Wacky article involving members of LCA at Tenn-Chatt.

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Tom, read the article.

They are implying that since the people who are running for office are both from GLOs that mention "Christian ideals" non-Christians will not be represented or able to voice their views. I am pointing out that just because you follow "Christian values" does not automatically mean you believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Savior. And even if you do, doesn't mean you can't reprensent Jews, Muslims, etc etc.

I am Sorry, but did we read the same article?

Your stretch for posting on this thread seems to be only a way to stir things up as you usually do on GC.

As Jono said, it paraphraing leaves a lot of openess and you seem to be picking at something that is not there.

NutbrnHair, you do also bring up a good point and only whats her face brings up something wih no relationship to anything but to start a problem in a thread she does not need to be in.

But, she does seem to have a way to do that?

LXA was Founded on Christian Principles, but we as not only a International Fraternity, accept members from all races and relegions.

33GIRL seems to have a different adgenda for posting this and only she knows why.

Never mind, I know why!

[JonoBN41]

TOM!

You will behave as a gentleman on this forum or I will ask you not to post as a member of Lambda Chi Alpha.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

LXA was Founded on Christian Principles, but we as not only a International Fraternity, accept members from all races and relegions.

Tom,

That's exactly what I said.

PLEASE read the article before you criticize me for something I didn't say. I am not trying to "stir anything up" - as a matter of fact, I posted to show SUPPORT for your brothers at UT-Chattanooga, as I would for any other Greek who was targeted by such a ridiculous article.

If anything, NBH is the one you should be angry with, as she is the one advocating voting (for what seem to be suspect reasons) for one of her sisters and not for one of your brothers. In your forum.

[NutBrnHair]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If anything, NBH is the one you should be angry with, as she is the one advocating voting (for what seem to be suspect reasons) for one of her sisters and not for one of your brothers. In your forum.

I'm for Sarah because I know Sarah.

"suspect reasons"

[NutBrnHair]

I have always been welcomed in the Lambda Chi Forum. These guys know I like them. I am not trying to stir anything up.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by NutBrnHair

I'm for Sarah because I know Sarah.

"suspect reasons"

Suspect = I thought you agreed with the premise of the article (i.e. that people should vote for her because Chi O has "Judeo Christian ideals" as opposed to LXA's "Christian ideals"). I had no clue you knew this young woman personally. Adding that information would have been helpful.

[NutBrnHair]

No, if anything I hope the crazy campus paper's editorial endorsement won't hurt her chances!

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

whats her face

This cracked me up.

Tom Earp, what 33girl is saying is a response to a point the article brought up regarding whether or not these two men can represent the student body (and whether "Christian values" are truly exclusive to Christians). And the Christian vs. Judeo-Christian distinction that was made is rather silly.

*****

I think this issue is ridiculous. It would cause an uproar if students were warned not to vote for a Muslim, Hindu, atheists, etc. because non-Muslims, etc. could be alienated.

The GLO membership for all the candidates is a better leg to stand on only if there is the potential to use offices to benefit GLOs rather than serve the student body. But for the most part I see this editorial as an attempt to draw attention to minute things as to distract from the real concerns. Kind of like the Presidential Campaigns.

[jwright25]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Your stretch for posting on this thread seems to be only a way to stir things up as you usually do on GC.

33GIRL seems to have a different adgenda for posting this and only she knows why.

I interpreted 33girl's post as a (valid) criticism of the article. Not as anything inflammatory or trouble-seeking. The OP criticized the article as well, so 33 is quite on topic - right?

Not that I agree or disagree with her particular post, but it seems like NutBrnHair's posting "Go Sarah" when Sarah is running against a Lambda Chi Alpha would be more along the lines of "stirring things up" in the LXA forum, yet you praise her post.