The Dartmouth Observer
Wednesday, February 12, 2003
So I decided to read the blogs today and ran into an argument about the CCC. It seems that as soon as I get a free moment I should weigh in on the whole religious proselytization argument and the false equivocation of relgious freedom with free speech, which unfortunately means that Emmet Hogan's 'content neutrality' thesis, though popular in modern jurisprudence, will have to come under fire. However, I was also interested to see what my fellow Observers think. It all started with this post from Kumar on the Free Dartmouth (from what: passionate relgionists...?):
The Term Crusade
The coming issue of the Jacko-Lantern makes fun of the student group, Campus Crusade for Christ, for its use of the word Crusade in its name. The mock Jacko article remembers back to the rather bloody Crusades of a thousand years ago, and asks if the current group has similarly intolerant, bloody and potentially anti-Islam aspirations.
I was wondering if you all thought the Jacko is being too hard, or if this group opens itself to such criticism with such a 'proselytizing' name?
I understand the proselytizing is no longer a pasttime that enjoys the support of the enlightened, the liberals (in the classic sense, not in the leftist party sense) and the mujadeen (since crusader is an offensive term) for social justice. However, I beleive that attacks on proselytization are made by those who either do not comprehend the primacy and power of religious beleif or seek to gut the things that seperate religious beliefs from personal preferences. I encourage all to read my 'Christian Alternative to Political Activism' as an example of what the overriding mission of the Church is; I have a feeling it will not sit well with the happy liberal consensus of today.