So I didn’t get as much internet access as I thought I might while I was travelling. Oh well. This will be quite long, as it contains every thought that crossed my mind for the past five days. Or not. In any case, I feel compelled to use the MORE tag so that this doesn’t take half an hour to load on dialup PCs.
Travelling is fun. The being tired and missing classwork and spending just under an hour chewing through 73 unread emails is not fun. But we consider this a “balanced diet” of fun - that is, for every fun thing you do, you must also do a not-so-fun thing to make up for it. Observe:
Fun - singing in chapel services and joking around with the high schoolers there.
Not-so-fun - wearing the exact same Chorale shirt to every chapel for four days in a row
Fun - sleeping on the bus to pass the drive time
Not-so-fun - waking up with a sore back and (inexplicably) a sore left thigh muscle once the drive time has passed
Fun - staying over at people’s houses every night
Not-so-fun - realizing that the best bed you’ve had all week is the one you have to leave the earliest
Tour is also very educational. For instance, I learned that I can kill Osama bin Laden by drinking Coke. This comes from a conversation about nutrition. One of my good friends, John, has this philosophy about eating healthy: eat whatever you want, whenever you want, so long as you stick to a vigorous workout program. Alyssa, who heard this philosophy, started at that point talking about “anti-odixants” and “free radicals” running around in one’s bloodstream. Last I checked, bin Laden was still free, and still a radical…hence bin Laden is in my blood. However, since we all know that Coke can dissolve nails, and that stomach acid is even more acidic than Coke, we can readily conclude that drinking Coke kills the free radicals in my blood, assuming bin Laden’s not alone down there. He may be protected by trans fats, which are small rail lines (not too dissimilar from Trans-Pacific) in your blood. Presumably Coke can work against these, too. … Don’t stare at me all wide-eyed! It all made perfect sense when it first came up! My rebuttal of the week came when Kristin made some offhand remark about wives making sure husbands ate right. My response was, “Yes, and when one of us gets around to marrying one of you, that’ll happen…until then, let us eat in peace!” (Trust me, it was funny then. We all laughed as if I had just said the funniest thing in the history of the universe. We were also borderline exhausted, if that makes any difference.)
Other opportunities abounded that we’d never be able to do otherwise. While on the road we drove through Chicago and stopped at the Moody Memorial Church downtown. They’re not usually open on Mondays, but we stopped in anyway and managed to get ourselves let in. We also got permission to sing there. They say that if the carpet in the aisles were removed the room would be “acoustically perfect.” The room was acoustically quite good to begin with, so I wasn’t complaining. (One note - their pew Bibles are ESV.) Then Wednesday (I think) we stopped at Notre Dame University and wandered around a bit. (The existential not-intended pun of the week came from their gate worker when the BJU tour bus pulled up - “You must be lost!”) We stopped in the basilica and, surprisingly enough, received permission to sing a few songs in the cathedral. The acoustics were quite good (though a little muddled, what with all the bling on the ceilings for the sound to bounce around), and we even put ourselves out of pitch listening to the reverb from one particularly loud moment. In a story of local interest to the back-home folks, former Philadelphia Archbishop John Francis Cardinal O’Hara is either buried or at the least has a monument in the basilica. In Philly there’s a street named after him, while there’s an entire alcove devoted to him in Indiana. Go figure.
The last hobby of tour is gaining weight. It’s a rule in the handbook that each choir member must gain at least five pounds while out. This is because we go through the rigorous exercise of doing nothing on the bus most of the day, as well as the equally rigorous exercise of ultimately failing to convince our hosts (more accurate, the hostesses) that we’re not hungry at 11p and don’t want a four-course meal right then. Just point me in the direction of the salad bar.
Life went on back in Greenville, though. I see that tomorrow’s highs are to be in the seasonably cool 70s, so not much has changed there. (I’d just like to take this opportunity to say that I hate Greenville. Thank you.) Starbucks was forthwith banned from campus, as so many other various bloggers have reported diligently. Read their debates there; as for me it’s not my place to criticize school policy (though I might have done it before, probably accidentally). I will say, however, that I will be selling Starbucks drinks from both my room and my desk, and that I’m quite tempted to run out to Starbucks right now for something…anything, really. (And before you complain, Starbucks isn’t off-limits. They’re just not brewing their coffee in the Snack Shop anymore. I’ve been assured that this makes perfect sense.) Show me one time that a very small group of Fundies have boycotted anything successfully and I’ll consider not buying their coffee. (And don’t bring up “The Book of Daniel” - we can’t take any credit for that.) Call me fatalistic, but since boycotts almost invariably fail to produce results, and since most of what I buy from Starbucks comes in glass bottles or cans, not styrofoam cups, and since pulling my $10 a month from their coffers will make absolutely no discernable difference, and since the rest of the Fundy community will very likely forget what all this is about in a month anyway, I see no reason to deprive myself of their coffee in the meantime. Bring on the Cafe Verona.
So, depressingly, I’m back in Greenville, SC, wishing I were anywhere but. I have surprisingly little to make up, though I’m sure once I give my assignment sheet a second thorough look I’ll find something else to occupy my time with. For now, I’m fried, and I choose to believe that I’m still on tour, which means no homework.














Comment posted by Michael (guest) on February 2nd, 2006 at 10:43 pm.
Link here
Tom, you assume that putting someone out of business or having a decision reversed is the sole end of a boycott. I don’t know if I agree. In my mind, boycotts are primarily a way of sending a message–whether it makes a difference to the organization or not. Boycotts can send a message to the culture at large and act as a rebuke to the organizations involved. A boycott can communicate the moral law, promoting its work as schoolmaster to highlight our need for Christ.
I don’t think Starbucks will close their doors because they lost the BJ franchise, but BJ’s move (in concert with others who are similarly alarmed) makes the corporation face the moral dimensions of their action.
According to my philosophy of boycotts, I don’t think it is necessarily wrong or inconsistent to later resume patronizing a business that you once boycotted. Again, the point wasn’t to put them out of business–it was to send a message. (Sometimes this message could be sent as effectively without boycotting.)
Along these lines, I would say that the much-publicized SBC boycott of Disney was successful in the sense that it helped American families realize that the name Disney no longer stood for wholesome, family-oriented content. In the span of a decade the public perception of Disney radically changed from a provider of clean entertainment to a promoter of deviant lifestyles.
Just my $0.02. Interested in other’s thoughts.
Comment posted by Tom Mount Sr (guest) on February 2nd, 2006 at 11:07 pm.
Link here
I wrote Dr. Stephen Jones on this exact thing a few months ago, and he did exactly hwat he said in his reply.
It is the right thing to do, this is about holiness, not putting them out of business. Dad
Comment posted by mounty (guest) on February 3rd, 2006 at 12:57 am.
Link here
Michael, if I take your tack, then I would say that the message has been sent. This issue flared up months ago; it’s only now that we appear to be acting a little late. Granted, the school did the honorable thing by giving quite a bit of time to hear back from SB’s PR department. But in that time I seem to recall something hitting SharperIron last semester to the same effect, with the result that a boycott was organized, Starbucks was rebuked, and life went on. As for my philosophy of boycotting, I believe one must choose one’s battles and the method of fighting. As Michael pointed out, messages don’t always have to be sent monetarily. I used to work, indirectly, for Procter & Gamble, a company that doesn’t seem to mind pushing things I don’t support. My efforts were going into their prosperity. Yet the idea of boycotting their products or even quitting my job never crossed my mind.
To be clear, the school’s decision to take this route is theirs to make, and I’m fine with it. Just means I’ll have to stock my fridge with coffee instead of getting it from the Snack Shop. Slight inconvenience, perhaps, but not really the end of the world.
Comment posted by David Siglin (guest) on February 3rd, 2006 at 2:35 am.
Link here
I think it is best for the University to take a “harder” stance on boycotting than I might. They represent a lot to a lot of people and have a lot of publicity so they have to be very careful to not inadvertantly send the wrong message. I don’t think Starbucks was pushing the gay agenda at all. They had quotes by Fallwell I believe, as well as quotes from all kinds of people. As it’s been pointed out the quotes were meant to start conversations. It’s a great idea. So I think Fundys are over reacting. I don’t think BJU over reacted. The pulling of Starbucks from the campus store was as much about the explitive on the cup as it was about the gay issue. They weren’t just knee-jerking. I bet Stephen personally wouldn’t have a problem buying Starbucks’ coffee. But BJU had to think of all the ramifications of keeping Starbucks. Anyways, I can think of a thousand more topics I’d rather discuss. This is more time than I should have given the topic.
Tom, BSG, Friday, 10pm, Brade’s place?
Comment posted by Graves (guest) on February 4th, 2006 at 10:35 pm.
Link here
As usual, sensible Dsiglin…
Personally, I’d have to go w/ Dr. J on this. My concurrence may or may not have to do w/ the fact that coffee is as appetizing to me as escargo…