‘#160;

I have to say that I am impressed. Only a week into the year and one of BG’s new budding minds has already figured out that professors have opinions.

Unlike high school, instructors aren’t required to censor themselves down to a lifeless shell droning on with only doubly proven, government regulated and FDA approved lectures. I can understand what a shock it must be to hear these biases, but must attest that I am surprised to hear that the most offensive thing Hoostal heard was that freedom of protest is a constitutional right.

I am only thankful he did not hear one of my professors sharing his thorough enjoyment of the bumper sticker: ‘Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.’ I can only image the bitter tirade that would have been spawned from such a comment.

But this is just one of the gifts that college has to offer: exposure to diversity. Yes, diversity isn’t just about race; it includes political values among other things. If our conservative friends do not want to hear opinions that differ from their own, my suggestion is that they stick their fingers in their ears and hum something patriotic.

But for those who do care to understand where the evil liberals are coming up with these strange notions of free speech and empirical evidence, I ask for just a moment of your time to explain.

To begin with the ‘fast and loose’ liberal interpretation of the Constitution; the 1st Amendment does not ‘infer’ the right to protest, it guarantees the right to free speech and petition. It’s part of that whole ‘democracy’ bit.

The 2nd Amendment, on the other hand, guarantees that people can ‘bear Arms’ so long as a militia is necessary. While we ponder that, I offer up the fact that the Constitution is well over 200 years old and not only do we have no need for a militia, but also that it’s not the people carrying muskets and bayonets that I worry about, it’s the ones with semi-automatics in their glove boxes.

I am too ashamed by the blatant refusal to even consider understanding other cultures to make a point of it here. Instead I address the issue of creation, scratch that, ‘intelligent design’ vs. evolution.

The only point necessary here is to say that the reason evolution is taught in science classes is because evolution is a scientific theory. Intelligent design, on the other hand, has nothing to do with science. Intelligent design is taught in churches; therefore it is not necessary to teach it in science class.

If someone wants creation taught, they should try getting more people to church on Sunday. Chances are, those students learning about evolution in science class who do not know about the intelligent design theory aren’t going to believe it anyway.

Although, I am open to compromise; schools teach both if churches teach both. That’s all we need to know about that, then.

I apologize on behalf of my evil liberal biases . I hope that I have not poisoned anyone’s mind with my preoccupation with ‘such standards’ as speaking my mind, caring about countries other than my own and not sending good people to die. Finding the one man we know to be responsible for the attacks is way more difficult than just blowing up one big country where we’ve seen other terrorists get

funding before.

‘#160;