LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Due to a broken link on The Falcon Web site, we are running letters that were submitted to The Falcon but were not received. These letters, meant for previous issues, were unpublished. The error has been fixed, and we apologize for any inconvenience. We appreciate your continued feedback.

Campaign flyers go missing

It’s the first week of the quarter, and already the dorms have been plastered with campaign flyers for the ASSP elections. As a candidate for vice president of campus activities, I admit I’ve been partly to blame for all those ads.

But I’ve noticed a disturbing trend: some students are so disillusioned with the election process that they have taken to tearing down campaign posters all over campus.

I’ve discovered my large ads missing from the lobbies of Ashton and Emerson; more troubling, they’d been replaced by other ads, including some for my opponents. Yet, even my opponents have reported missing flyers of their own, so I know this phenomenon is not limited to myself.

On 2nd Moyer, every one of my ads had been vandalized and replaced with others -- not a single one was left. I even filed a report to Safety and Security last Thursday when I discovered that one of my flyers had been removed from Emerson, less than 15 minutes after posting.

This is getting ridiculous. These ads were not financed from the ASSP general fund -- they were purchased out of my pocket, and these acts amount to personal theft.

Yet, these students are not merely being disrespectful to me or my candidacy; they are holding the entire ASSP election process in contempt. There are more candidates running for office this year than we’ve seen for quite some time.

Every position is up for grabs, and every candidate epitomizes a different approach to leadership. The future of our student body will be determined in these next two weeks. But before we can make informed choices in these elections, we must be aware of the choices, and that is precisely what these vandalisms aim to prevent.

If I cannot increase awareness through these flyers, then I will work by word of mouth. You will see me this week campaigning outside the doors of Gwinn; feel free to approach me, and I’ll give you more information about my plans for the office.

In the meantime, don’t forget to vote tomorrow for the primary and next Thursday (April 10) for the general election.

Alex Binz, Sophomore
Submitted March 31

Binz regurgitates Obama

I enjoy satirical performances as much as the next man. I can sit back and laugh at the antics of Saturday Night Live or the brilliance of Oscar Wilde’s writings.

But the recent efforts of Alex Binz, who is running for vice president of campus activities, to imitate the campaign rhetoric of Barack Obama leave me frightened about the future of SPU (see www.barackobama.com and Audacity of Hope). His campaign posters’ cheap attempts at satire are deplorable and unwanted in the leadership of SPU.

Though I wish to abstain from ad hominem attack, it is my wont to question the tactics behind his deliberate plagiarism of Mr. Obama’s campaign slogans. By stealing Mr. Obama’s ideas and campaign poster layout, Mr. Binz has demonstrated a profound lack of respect for his fellow running mates.

Hopefully, Mr. Binz was merely trying to inject some humor into his posters by placing his face in Mr. Obama’s well recognized campaign poster. His decision, however, came across as neither lighthearted nor comedic.

I have viewed the posters of other ASSP candidates and observed sincere attempts to campaign legitimately. Rather than demonstrating original ideas, Mr. Binz chose to copy the hard work of another person. This type of behavior is unneeded, exhibiting insincerity and cheapening the role of ASSP.

We are a Christian university striving for excellence in scholarship: cheap imitations have no place within the walls of this institution. Our leadership is called to this duty and must emphatically display our principles to help graduate “students who demonstrate both academic competence and personal character (SPU Web site).”

Well, Mr. Binz, perhaps you have some good ideas for the betterment of SPU; I simply cannot, however, accept your plagiaristic tactics. Not only do you demean Mr. Obama’s message, but you have injured your own campaign. In one “audacious” move, you have lost my vote. I encourage you to take down the current posters and attempt a more original approach.

Tyler Anders, Freshman
Submitted March 27

Tuition article slanted

In your March 5, 2008, issue of The Falcon, you published a letter to the editor from Jordan Grant, Director of Student Financial Services, in response to your staff editorial entitled “Aid needs to match tuition.” I was interviewed and quoted in the article explaining that the issue would be very difficult to change overnight, and that a tuition increase would most likely be necessary to increase the discount rate (percentage of tuition returned as scholarships), and that “this would cause the burden to fall on ‘wealthier’ families able to pay more.” In a 2004 presentation to Senate regarding this issue, then ASSP Vice President of Finance Richard T. Moore said, “Asking for more scholarships is often asking for an increase in tuition followed by a greater sharing of costs by those who are able to pay.”

I think Mr. Grant provided the data and reasoning to respond very effectively to your article. I am curious how, if at all, this affects the opinion of The Falcon. I have heard numerous times that The Falcon is to be a forum for discussion, and I would love to see a response to Mr. Grant’s letter.

Furthermore, in my own response to your February 20, 2008, article “SPU price tag next year will top $35,000,” I chaired the student budget committee that was referenced, and I can attest that university administration is committed to keeping increases reasonable and providing aid to students in need. To be frank, I felt that this news story was unfairly slanted against the university -- at times resembling something more likely to appear in an opinions column. No student voice spoke to an understanding of the reasons behind the price increase, yet nearly 300 words depicted the tragic story of a student who would be forced to leave because of the increases. The story ended with the emotionally-charged quote, “They [the university] haven’t really held their promise.” It is not my intent to discount this student’s personal experience -- I know far too little to make assumptions. However, it’s no secret that tuition prices go up. In interest of full disclosure, it may be important to know that like Ms. Lockett, the student referenced, I’m “paying for my own education.” And I too wish that tuition could magically stay flat or that extra aid could land in my lap. But I understand the driving forces behind this decision. I believe it is important to understand that the university is not hiding anything from us; they truly care to make SPU fiscally feasible to as many students as possible, and SPU is not alone in the trend.

In response to your challenge for “our representatives in [the] ASSP office to continue to make any needed changes and effort that will allow them to hear the opinions and needs of the SPU student body,” I am pleased to say that this year’s student budget committee recommended that the structure be changed such that the committee begins meeting in fall quarter to allow more time for solicitation of student input and a better understanding of the budgeting process. The administration has responded very positively, and we hope to make these constitutional changes before the end of the year.

Joel VanderHoek, Vice President of Finance
Associated Students of Seattle Pacific
Submitted March 13

Haven deserves recognition

It was disheartening to read the article on the struggles the group Haven is facing in campus in their attempts to receive club status. It feels so much like backsliding has occurred since last spring when Equality Ride was here on campus and this subject was being discussed more regularly.

Unfortunately, the administration of SPU is pulling an old-time tactic: out of sight, out of mind. They won’t make a decision, hoping that eventually people will forget or just give up. I am proud of Haven for not giving up and for continuing to meet despite the circumstances. Sometimes you have to step backward to go forward. Besides, you never know who you are helping just by being. Homosexuality will always face adversity, especially in the eyes of legalistic Christianity, but I am so grateful there is a place for people to go where they can fi nd support and love. In a world where the suicidal rate of homosexual teens is out of control, it is so good that there truly are some people on campus being the people of God.

Isaiah Nielsen, Junior
Submitted March 12

“Expectations” unclear

I am not an authority figure in the field of psychology or on issues concerned with sexuality. Being a psychology/communications major at SPU, though, I have a valid concern with how the status of the group Haven is being treated.

The whole argument for or against accepting homosexuality rests on this question: Is homosexuality something you are born with, or is it a choice? The best behavioral scientist can only answer this question with the following two words: it depends. For example, the research shows that the more sons a mother has, the more likely that the younger sons will be homosexual. This can be tied to differences in chemical balances when the fetus is in the womb during subsequent pregnancies.

On the “nurture” side, it is very likely that the more open-minded one’s parents and peer-groups are to the gay culture, the more likely the individual will consider it acceptable to be gay.

SPU’s Lifestyle Expectations ban “homosexual sexual activities,” and in the Statement on Human Sexuality, it explicitly states that “sexual experience is intended between a man and a woman.” This is problematic for two reasons: as a behavioral guideline, it is remarkably vague in nature. What homosexual activities are unacceptable? Two men holding hands? Gay sex? Being gay? Questioning one’s sexuality? Where do we draw the line in the sand?

Also, it does nothing to explain why homosexuality is prohibited beyond stating that the opposite of it is deemed as God’s plan. What specifically about homosexuality is not part of God’s plan? Reproductive capabilities? Vaginal intercourse? Family structure?

Regardless, through the decisions SPU has taken with Haven’s club status, the administration is left with only one course of action in my mind: answering the question, “What is wrong about homosexuality, and why?” We need a more explicit statement about homosexuality in our Lifestyle Expectations if SPU is going to make moral arguments against homosexuality beyond “because the Bible says so” arguments.

As it stands, the administration has no right to deny club status to a group that encourages communication, honest evaluation, open membership to all sexual orientations, and most importantly, provides a safe harbor to those who cannot fi nd refuge elsewhere. A Christian environment can be an intimidating environment for a person who is homosexual; Haven may very well be their only safe outlet. The presence of Haven would alleviate the “emotional, mental, or physical harm or suffering” of these individuals, seek to find meaning, clarity and social support when others may “demean the dignity” of a homosexual person, and help those questioning the moral legitimacy of homosexuality to see that it is not in general “lewd, indecent, or obscene,” as Lifestyle Expectations say.

Indeed, contrary to what we are told by the administration, it would seem that establishing Haven as a recognized student group through ASSP would do more to protect and ensure the good intent behind Lifestyle Expectations than denying it would.

Tim Bauerle
Senior, Submitted March 9

Grim’s cynicism unsettling

Dear Ms. Grim, So, if something had actually happened in the library on Friday, February 29, would you feel as free to mock the student who called the cops? I, for one, am very glad that there was such a quick and thorough response to the call about a suspicious-looking individual on our campus. And, actually, “emotional impulses” usually are what people go by when any sort of weaponry is involved, especially in light of recent school shootings -- which, I believe, you yourself used as a perfectly good reason for arguing against mafia games on campus in last week’s edition of The Falcon. You really want a person to take the time to make a rational, “educated” response to someone who is possibly in possession of a device that could take your life in half the time it takes you to even think about “stopping and thinking”?

Also, wasn’t there something mentioned in last week’s Falcon about how it might be more beneficial to send money to organizations instead of Americans who are doing what local laborers can do themselves? I believe that Ms. Dudley’s opinion article “Short-term friendship or food?” highlighted the advantages of sending the money it would normally cost for ten to twelve teenagers to go to Mexico (upwards of $30,000, if I remember correctly) rather than sending the Americans themselves. So, making fun of people’s non-involvement because they are “just” sending money seems to me, if nothing else, a bit inconsistent.

Not to repeat a letter to the editor (by Sarah Schooley) printed in last week’s paper about doing your research, but isn’t it the newspaper’s job to give us information? Perhaps it does bear repeating: instead of fueling the already rampant rumors about the recent price increase, do your research! It would be much more beneficial to actually find out what’s going on and report that, or, if you’re going to write an opinions article, writing it on actual facts instead of making up your own. For example, if you poke around a little bit like any good journalist does, you might find out that one of the reasons for the tuition increase is to raise professor salaries to a competitive level. This is actually more specific, but if I just knew this much, I would be inclined to think that this directly benefi ts me as an SPU student: more competitive salaries can result in better and better professors (both from the hiring of new and the motivation that comes from rewarding the current faculty), which translates into, among other things, a stronger and more “marketable” degree for me. The “more specifi c” information is that some of this increase is going to assistant professors, the salaries of whom are ranked 11th in the 13 colleges that make up the Christian College Consortium in this country; they work just as hard as “normal” professors and deserve a raise, especially since it is the professors who are the ones providing this hot commodity of an SPU education. And all this I found out just by going to Dr. Drovdahl’s class and listening to a few students ask questions about this. In other words, this information is not hard to find; a “vague” email is not your only source.

Trying to be funny about issues that are sore spots for most students just trying to make it through college is rather insulting, especially when correct information is readily available (I didn’t even have to ask the questions raised in Dr. Drovdahl’s class; imagine what some initiative and investigation would get me!). Sarcastically making fun of those who are giving money rather than going down and doing the dirty work themselves is, as I’ve said, inconsistent and a bit short-sighted. I’m willing to bet that nonprofit organizations can benefit just as much from financial donations as “the obnoxious task of hands-on work,” especially since, as Ms. Dudley pointed out last week in her article, sometimes they can do “labor” themselves. Besides, wouldn’t nonprofit organizations greatly benefit from people giving money? Mocking the library incident on campus might be offensive to the very people you were trying to defend in one of your articles in last week’s paper, “On-campus games insensitive,” not to mention the people who have actually been connected to campuses where the “suspicions” turned out to be correct, such as the people at Northern Illinois, Virginia Tech, and, like myself, Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo.

The Grim future

Lately I have been frustrated and somewhat confused by opinion writer Bekah Grim’s articles on purity rings, speed dating, on-campus games, and tuition increases. I recognize the value of satire and criticism, but I question where this is all headed.

Ms. Grim, you obviously have a gift for very clear and pointed writing, but I question where you are trying to take us. It is your responsibility to use your talent to change this environment you apparently do not like and lead it toward the one you wish it to become.

After a month of complaints directed at many parts of this campus, I think it is time for you to cast some vision. Rather than attacks on others’ hard work, I would like to hear your suggestions or plans for improving SPU, Seattle, or the world. You have shown shortcomings in many parts of our campus, good; please explain for us how to be more effective in any one of these areas.

Please explain for us what you consider an ideal worldview, community, university, city, nation, or planet. Every week I know that your half-page will be well-written; I just hope that it will begin to show readers where to go from here.

Sometime in the near future I hope to read what you like and respect, not another example of what you do not.

Alex Kato, Freshman, Submitted March 5

Blackler gets fact wrong

While I have always appreciated The Falcon and the articles it has published, I was surprised by some of the content in the recent opinion article “Castro: don’t know, don’t really care.” I found it highly ironic that in a political opinions piece that basic political knowledge was incorrect.

For example, when author Keegan Blackler stated “...but that still limits Castro’s geopolitical relevance for people our age to, say, that of the governor of Rhode Island, or the president of Canada.” This is ironic because Canada doesn’t have a president; it has a prime minister. I guess Canada doesn’t have geopolitical relevance for Blackler either.

Rebecca Taylor, Staff Submitted March 3

Senate thwarts precedent

I am thoroughly disappointed with Senate’s recent decisions to overturn choices that previous student Senates have made.

Decisions made by former Senators create a sense of precedent that should be followed by current senators unless extenuating circumstances have been made known. Precedent creates a sense of tradition that ASSP and SPU should respect. It seems that this body of Senators and ASSP officers are beginning to set themselves apart from previous years, which could prove detrimental to the posterity of Seattle Pacific students.

This resulted in overturning the stipend reduction in spite of a split workload for Campus Student Ministry Coordinators, funding T-shirts (which are not for security purposes), giving money to Rugby Club (which could lead to liability issues between the students of that club and ASSP).

Evin Shinn, Senior Submitted March 2

Mafia is a gateway game

You know, I really feel Bekah Grim is right on the money in her article about on-campus games. Frankly, I’m surprised there hasn’t been even more of a public outcry over these frightful bits of frivolity!

Every time I’m on campus and I see one of those Nerf guns, I think, “Oh my! A two foot long purple and yellow rifle-shotgun with multiple rotating barrels!” and I start looking for cover. But by then, it’s too late. I’ve seen someone get hit with one of those foam darts; it’s not pretty.

I am worried about one thing, though. She contrasts these awful activities with the so called “innocent” game of capture-the-flag, but I would not tread so lightly over those painful tracks.

Capture-the-flag is a monstrous mockery of what has been happening since the beginning of time: stealing. And the game is often further polluted with catching players and putting them in jail! Is this what we want our children doing?

Let’s face it; capture-the-flag is a gateway game. It can only lead to harder games like Red Rover or, God help us, Hangman

Finally, I was playing Monopoly the other day, and after a buddy landed on my Boardwalk with 4 houses and I forced him into bankruptcy, I wondered... is this really fair?

I mean, in light of the recent sub-prime crisis and the thousands of people across the country losing their homes, is it right that I’m sitting here with four houses on one property? I just put my best friend into bankruptcy, for goodness sake!

It made me realize something... it’s just a game!

Chris Winther, Alumnus - Submitted Feb. 29

I am flattered that some people see floor games like Assassins and Mafia as a campus wide, panic-inducing killing game. Namely, because that’s just what it is.

What is not addressed in this article is the real camaraderie that these games bring, as well as floor unity and competition. For one, anyone on the floor not interested in playing (for any reason) is allowed exemption. If you don’t want to play, then you don’t have to. The article makes it sound like it’s some sort of initiation ploy, which simply isn’t true.

Secondly, the game is designed to bring the floor together and nothing more. When a floor decides to play one of these games, you don’t sit around wondering how you will make your kill. It’s really a lot of off the- top-of-your-head, catch-them-in-line-at- Gwinn sort of thing that just makes everyone laugh.

Comparing our games to the tragic shootings at other college campuses is terrible. Our games are completely pretend and designed for fun and fl oor unity, not to contemplate the murder of our friends. It’s just Nerf. Get the stick out of your butt.

Michael Quilici, Sophomore, Submitted Feb. 28

Men, be men; Ladies, lady up

I am writing this letter in response to an article published titled “Purity for yourself, not your dad.” As a young woman who ascribes to the teachings of Christ, I can appreciate the attempt to discuss something as controversial as purity in this day in age; however, I have a few problems with the aforementioned article.

The author of the article dogs on, numerous times, purity rings and purity balls and attributes both of them to young women pledging their sexuality to a male figure and thus degrading themselves and lowering their worth to that of their purity.

I can understand how something as a purity ball may come across as cheesy in the eyes of all of us cultured and hip college students, but what I don’t understand is how someone who has read the word of God would ever think that these “prom”-type events and rings are done in honor of a human. I think the author is missing the point by a long shot.

In addition to this misconception on what purity rings signify, the author also questions when a woman’s purity is ever her own. Instead of getting all postmodern and political about purity rings, assuming that fathers who give them to their daughters are trying to oppress these young women and objectify them, how about we take a biblical look at purity?

While I must agree that a purity ball seems a little bit corny to me as well (hey, I’m one of those self-acclaimed, hip college kids), I can appreciate the sentiment behind it. I think that a father giving his daughter a purity ring and vowing to protect her innocence is a beautiful thing.

I personally wear a purity ring, and, no, it was not given to me by my father. I wear it (and know many men and women alike) as a reminder of where I was before knowing Jesus and how he has brought me from darkness to light.

It is a reminder of his words to me regarding sexual purity and a reminder that one day I will marry a God-fearing man – and on that day, I want to be able to look him in the eye and know that, while I may have made mistakes in the past, I treasured the words of God enough to maintain a state of purity.

I see a trend in the body of Christ nowadays that downplays God’s commands to us in order to ascribe to a more socially and politically correct set of values. I think what it really boils down to is men today don’t know how to be men and women don’t know how to be ladies

We’re living in an age of boys and girls who don’t really believe what the Bible says about how they should act as men and women transformed by Christ; either that or they don’t care.

What really needs to happen in the body of Christ is we need to see a return to scriptures and a holding onto what is written in these ancient texts as the guidelines to living, as the very word of God.

Katy Blomquist, Freshman, Submitted Feb. 26th

When I read Bekah Grim’s article on purity rings and purity balls last week, I was left with the unsettling idea that these two traditions are tools to make a woman feel that her “virginity is indebted to a man rather than herself.” I cannot speak for all men, but let me at last speak as someone who hopes to be a father someday and paint a few alternative intentions and attitudes surrounding purity rings.

For myself, and I believe for some of today’s fathers as well, the point of presenting a purity ring to one’s daughter in such a dramatic fashion is not to lay down yet another guideline for a teenage girl, in this case one to extend even after she leaves the home. It is to make a statement of respect and value and to present a physical reminder of the event. The statement is that a father respects and values his daughter. He finds her beautiful, interesting, and well worth spending the time it takes to really understand and know her.

The ring is a reminder that her father, the man who knows her best at this stage and has seen her at her best and at her worst, loves her, without any action or concession on her part.

The implication is that she never needs to give up anything, not only physical but even emotional to be accepted and loved. It’s admittedly cliche, but most cliches have a ring of truth to them: she is beautiful for who she is. In a nutshell, these rings don’t have to do with rules and regulations. They’re about love and respect.

Gabe Bentley, Junior, Submitted Feb. 22

I was surprised at the ignorance demonstrated in Keegan Blackler’s article concerning the SPU library and even more so at his poor study habits. It seems to me that his article was a result of an unfortunate experience involving procrastination and bad time management rather than a constructive overview of how the library successfully caters to its students.

As someone who frequently writes literary research essays myself, I have had no trouble using the databases or Summit when I plan ahead and don’t wait until the last minute. As someone who also works at the library, this does not mark me as “brainwashed,” but rather, competent, which is a quality I challenge Blackler to consider for himself.

It’s true that in comparison to the University of Washington (UW), our library is quite small and research takes more time; however, the word “research” does have the word “search” in it and not the words “easy” or “lazy.” Believe it or not, UW borrows just as many, if not more, books from our library as we do from theirs. I guess there are some students over there at UW that just can’t expect everything from their library, either. In sticking with Blackler’s logic, I suppose the UW library, and all of the other schools associated with Summit, can, therefore, be considered just as “decrepit” and unreliable as our very own.

Emily Tweedie, Senior, Submitted Feb. 22