomy, as things are not always what they seem.

I remember when some new landscaping was done in the mid-90s, students widely criticized it as a `frivolous expenditure.' Only later was it revealed that the project was a donation by an alumnus with a local landscaping business.

So I would encourage these students to investigate the matter a little further before making assumptions.

Secondly, in response to Justin Grill's letter regarding ``God Bless America'' I have to agree with him in principle. Certainly our Reformed tradition espouses the idea that God cares for and calls for the redemption of systems as well as people, and that would seem to apply to countries as well.

I do not have a problem with the idea that ``God blesses America'' or that ``God loves America.'' What does bother me is to hear a nation rally around the cry ``God Bless America'' when it has demonstrated little concern for justice and equality in many spheres of influence. The ``God rhetoric'' we usually hear gives off just a bit too much of a hypocritical odor to be considered a heartfelt, humble cry to God. ``God have mercy on us, for we have sinned greatly against you'' might be the refrain America ought to chant first, for I've seen very little humility demonstrated by this great nation. One thing is for sure - while God might love all people equally, he has little patience for those who call upon his name but fail to demonstrate love for their neighbor.

Jason Rekker '95

Refund Ben Hoff's tuition

By insinuating that America is responsible for the religious dimensions of the war on terrorism, Ben Hoff has demonstrated to the whole of the Calvin Community that it has failed him. His tuition money should be promptly refunded.

There are two main branches of Islam; Shi'ite (about 20 percent of all Muslims) and Sunni (about 80 percent of all Muslims). These two branches, have had major religious and political differences. As it happens, the Sunnis ``won'' and therefore are the majority. Islam is a fundamentally monotheistic religion. Christianity is a fundamentally trinitarian religion (tritheistic in Muslim circles).

To Muslims, tritheism is idolatry and therefore very bad. Hence, Christians fall into the category of ``infidels'' since they do not worship the true God, Allah. Throw all of this together and you get a majority of Muslims (Sunnis) who can tolerate Christians and a minority (Shi'ites) that sees Christians as being worse than Sunnis. These religious sentiments have been around much longer than America has. And so America can hardly be blamed for turning this into a religious war.

The countries that have the most significant Shi'ite presence are Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and (you guessed it) Afghanistan, which means that America is at war with a faction of Islam that has historically felt slighted. The Taliban almost certainly believe that this is a religious war. When they refer to America as the Great Satan, they do so out of religious conviction, not for the purposes of propaganda. The sooner Americans come to understand this, the sooner they will be able to understand why bin Laden and the Taliban go to the lengths that they do; they really believe that they are doing the will of Allah.

If America and her leaders are guilty of anything, they are guilty of compartmentalizing religion to such an extent that the American people simply cannot believe anyone (American or not) would still go to war over their religious beliefs. Bin Laden and the Taliban believe this is a religious war; President Bush, along with most Americans, do not.

Daniel J. VandeBunte '99

Prank coverage lacking

I would like to call to the attention of the Chimes staff something I found rather annoying and slightly disturbing. Christian Bell's article about the ``Names and Faces'' pranksters was in the ``News'' section, but if it was going to be published at all it ought to have been in an opinion section. The article was markedly imbalanced towards the side of the pranksters: the second half was entirely dedicated to reporting their quotes, while on the other hand not a single administrator seems to have been consulted for the article.

The statement that the bod books ``were last seen being loaded onto a white truck'' seems to be lazy reporting at best (why didn't the writer find out where that truck was going, or who was in charge?) and at worst, an attempt to manipulate the reader into a particular view of the administration as being heavy-handed and over-bearing. The point isn't whether this view is accurate or not, but whether the Chimes is fulfilling its role as being a trustworthy provider of objective news.

Whether or not the Chimes actually has any ties to the pranks, the extensive print given to the ``Cats,'' coupled with the complete absence of coverage from the administrators' end, casts suspicion on the Chimes staff. If in fact Chimes staff were involved in the prank, it would be an even more serious violation of readers' trust and journalistic ethics - newspapers are supposed to report news, not make it.

As to the pranksters, whoever they may be: I find it interesting that in this same issue Erin Miller's editorial was about student apathy. If the ``Cats'' think that they're doing something noble or good for the college, they're deluding themsleves. If they really cared about effecting change in the college, they would put their energy into positive actions such as participating in the meetings Miller talks about, or taking part in actions of the Social Justice Committe, ESC, etc.

Pranks can be funny, but to whoever's doing them: grow up. Don't be so foolish as to think that stealing some doors or putting funny stickers on phone books is some kind of grand crusade for justice.

Abe Huyser-Honig '04

Editor's note: When Christian Bell received the interview via e-mail from the pranksters, adminstrators were unavailable for comment. In light of the impact the recall of the ``Names and Faces'' book had on campus, an editorial decision was made to run the article in a timely fashion.

Chosen people, not chosen nation

Justin Grill says that just as God cared for the nation of Israel, he cares for America and for the Taliban (Letters, Oct. 26). Two problems. One, Israel was God's chosen people, selected by him for a unique role in his redemptive plan. Since the coming of Christ, that status has belonged only to the universal Church, not any political entity. It is not tenable that God has any vested interest in the prosperity or collapse of any particular national institution. He rejoices in those who sing his praises, no matter what continent they're standing on, and likewise weeps at the death of his creatures, be they Americans or Afghans. We are the ones who draw boundaries across his globe.

Second, the Taliban is not a nation or a government, but a rogue military regime. Imagine the Michigan Militia holding Washington D.C. hostage, and you get the idea. Lost in the sound and fury of our patriotic propaganda is a simple fact: We are not at war with Afghanistan. We are punishing a crime by a crime mob. What an important time to keep our facts separate from our myths.

Nathan Bierma '02

Diamond buying advice

In this fair month of November, when the papers pile up and poor grades are freely given, it is well advised that we reflected, individually and as a community, on a variety of issues. An issue for most of us, since we are urged to fulfill the biblical mandate of procreation, is the engagement ring purchase, which marks the first step for Godly Calvinist-Amway disciples into the realm of true adulthood. However, while you make one of the most important purchases of your adult years with your parent's credit card, I urge you to consider the diamond that you are purchasing. Chances are that the diamond that a young man gives and a woman receives was mined in the war torn regions of Africa, especially the countries of Liberia, Sierra Leone, Angola and the Congo.

These nations have large diamond mining operations that are controlled by various factions perpetrating brutal wars, which have seen the deaths of millions and the destruction of countless number of lives, both young and old. Of particular interest is the fact that a large number of soldiers in these struggles are children, boys trained at the age of nine to be spies. Regardless of the side, revenue from the sales of diamonds funds and allows for this region to purchase weapons and fund countless years of bloodshed.

Thus, while you might have a lifetime of bliss in mind as you look at the ``wondrous'' diamond ring, please remember that you are helping your fellow humans enjoy an existence of mindless butchery. When you do get your engagement ring, make sure that your diamond was mined in Canada, not in Africa. You don't want your trip down the aisle to pay for a stinger missile.

Peter Bratt '02

Representing college or Christ?

In last week's article, ``Administrators Clarify Alcohol Policy Changes'' I believe an important aspect of the issue was ignored. It stated that ``any student who is of legal drinking age and consumes enough alcohol to become impaired or intoxicated is in violation of the policy.'' The article implied that the reason this rule exists is to preserve a positive reputation for Calvin. However, the article failed to mention that by attending a Christian College, intoxication not only represents the college poorly, it more importantly represents Christ poorly. I hope that this Christian Institution based this policy not on our reputation, but on the Biblical truth that drunkeness is a sin (Galatians 5:21). Maybe misrepresenting the college doesn't seem like such a big deal to students who break this violation, but hopefully a reminder that they are misrepresenting Christ will cause them to rethink their actions.

Lindsay Wieland '05

Pranksters are criminals

It was very disturbing to read the Chimes interview with the ``Cats'' group in your Nov. 2 issue. The picture I got is that Calvin was being attacked by students for reasons unclear, some kind of a game that involves criminal behavior and large amounts of wasted time and money on the part of the college.

A college campus is a unique environment that exists for the benefit of students. No one is forced to stay, and if the college has been dishonest in its dealings with students, there are advocates and procedures to help them. It is an organization built on trust. We trust that people will do what is right and honest. We trust that we do not need elaborate surveillance or protection systems in place.

Breaking into the Student Life offices was a crime. Defacing property is also a crime. To call it something else is wrong.

As I see it, Calvin College has two options in dealing with this. We can handle it internally and say that some school rules have been broken and the violators need to own up to it. Or we can turn the matter over to the police and have them deal with it. This is their kind of thing and they are trained in the proper techniques.

I also fail to see what ``Cats'' has against our president. President Byker passionately loves Calvin College and believes in its mission. He works tirelessly, often 60-80 hours a week, trying to make it a better place for present and future students. He is well respected in this community, around the country and among his peers at other institutions.

So Christian students, what's the deal? Where are you on this one? Calvin is a place where we can talk about differences. We do not operate well in an atmosphere of distrust. You students have access and freedom to almost all of the college's resources. Now, a group of cowards want to change all this. It sounds like the ``Cats'' plan to continue their operations. If so, they will continue to waste your money and resources for their pleasure. Because of their behavior, your freedoms and opportunities will be limited.

David VerMerris

Admissions

Advice for would-be pranksters

Some years back I instituted the Moses Award for the best practical joke at Calvin College. I begin to wonder if it was among my less inspired ideas.

Last year, chickens in the president's office caused considerable damage. This year, missing doors during Parents' Weekend caused more inconvenience for an already harried staff than amusement, and I suspect more expense to the college than the pranksters anticipated. The Bod Book caper was more amusing, though it perhaps caused more annoyance than intended.

President Byker has been the target of recent pranks, in part because of an error on my part in a Spark article which gave him ``credit'' for a prank that was in fact perpetrated by his predecessor, President Diekema.

In any event, a good prank requires more than the skills of a second-story burglar, and I would encourage those planning them to consult such classic works as H. Allen Smith's ``The Compleat Practical Joker'' or Neal Steinberg's ``If at All Possible, Involve a Cow: The Book of College Pranks.'' Good pranks should amuse and delight more than aggravate and annoy.

Randall Bytwerk