Oct 08 2008
Christian school allowed alcohol when it hosted debate Tuesday
Alcoholic drinks have been forbidden on Belmont University’s campus since at least 1951. The small Christian school in Nashville has decided to make an exception to the rule when it hosts a presidential debate Tuesday.
A private school with a self-described “strong commitment to providing a Christian community of learning and service,” Belmont is allowing alcohol to be served at a hospitality tent for the news media — one of several substantial changes the college made to land the big event.
Universities that vied to host the debates had to be willing to pay $1.35 million to cover production expenses, then millions more to erect facilities, spruce up campus grounds and shuffle sports events. Some also canceled or rescheduled classes to enhance security and debate setup.
The payback: instant international attention. The debates also help with a university’s mission by offering opportunities for students and the community to learn more about politics and election issues. School leaders say the sacrifices and concessions are worth it.
Read more here.
[From me]
First, why does that “media” need alcohol before they cover a debate? Does that mean they need to be drunk to hear politicians? Second, what kind of message does this send to students at this school? Students aren’t allowed to have alcohol on campus but to get national exposure they give in? I guess it is a wrong as long as you don’t get national publicity.
What do you think?
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
14 responses so far
I think it was either a hypocritical compromise on the part of the school, or perhaps a recognition that no one is really separate from the “world” after all, or a tacit admission that their policy of blanket alcohol prohibition was unreasonable in the first place.
But to answer your question: “why does that ‘media’ need alcohol to cover a debate,” the alcohol isn’t user for drinking - it’s used as a disinfectant.
I am in total agreement with A3, especially the last sentence. I am so sick of this whole mess. If I happen to catch a glimpse of any of it (and I try to avoid it at all costs) I feel like I need disinfected. And personally, I think it was hypocritical of the university to “pony-up” to the media. Bad precedent to set for the students and others to see.
Bill(cycleguy)’s last blog post..When People ?Get It?
Did any of you actually watch the debate? I watched 2 minutes of it–and had to stop–or I would have needed some alcohol to continue!
How else can the media continue to cover, day-in-day-out, without a buzz of alcohol on!
M. Steve Heartsill’s last blog post..Wednesday’s A+ Award of the Day
This is silly. They definitely shouldn’t have compromised their beliefs for global recognition. That is exactly what Christians are NOT suppose to do.
That being said, I don’t think drinking is a sin. I’m baptist and have never drank, but I think baptists (and some other groups) are out of line when they say drinking is always wrong.
So, my beef isn’t that they sold alcohol. My beef is that they sold their convictions.
Michael’s last blog post..Do You Play Like You Practice?
Michael,
My point exactly. When I was at Samford we weren’t even allowed to “dance” on campus.
Kevin Bussey’s last blog post..Christian school allowed alcohol when it hosted debate Tuesday
Kevin,
I went to Hardin-Simmons, a baptist university in Texas. We didn’t have dances either. We had “foot functions”. No lie!
Michael’s last blog post..Do You Play Like You Practice?
Michael,
LOL! Samford called them “rhythms.” Our aerobics were called that too.
Kevin Bussey’s last blog post..Christian school allowed alcohol when it hosted debate Tuesday
Kevin…how quickly you forget…we did have a class (that probably neither of us took) called Square Rhythms…talk about hypocritical!
And Michael is correct…the school sold out…this time, for a little more than 30 pieces of silver!
M. Steve Heartsill’s last blog post..That’s What I’m Talking About!
Steve! i beat you. I didn’t even turn the debate on. All one is going to hear is the same old same old. he said/he said. Gag!
For the record: they sold out.
Bill(cycleguy)’s last blog post..Better Late Than Never
If you all had been GOOD PENTECOSTALS, you would have only “danced in the Spirit”….
And no BOOZE whatsoever.
We were drunk on “new wine.”
Phil Hoover’s last blog post..HEAVEN! It’s a real place!
Yikes !!!
I agree with Michael & Phil 100% !!
Many of us have been unsuccessfully attempting to have our Governments approve mandatory Health Warning Labels on all liquor containers. As the scourge of this planet, is pretty much running a muck, with no end in sight what-so-ever !
I’ve met many people who’s illness’s are the same as mine,
Grand-Mal Seizures, some near complete deafness, then near complete blindness, rotted liver & severe heart attacks. Many of whom do not & will not speak out on the subject, due to shame.
So, what’s going to happen to our youth? Just think, when we’re all in Nursing homes, being spoon fed & diaperred, who will be taking over our Governments ?
At this rate, maybe ‘Sim Sala Bim’ (? spelling) or the Iraq’s, as they have complete non-drinking rules !?!?!?!
Just think about it.
I don’t think I listened to the debates. If I did, I must have been drunk.
Bob Cleveland’s last blog post..Go See It.
I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with drinking, in moderation. BUT if the rules say it’s not allowed, then it’s not allowed. I tend to believe that Christians that totally condemn drinking shouldn’t even patronize restaurants that sell liquor. My father-in-law does that. It really limits where he eats. You can really take this as far as you want, i.e., not attending church services on Sunday but going to a restaurant to eat as soon as the AMEN is said. The people at that restaurant couldn’t attend services - they were getting ready for you. There are all sorts of lines that can be crossed when you look closely enough.
Needing to be drunk to listen to politicians– YWDL!!! Bravo!!!