Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ind. college lifts 116-year ban on national anthem
hosted ^ | Feb 20 | CARLY EVERSON

Posted on 02/20/2010 2:30:21 PM PST by JoeProBono

GOSHEN, Ind. (AP) -- For more than a century, there was no playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner" at Goshen College - a small Christian college with ties to the Mennonite Church.

That's about to change. For the first time in the school's history, Goshen College will play an instrumental version of the national anthem before many campus sporting events.

The decision to reverse the ban on the anthem is aimed at making students and visitors outside the faith feel more welcome, but it has roiled some at the 1,000-student college who feel the song undermines the church's pacifist message and puts love for county above love for God.....

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Education; Religion
KEYWORDS: christiancollege; jpb; mennonites; nationalanthem

1 posted on 02/20/2010 2:30:21 PM PST by JoeProBono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Stupid Mennonites...


2 posted on 02/20/2010 2:33:12 PM PST by KevinDavis (Ad Astra Per Aspera!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

I kinda think they should have stuck to their guns, so to speak. Mennonites don’t have anything to apologize for.


3 posted on 02/20/2010 2:34:55 PM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grut

“I kinda think they should have stuck to their guns, so to speak. Mennonites don’t have anything to apologize for.”

I have mixed feelings on this but I tend to agree with you. Being born and raised in that part of the country I’ve seen the contribution these people have made through their selfless devotion to peaceful betterment of their communities and Americans as a whole.

God before country is understandable and accepatble when that God does not promote the mass extinction of non-believers (you know who I mean).


4 posted on 02/20/2010 2:44:01 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

I think it was Vicksburg that did not observe the Fourth of July until well into the 20th Century, and after the last Civil War veteran had died...


5 posted on 02/20/2010 2:47:21 PM PST by Bean Counter (I keeps mah feathers numbered, for just such an emergency...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grut

Its difficult to respect them either way. On the one hand, Pacifism is an inherently ridiculous ideology because those who believe in it can only remain free ‘because of the exertions of men better than themselves’ or as Orwell put it, because ‘Rough Men stand by ready to do violence on their behalf’.
On the other hand, they compromised their religious beliefs to fit in with secular society, which, even if you think their beliefs are a load of cobblers, demonstrates a certain level of moral cowardice on their part...


6 posted on 02/20/2010 2:52:42 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

yes, I thought of Orwell immediately.....

In my foolish adolescence I lived a fair amount of time around some Quakers, although not one myself.

In my foolish adolescence, I actually thought there was something noble and upright about their pacifism.

It didn’t take too long for me to come to Orwell’s obvious and incontrovertible conclusion, that pacifists and all kinds of leftist “conscientious objectors” can only enjoy their tender pangs of conscience because of all those who ARE ready to risk their lives to defend freedom.

Gandhi could achieve much against the British because they were relatively civilized.... but Gandhi’s idea that non-violent resistance could do anything against Hitler is contemptible, not merely laughable.


7 posted on 02/20/2010 3:03:58 PM PST by Enchante (Obama and Brennan think that 20% of terrorists re-joining the battle is just fine with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

On the other hand, Mennonites have maintained that commitment to pacificism throughout history even when it has meant the loss of the kind of freedom you are describing. For them, it is considered blasphemy against God to give credit to human beings for what they believe the Bible says God has already done: give them freedom.

As I understand it, the singing of the national anthem is not a “compromise of their religious beliefs”, it is a change of stance about how those beliefs are applied. The national anthem and flag have never been a set religious dogma for Mennonites and for years Mennonites have had a wide variety of responses to both.


8 posted on 02/20/2010 3:06:05 PM PST by mongrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

Right, wrong or in between they’re no more stupid than you.


9 posted on 02/20/2010 3:16:22 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

God before country is understandable and accepatble when that God does not promote the mass extinction of non-believers (you know who I mean).

God before country is an interenting concept......but without the Revolutionary WAR, the WAR of 1812ivil WAR, the micellaneous wars, The First World WAR, the Second world
WAR, Korea, Vietnam, Irag, Afghanisan, etc etc etc....they would not even have their Pacifist college in Goshen to begin with. I do not understand pacifism at all....I do not agree that you must be a pacifist to love God..throughout history, God has even participated in wars (remember Moses having his arms held up while the battle went on) we live in the world, and it is not necessarily a nice place.....if we don’t defend our freedoms, including the freedom of religion, we will lose them......try having Goshen College in such places as Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or Jordan, or any other country in the world that does not respect (and defend) freedom of religion.......sometimes the people who want to take advantage of all the freedoms that we have, do not realize that freedom is not free


10 posted on 02/20/2010 3:23:27 PM PST by terycarl (4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bean Counter

“I think it was Vicksburg that did not observe the Fourth of July...”

In Richmond, VA the black population celebrated the fall of Richmond to the Union troops for many years after that happened.


11 posted on 02/20/2010 3:26:07 PM PST by TWohlford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Enchante

Gandhi had little to do with India’s independence.

More than not, Gandhi was precisely whom the British needed, to prevent any violent military uprising in India. Remember, just prior to independence was a 2-3 million-strong British Indian military which had just fought on behalf of Britain in WW2 and were instrumental in the victories in many battles for them (Burma Campaign, Italy, Iraq, North Africa and France), awarded dozens of Victoria Cross medals for their efforts, and getting increasingly itchy about continued British rule. The best the British could hope for, was a relatively peaceful exit, and Gandhi provided them with a strategy to do just that.

As for “relatively civilised”, are you referring to the same Britain that was not hesitant to bomb and execute at will, as was what happened in the American Revolution?

WW2 was instrumental in Britain’s exit from the Subcontinent, much more so, than any perceived civility.


12 posted on 02/20/2010 3:38:48 PM PST by James C. Bennett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Enchante
Gandhi could achieve much against the British because they were relatively civilized.... but Gandhi’s idea that non-violent resistance could do anything against Hitler is contemptible, not merely laughable.

The irony was, Ghandi joined the British Army as an Ambulance corps member and aided the British fight against the Boers, a greed-oriented and morally unjustifiable war from a British perspective compared to the Second World War, in which Ghandi urged an Indian boycott of the war effort and even advised the British to let Hitler invade Britain without resistance to maintain moral superiority over the Nazis. I suppose some people don't grow wiser as the grow older...

13 posted on 02/20/2010 3:48:44 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett
As for “relatively civilised”, are you referring to the same Britain that was not hesitant to bomb and execute at will, as was what happened in the American Revolution?


Have you been getting your history from Mel Gibson films or something? Britain did not pursue the war against the colonists with anything like as much ruthlessness as it could have done, especially by the standards of the day. They weren't even as ruthless as they might have been with foreigners, as the colonists were viewed as fellow Englishmen at that time, and many of the officers, even the ones who didn't refuse to fight against them, were, like Cornwallis, sympathetic towards the colonists' grievances....

14 posted on 02/20/2010 3:58:29 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

Land o’ Goshen! (I’ve always wanted to write that)


15 posted on 02/20/2010 4:00:34 PM PST by Poe White Trash (Wake up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poe White Trash

16 posted on 02/20/2010 4:03:44 PM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

17 posted on 02/20/2010 4:16:57 PM PST by Poe White Trash (Wake up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Poe White Trash

18 posted on 02/20/2010 4:19:37 PM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

19 posted on 02/20/2010 4:22:15 PM PST by Poe White Trash (Wake up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Poe White Trash

20 posted on 02/20/2010 4:24:12 PM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

21 posted on 02/20/2010 4:30:40 PM PST by Poe White Trash (Wake up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan
LOL, perhaps a little bit (it did take a bloody, violent uprising to eject Britain from America, after all), but the point I was trying to make was that Britain NEEDED Gandhi in order to exit smoothly from the Subcontinent.

Their real worry was the ripe situation for the Royal Indian Army, Royal Indian Air Force and the Royal Indian Navy (together, the largest all-volunteer force in WW2) toward turning against them. Hundreds of defections to militant nationalistic movements brought them more sleepless nights than any speech Gandhi might have made.

They feared turn-coats from this:

more than they feared this:

or this:


22 posted on 02/20/2010 4:30:40 PM PST by James C. Bennett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

True and WWII had the same effect in Southeast Asia and Africa, which also had colonial troops in the fight. The lesson learned was “Bullets kill white guys, too.” And in America. It wasn’t long after WWII, Truman integrated the Armed Forces.

parsy


23 posted on 02/20/2010 4:30:53 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

Drive by GC quite often.

Pardon my judgmentalism, but some of the liberal GC crowd seem a lot more excited about being Mennonite than Christian. Other Mennonites are some of the most solid Christians you can imagine.

DH comes from a Mennonite background and some of my ancestors were Quakers. So ... I can see where they are coming from as far as non-violence.

My conviction is that I should be non-violent, myself, in daily life. But at the same time there is such a thing as a just war. I believe the war on terror is a just war.

I do think Orwell was right when he said rough men are willign to do violence on our behalf.


24 posted on 02/20/2010 4:45:19 PM PST by Cloverfarm (This too shall pass ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cloverfarm

25 posted on 02/20/2010 4:47:16 PM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mongrel

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse...A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

-John Stuart Mill


26 posted on 02/20/2010 4:56:29 PM PST by Raymann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cloverfarm

you wrote: Drive by GC quite often.

- Mrs. Big Truck and I are GC alums 1990.

you wrote: Pardon my judgmentalism, but some of the liberal GC crowd seem a lot more excited about being Mennonite than Christian. Other Mennonites are some of the most solid Christians you can imagine.

- This isn’t judgemental. I’m afraid you may not realize how true this statement is. After years of talking with those in leadership about the direction the Mennonite Church was heading(including then president of GC Victor Stoltzfus), we left the Mennonite Church about 8 years ago. The reaction we got from people in our church was a bit disconcerting - anywhere from an angry “I’m sorry our church isn’t good enough for you anymore” to people asking us what we were going to be if we were not Mennonite. Our reply was “Christians.” For some, being a Christian is great, but if you’re a Mennonite, well then you are really in.

Unfortunately the older generation who remember the theologically conservative position the Mennonite Church used to hold to (dress, employment, view of scripture, the roles of men and women in the church and society, ect) have no freaking clue what Mennonite schools have become - bastions of liberals who indoctrinate the children who are entrusted to them. Our local Mennonite schools are no different than public schools, just more of a private, $10k/yr institution.

The seminaries are even worse - filled with people who went to college/seminary (instead of Canada) to avoid military service. Now they are teaching the same garbage about the military to all they come in contact with. It’s a vicious circle.

you wrote: DH comes from a Mennonite background and some of my ancestors were Quakers. So ... I can see where they are coming from as far as non-violence.

-Mrs. Big Truck and I were born and bred Mennonite. I don’t see where they are coming from at all. Pacifism is a great concept (who doesn’t want to live in a society where violence is not needed?) but it breaks down upon application. The same people who decry any form of resistance to evil are the same ones who alarm their houses, cars, and businesses to resist people taking what they have. Ask them if someone broke into their home and had a loved one held hostage at gunpoint, would they call the pastor/prayer chain or the police? Are their alarms wired to call the church leaders or the cops? Pacifists in general cannot answer those questions.


27 posted on 02/20/2010 5:33:45 PM PST by big truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

On a side note, I won first place in the 15 year old class in the NBL War of the stars 1980 BMX race in Goshen Indiana... I think the track was adjacent to Goshen College. Not much else there except the Amish. Good memories!


28 posted on 02/20/2010 7:51:37 PM PST by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

wow, did you actually read my post? Your comments have nothing at all to do with my post, which was about the plausibility and respectability of PACIFISM....

I brought up Gandhi solely in the comparison between non-violent tactics toward the British Empire vs. his recommendation of non-violent tactics for Jews vs. Hitler.

The “relatively civilized” in context obviously compares with Hitler and other fascist regimes. It does not imply that Britain was/is “perfectly” civilized all of the time, although your statements about the American Revolution are rather strained (the Brits were still “relatively” civilized for that era, too, although it should be obvious from my post that I was discussing the mid to late 20th century).


29 posted on 02/21/2010 10:07:28 PM PST by Enchante (Obama and Brennan think that 20% of terrorists re-joining the battle is just fine with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson