1: We’ve certainly ‘tried’ to balance things out. One of our authors, Chris McNeal, has a more forgiving opinion of Christianity. You’d see that borne out if he wrote more (Hey Chris! Write more, dude!). Also, like David pointed out, we more than welcome criticism of our posts; in fact, we probably crave it.

As for us who are less than forgiving, I think the anti-Christian bias is a reaction to our time spent in an ultra-conservative, ultra-orthodox, southern evangelical environment. I can’t speak for everyone on this issue, but the constant subversion of rational thought and liberal ideas had quite the effect on my perception of religion and my personal beliefs. Harding seemed to de-emphasize the scholarly study of religion, philosophy, and political science. Like it did for David, Harding became something of a giant satire show on wheels. I’m still sort of fighting off it’s less than desirable effects. This, I suppose, leads nicely into the second question.

2. Why I stayed? In a funny way, the answer is more practical than you might have thought. By the time I realized my relative degree of disdain for evangelical Christianity to that of other Christian sects (or perhaps my total disdain for wacky metaphysical speculations and vain attempts at biblical literalism), it would have been counterproductive to transfer schools. I would have been in my undergrad for at least another year, and it would have definitely put a deeper dent in my pocket book. I graduated early. Transferring would have made that impossible.

Nonetheless, like David, I enjoyed my time at Harding. My feelings of marginalization – for unbecoming a Christian – motivated me in entirely different ways (writing on this blog being one of them). I met many sincere and intellectually gifted people at Harding. I am grateful for the time we spent together. Although I like to say if I could do it again, I’d do it differently, but if that happened I’m certain I’d be an entirely different person. And I like who I’ve become.

“It wasn’t until quite late that I discovered how easy it is to say ‘I don’t know!’”–W. Somerset Maugham

It seems that questioning things–among certain circles–automatically puts you into a point/counterpoint discussion. Which then almost certainly devolves to ad hominem then we get nowhere.

1 : Speaking for myself, I have a pro-reason bias. I would love to debate, but if your arguments can’t be scrutinized logic or empirical evidence I think we might be running in circles.

Anyway… For anyone interested here is a special treat on Intelligent Design. My friend Vic is an ACLU attorney interviewed for this.
Judgment Day — Intelligent Design on Trial: Nova
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-404729062613200911#

It’s not just that I changed, but Harding changed me. Do you ever watch something satirical? Satire takes a position so far to the extreme that it becomes funny and it points out the inherent flaws of the original position. On its face, satire is saying one thing, but it has the effect of turning people away from that. To me, Harding was one giant satire of weird religion and it turned me off of the whole thing.

I don’t regret my time at Harding. I met my fiancee there and it made me who I am today, and I like both of those things a lot.

The other side of any article published here is always welcome to join in (and frequently do) in the comments. Do you think that mocking this silly pamphlet is anti-Christian or that someone should defend it? Go for it, but… good luck.

1: Why the anti-Christian bias on this blog? Is there simply no one to argue the other side? I believe it would behoove Political Cartel to feature more viewpoints in their articles, and would make for a more ‘robust debate.’

2: David Manes, and other Harding graduates that write for PC – As you clearly do not subscribe to Christianity (in it’s typical form), why did you attend Harding in the first place? I don’t understand the logic or motivation. There are plenty of other reasonably priced schools that offer reasonably good educations.