Month: May 2005

Karen Spurney acknowledges that she hasn’t made much time for her spiritual life while attending the University of California, Los Angeles.

She is busy with schoolwork, piano practice, sorority activities and other aspects of college life. That’s quite a shift for the 19-year-old sophomore, who said that before college she rarely missed Sunday masses with her family and was an altar server at her Temple City, Calif., church.

“I’m a Catholic on pause,” said Spurney, who is majoring in piano performance. “I didn’t come [to college] for the spiritual aspect. My goal is to experience as much as I can.”

According to a recent UCLA study, Spurney’s experience reflects that of many college students who have a high interest in spirituality and religion but are not necessarily looking for ways to explore or practice their beliefs.

The national study, based on a survey of more than 112,000 entering freshmen at 236 universities and colleges, found that 80 percent of the students expressed interest in spirituality. But fewer than half said they considered it necessary to find ways to nurture their spiritual growth.

More than three-quarters of students — 79 percent — said they believe in God. But only 40 percent consider it “essential” or “very important” to follow religious teachings in everyday life.

Natasha Lee
Los Angeles Times
May 15, 2005

Analysis:

We have several young people who will be leaving home next fall, to begin college life. It will be their first extended time on their own, and there will be temptations and distractions which will tend to derail them from a righteous path.

To be forewarned is to be forearmed. It is invalid to say that the “day to day” activities of life must take precedence over your spiritual walk. This is true at any time of your life. When at college, your responsibility will be the same that this always has been, and it always will be:

“But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you” (Matthew 6:33).

AUSTIN – Forget education reform and taxes. On Tuesday, the Texas House turned its attention to a measure dubbed “the booty bill,” voting to crack down on cheerleaders who perform sexually suggestive routines at school-sponsored events.

The legislation, which passed 65-56, would give the state and school districts more power to shut down or punish drill teams, dance squads, cheerleaders or “any other performance group” that perform ribald acts.

Many members chortled, joked and jovially waved blue and white pompoms during the debate, but the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Al Edwards of Houston, said the legislation is no laughing matter.

“Girls can get out and do these overtly sexual performances and we applaud them. And that’s not right,” said Edwards, an ordained minister. “This is the beginning of an era to change some of what we’ve been seeing.”

Though Edwards is a Democrat, most in his party opposed the bill while most Republicans voted in favor.

Opponents said the bill has already made Texas a national laughingstock, can’t be enforced and gives the state a power that should be reserved exclusively for local school districts&ldots;

…State Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, said the bill was embarrassing and insulting, particularly as more pressing issues — like a major overhaul of the state’s school finance system — await consideration.

“We can’t legislate morality,” Thompson said. “I don’t know how this bill got to the floor. It’s stupid!”

The measure, which would still have to pass the Senate and be signed by the governor to become law, would allow the Texas Education Agency to require that school districts review possibly lewd performances.

If the school district determined that the act was conducted in an “overtly sexually suggestive manner,” they would have to take unspecified “appropriate action” against the performers and the performers’ sponsor.

Will Harrell, director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said the legislation was too vague, petty and “patently unconstitutional.”

“This broad, morally restrictive legislation reminds me of the Taliban,” Harrell said, referring to the former hard-line regime in Afghanistan. “Why not go all the way? Why not require them all to wear a burka?”

Ft. Worth Star Telegram
Jay Root

Analysis:

I purposefully printed most of the article, as it speaks for itself. While I will not comment on the wisdom of the legislation itself, the present attitudes toward what is obviously lasciviousness is interesting:

• The view that we can’t legislate morality is obviously not so. Laws against murder, for example, do just that.

• We live in a society in which many think that any limitation of prurient activity is tantamount to fascism.

• The world recognizes that the routines and dress of cheerleaders are sexually suggestive. Why is it that so many Christian parents still allow their daughters to participate?