ISU Football

[Splendid]

I'm a proud Christian but it doesn't matter to me if GC chooses a Jewish, Buddist, Muslam or any other type of religious leader for our boys as long as he is a good person and good at what he does.

Just because Phil Jackson preaches zen phylosophy at every chance doesn't make me think his players are all going to convert to Buddhism. Just the oposite, maybe having a non Christian religious person bringing a different slant would be good for the team. But at the same time, don't criticize GC if he wants to bring in a Christian he thinks is the best for the team.

 

[Gary_ISU]

To be clear - I'm not saying this is a horrible idea. And I am Christian - I just don't feel that everyone else has to be.

If I may ask a follow up question, what do you mean by "I just don't feel that everyone else has to be?"

Do you mean that everyone has the freedom to either accept or reject Christianity? Basically, it is a free will choice so not everyone has to be a Christian.

Or do you mean that there are other religions similar to Christianity and what Christianity is all about and has to offer? Meaning you do not have to be a Christian and it will all be okay.

I agree that not everyone has to be a Christian. I think all should be. It is a free will choice that has very permanent and eternal consequences.

 

[Angie]

Not to go off on a rant here, but is everybody still harboring the immense pain of getting picked last in kickball? I can't remember ever, in my life, feeling alienated, or maybe I did, and then I got over it.

I am so sick of this whole world view where we don't want anyone to feel uncomfortable about themselves, so we have to remove all standards and morals to make sure of it. Then we sit back and wonder why the world is going to hell, and point the finger at someone else. :angry6wn: :growl5cj: :frown3qg:

I don't think this was necessarily warranted. Nobody is making this about their own abandonment issues. Nor is this about being "politically correct". This is about letting people practice their faith (one of the most important things they can do) in their own way and however they choose. This is also a part of our founding beliefs of our country - much like separation of church and state. If we were a Christian private school (many of which would have taken these athletes, if they're playing in the Big 10), I would be all for this.

If I may ask a follow up question, what do you mean by "I just don't feel that everyone else has to be?"

Do you mean that everyone has the freedom to either accept or reject Christianity? Basically, it is a free will choice so not everyone has to be a Christian.

Or do you mean that there are other religions similar to Christianity and what Christianity is all about and has to offer? Meaning you do not have to be a Christian and it will all be okay.

I agree that not everyone has to be a Christian. I think all should be. It is a free will choice that has very permanent and eternal consequences.

I believe 100% with your last paragraph. That is how I feel, as well - I was going to be a minister for a while, so I very much agree with your sentiments. However, I am just talking about a state-funded institution pushing my personal agenda. I am not offended by the idea, I just could very easily see how people would be.

 

[isugcs]

This is also a part of our founding beliefs of our country - much like separation of church and state.

Actually, the Constitution does not contain any clause or section mandating "the separation of church and state." It may be a modern day belief, but not founding belief. However, the freedom to choose and practice any religion, or lack thereof, is protected under the Constitution.

 

[Whitey]

The problem with "counselors" is that they have absolutely no moral foundation to make their advice genuine. And kids aren't as stupid as adults, and realize that nearly 100% of what comes out of "counselors'" mouths is b.s. Without recognizing a basic moral foundation, a murderer has the innate right to murder. It's just his/her personal choice of what they find right. Your counselor can help that individual "deal with those feelings", but in the end, if the murderer is convinced in the rightness of their beliefs, they will go out and murder anyway. Someone with a strong moral foundation should be able to take on an individuals' beliefs that are wrong, provided they are courageous.

If saying that your a Christian, or associating yourself with a faith gives you moral credibility, then I'm left wondering why there are so many Christians in our prisons. I guess I judge people based upon their actions. Having received a number of sacraments from the Catholic church does not have me believing that all priests are moral.

I guess that I feel that a religious mentor is easy enough to find. In Ames, you can't throw a handful of rice without hitting a church. I would like to see somebody with some academic credential such, as a psych degree, available to our players. If they have a faith, great. A good counselor will be able to figure out whether or not that is the best means to reach their target audience. However, if the the target audience doesn't have faith, someone with an academic background might have more means to reach the person.

 

[herbiedoobie]

Whitey - Your first paragraph is an interesting study in agit-prop. Nothing in it even remotely resembles what I wrote, but it implies that it does. A classic study of the "straw-man" argument. It is obvious that you either have no idea of what a "Christian" is, and are therefore unqualified to pass judgement on "Christians" but feel compelled to do so anyway, or you know what a "Christian" is and are attempting to be clever by making a false argument.

Your second paragraph is refuted by your first. Psychiatric personnel are readily available to ALL University students. Therefore, the team, by your definition, doesn't need Psychiatrists on staff, either. However, Psychiatrists aren't even remotely interested in issues of right or wrong; they are interested in the functioning of the human mind and a well-adjusted psyche. So my "murderer" will be a well-adjusted, self-actualized murderer, but a murderer nonetheless.

Religious bigotry and prejudice perpetrated by the amoral, atheist political correctness crowd is generally accepted, and even fashionable in today's society. Therefore it is acceptable to them to have a chaplain of the Psychiatric "religion" (and it IS a belief structure) but unacceptable to have competition by a chaplain of some OTHER religion.

 

[Whitey]

If a "chaplain" would start to proselytize to others or attempted to convert someone, they would no longer be an effective "chaplain", they would be an evangelist. I think denying those who ascribe to a morality-based lifestyle access to a "chaplain" would be just as prejudiced and bigoted as making someone of a different race sit in the "back of the bus." I wouldn't even mind tax dollars being spent for it, provided no overt or covert acts of discrimination were committed by the chaplain.

But religious bigotry and prejudice perpetrated by the amoral, atheist political correctness crowd is generally accepted, and even fashionable in today's society.

Wow, who would be denying them access to a chaplain? They can pick any number of them from the 100 or so churches in Ames.

And, what does "morality-based" infer? Does choosing not to worship, by default, mean that someone is immoral? I know a lot of agnostics and atheists that more moral than some of Christian and Islamic friends. That being said, none of my friends are immoral, some just have more lapses in judgment than others.

As far as bigotry and prejudice being generally accepted. The last time I checked the federal electorate was 98% Christian. I don't think Christian values are being denied their outlets.

 

[Gary_ISU]

I believe 100% with your last paragraph. That is how I feel, as well - I was going to be a minister for a while, so I very much agree with your sentiments. However, I am just talking about a state-funded institution pushing my personal agenda. I am not offended by the idea, I just could very easily see how people would be.

Glad to hear we are on the same page.

I guess I can see how some would be offended partially because there are some who are offended by any talk of religion, especially Chrisitainity in public. I believe the position would be privately funded so that eliminates the issue of using state money to pay the position. The athletes choose to play at Iowa State and I would assume could choose to talk to the chaplain and be part of any groups the chaplain would form. I would hope there would be no additional pressure placed on the players to participate.

I think it would be interesting to hear the reasons for having a chaplain and the job duties. I would guess somewhere in the motivation is a desire to lead players to Christ and disciple them. That could be offensvie to some but ultimately would serve a greater purpose.

 

[herbiedoobie]

Wow, who would be denying them access to a chaplain? They can pick any number of them from the 100 or so churches in Ames.

And, what does "morality-based" infer? Does choosing not to worship, by default, mean that someone is immoral? I know a lot of agnostics and atheists that more moral than some of Christian and Islamic friends. That being said, none of my friends are immoral, some just have more lapses in judgment than others.

As far as bigotry and prejudice being generally accepted. The last time I checked the federal electorate was 98% Christian. I don't think Christian values are being denied their outlets.

You make three separate points, and I will deal with them individually.

1. It's tough to argue with someone who doesn't understand what they are arguing about. "Chaplain" does not equal "Preacher". A "Chaplain" is a morality-based facilitator who is assigned to a "unit". The minister for the XYZ church is NOT a chaplain, unless he is assigned to be the chaplain of the football team, or "name your own" group.

2. I'm inferring that atheists and agnostics choose a "principle-" or "scientific-" based belief system. A "moral-" based belief system is also a choice, which is apparently out of fashion with the current set of "PC" rules. Since we've decided to categorize belief, we've also decided to divide beliefs into the classes of moral, principle and science. (If you ask me, I think they are interconnected, but oh well...)

3. On your third point, you are incorrect. And I'm not saying that is a bad thing. But we, as a society, have agreed to separate church and state, to a certain degree, and as a result, have agreed to deny religious beliefs "outlets" for the good of the people. And, again, I don't necessarily disagree with that. It keeps majority religious belief in check, which at times can be a good thing.

 

[KneeGusto]

I'm thinking a Shaman of some type is exactly what we need to help bless the field before Nebraska games. This could work out for us.

 

[Whitey]

herbiedoobie,

I will not argue with the likes of you. You sound like Tom Cruise in your condescension. If someone doesn't agree with you, it's because they don't know what they're talking about.

Feel free to enjoy your self-righteousness. Your method of arguing is as credible as your illogical arguments.

 

[tube1]

Didn't we have a softball coach that pitched a fit in the not-so-distant past when Baylor had someone pray before a softball game? They had better make sure all programs were on board before implementing this new role.

 

[RedStorm]

"herbiedoobie,

I will not argue with the likes of you. You sound like Tom Cruise in your condescension. If someone doesn't agree with you, it's because they don't know what they're talking about.

Feel free to enjoy your self-righteousness. Your method of arguing is as credible as your illogical arguments."


Whitey,

Herbdoobie made a well thought out arguement and you calling someone condescending, thats the pot calling the kettle black, you are unable to even hear anyone elses arguements or pionts for...other than your own. What is being lost here is:

1. This is not about religion.

This is about a guy who is part of the staff who the players feel comfortable with to approach. A person who has been a student/athelete and a coach so there is your training. This is a person who is knowledgeble about player schedules and issue that will be available to a player around the clock, but most of all, the guy will not be a stranger and APROACHABLE!

2. If a player wants to meet with someone of another faith....this guy can help facilitate this and take the kid for an intro....

3. This is done with donated money by people who know what the $$$ is for....and will not have to pay a "counselors" price tag.

4. How do you know this new Coach/Chaplian does not have a psych/counseling degree? His coaching experience well fills the requirement.

5. This is about the kids on the team. Having someone they can take a problem to and do not want to talk to the coach about. A person who can get them the assistance, no matter whatt it is, and even get the kid to counseling or a Iman, Rabbi, Priest...whatever. I look at this guy like a 1st Sgt in the military...

This is not aobut you and Angie disagreeing on this and thinking its the wrong approach, or what I or anyone else think. What it comes down to is what is good for the kids on the team and having a someone they trust, can approach, are comfortable talking to, is knowledgeable of the unique situations and demands of the student/athelete.....IS A GOOD THING! You don't get that from the 100 churches in Ames or any person just because they have a psych degree....

 

[Kyle]

5. This is about the kids on the team. Having someone they can take a problem to and do not want to talk to the coach about. A person who can get them the assistance, no matter whatt it is, and even get the kid to counseling or a Iman, Rabbi, Priest...whatever. I look at this guy like a 1st Sgt in the military...

What it comes down to is what is good for the kids on the team and having a someone they trust, can approach, are comfortable talking to, is knowledgeable of the unique situations and demands of the student/athelete.....IS A GOOD THING!

Does this person have to have a religious affiliation to provide these services?

 

[RedStorm]

Hi Kyle,

No....

I think to many people are hung up on the Religion thing. If Coach Chizik would have went out and got a counselor without a religious background...then okay. I guess what I am saying this was the coaches and teams choice...like it will be there choice if they want to utilize him.

To me this is not about religion...

This is about a need that had been identified and Coach Chizik filled the need with someone, I am guessing he knew and trusted, to fill this role. I don't see any questioning the fact he is a S&C Coach.....