I recently went to a friend’s homecoming at Elizabethtown College in Central Pennsylvania, which just so happened to fall on the same day as my own alma mater’s homecoming… at its rival school, Messiah College, also in Central Pennsylvania.
This would have been my 10-year homecoming too, which I’m told is a pretty big deal. Yet I didn’t care. E-town had better food available and a thirty-minute drive difference. Plus, I just don’t have a great opinion of Messiah College.
The campus is beautiful and safe, the class sizes are cozy and some of the professors are stellar.
But that’s offset by a humanities-wide agenda to indoctrinate students to liberalism. As I remember Messiah College, religious classes were used to undermine the Bible, English classes were hijacked to preach about pacifism and who to vote for in the 2004 elections (hint: It wasn’t George W. Bush), and even science classes weren’t guaranteed to be entirely scientific.
Oh, and don’t bother having a different opinion unless you want to put your grade in jeopardy.
(I never had a bad experience with a history professor there though. Loved them!)
Not to say I would have gotten a different experience at E-town. I just wouldn’t have paid more for it under the false pretense of a Christ-centered education.
But as much fun as I have bashing my alma mater, that’s not my main reason for writing today. You see, while at E-town’s homecoming, I ran into some of my sister’s liberal friends who got into a discussion about how distasteful it was to teach the U.S. Constitution in history classes.
Oh, the horror!
Now, admittedly, I didn’t stick around for the full conversation. They were totally killing my two-beers-over-2.5-hours buzz (apparently, I’ve turned into a lightweight), so I left. All the same, they got me thinking…
According to liberal dogma, the United States of America is a racist, sexist, closeminded, bullying, bad, dark and yucky place. It’s been that way since its founding: fundamentally flawed from the start.
In that case, why not teach the Constitution – one of our most important founding documents that everything else in this country is supposedly predicated on? I mean, if liberals are right, shouldn’t such a formidable piece of history only solidify their arguments? It was, after all, composed and signed by a bunch of unapologetic, disgusting slave owners, right?
Yet they seem to want to do the exact opposite, only calling it a racist, sexist, closeminded, bullying, bad, dark and yucky manuscript… instead of proving it to be as much.
It’s almost like they don’t believe the academic or intellectual integrity of their own argument.