Lone Star Lutheran (Seguin, Tex.), Vol. 46, No. 7, Ed. 1 Friday, November 13, 1964 Page: 2 of 4
four pages : ill. ; page 18 x 12 in. Scanned from physical pages.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE LONE STAR LUTHERAN
Friday, November 13, 1964
£
Our Dear Status Quo
Once again Texas Lutheran College has enthusiastically en-
dorsed the status quo!
Once again the student leaders of Texas Lutheran College have
expressed mild opinions that things are not exactly as they should be,
but failed to get excited enough to disturb the comfortable “present
situation.”
Such was the prevailing mood of amiability that prevailed at the
second annual Student Leadership Retreat, held last weekend at Camp
Chrysalis, a weekend that is now history.
Those of us attending the retreat seek to justify the weekend by
saying that it is the type of thing which has no tangible, concrete
results. What is gained from the weekend is mainly a matter of
more fully understanding the problems of our school and of enriching
the communicative relationship between students, faculty, and admin-
istration.
It is highly unlikely that anyone attending the retreat would doubt
that these intangible results were realized. Some of the problems of
TLC were discussed at length and with some degree of depth. Certainly
it was also the case that the discussions helped to alleviate some of the
problems of misunderstanding between students and administration,
and students and faculty.
In fact, probably the most beneficial portion of the retreat was
the presentation by members of the Administrative Council of some
of the “inside” information regarding the present situation of TLC
and projected plans for the next ten years of TLC’s future.
It is indeed gratifying that the administration is quite willing to
inform students of its activities and plans. Students too often get the
impression that something is being “pulled off” behind their backs.
But the stigma still remains. Despite the realization that certain
things are lacking or out of balance and proportion, students came up
with resolutions in the various areas of discussion which were nothing
more than mere hints that maybe something should be done, as long
as a way can be derived of getting it done without disturbing existing
conditions.
An example will serve to clarify the situation for those who did
Dot attend the retreat.
There seemed to be overwhelming agreement that although TLC
is a Christian, liberal arts college, it is first and foremost a COLLEGE,
and as a college, its primary objective should be to provide academic
excellence. It was also agreed by the majority that TLC has been
lacking in some degree in emphasizing academics.
Yet those present at the retreat could not see that to achieve
this primary objective of academic excellence requires some
shift of present interest and1 attention.
It was as if academic interest could be neatly tacked on beside
athletic interest, greelc organization interest, and the multitude of other
interests on our campus.
The majority bemoaned the lack of academic scholarships that
exists and the unequal proportion between academic and athletic
scholarships, but they could not see sacrificing any athletic scholar-
ships to achieve those ends.
The attitude seemed to be that we are in favor of making
TLC the best small, Christian liberal arts college in the state or
nation, but we would rather sit back, waiting and hoping that
someday all of these problems will be resolved, yet not willing
to make the adjustments that need to be made today.
BURNING QUESTION
The Burning Question is a col-
lection of student opinions on a
contemporary campus or world
problem.
This week’s Burning Question:
Two years ago the Student Senate
changed to the present type of
representation by dormitory units. |
Previously there were two Sena-;
tors elected from each class to'
represent them on the Senate.
Now that the representation by
dorm units system is in its sec-
ond year of operation, which of
the two systems do you think
is preferable?
John Stern (’63-’64 Senator) —
Of the two systems, I feel that
the present system allows much
more interaction between the stu-
dents and their senators than the
previous system; but its potential1
is yet to be fully developed.
Kathy Doerfler — I haven’t seen
that much difference. There have
been very few of my senators, i
either as dorm or at-large repre- i
sentatives, who have bothered to
stimulate interest on opinions from
their so-called “constituency.”
Ray Ludwig (’62-’63, ’64-’65 Sen-
ator) — Theoretically, the dorm
senator is closer to his constitu-
ency and would therefore make a j
better senator. I personally feel
that the Senate has not benefited
by the initiation of the dorm sen-1
ator as opposed to the class sen- j
ator.
Miriam Thompson .(’64-’65 Sen-;
ator) — Speaking as a first-year
senator, I have not seen a distinct
difference in the systems. But the
present system seems to delegate
more responsibility to the specific
senators, since they have constit-
uencies who are usually their
friends or at least acquaintances.
Before, seventy per cent of each
class didn’t know who their rep-
resentatives were.
Walter Balderach (’63-’64 Sen-
ator) — I, too, do not see a- very
extensive difference between the
two, although I do feel that it is
more feasible to have dorm sen-
ators. The previous system of class
senators made it quite difficult for
this person to see all of his con-
stituents. Now the senators are
closer to their actual representa-
tion, and should therefore mani-
fest better student government re-
lations.
Stan Eckerman (’62-’63 Sen-
ator) —- There hasn’t been any
noticeable difference. Although
the dorm representatives are
“closer” to their constituents, they
haven’t displayed any outstanding
initiative in consulting the resi-
dents.
Red Ruppel (’63-’64 Senator) —
I feel that the present method of
representation is good in that it
allows more students to paticipate
in student government and pro-
vides the opportunity for a sena-
tor to be in close contact with his
constituency, thus making for bet-
ter representation. However, it
seems to me that less has -been
accomplished by the Senate under
this new system, although I don’t
feel that it is the system of rep-
resentation which is at fault.
Sheol
By SHARON RYAN
the ballad
of the
second annual
student senate
retreat:
praise god
from whom
our image flows
praise southern comfort
here below
praise money and athletics
too
tho intellectuals
are blue
were not unique
we thought we were
now wTere not sure
just what were fer
but well preserve
our integrity
its the means
to our
prosperity
our image
must we
always keep
bonfires will burn
if we do sleep
tho were not sure
we want
to think
in thompsons class
its think
or sink
tuition
does not
come for free
but it will soon
be less
than the
activity fee
our congregation
may not fair
o
is there
anybody there
athletics or fraternities?
weve split our
personalities
til we achieve
some unity
we will remain
a trinity
xmas vespers or a festival
tis a matter
controversial
we work together
to decide
from rise of sun
to eventide
■ "Tr l
our motivations
kin da low
we dont read
kafka or saul bellow
in fact
we do not read
at all
for more on tills
see dr da hi
camp chrysalis
is a
lovely place
its filled with
so much
sun and space
and theres enough room
to lose a car
o ha ha
hardy hardy har
it wasnt all work
we had some fun
but the
biggest work
has just begun
some crisis
will we now
create
so we can end up
marytrate
RAIN
By MICHAEL HOLM <
Existentially speaking, I’m not supposed to be here. I mean, I
know I am here, but I also know that I shouldn’t be (here). And by that
I mean that I don’t have any reason to be here, so shouldn’t (be).
Which implies that one must have a reason to be. If you have a
reason to be here, then it is perfectly all right. Being needs a reason
to be. And one as a human being, needs a human reason.
And the goulish detail arises—what is the reason? If you allow me, I
will tell you that you haven’t one (a reason). So why are you still
around? It is because you don’t particularly care whether or not you
have a reason. One can be without a reason. Novel, maybe. True,
perhaps.
What has a reason has either a cause or a motive. In cases,
the motive is the cause. Now, to apply such a nice rule to you. Are
you simply an effect? If so, then you are and that’s the end of it. But if
you think that you are a being with a motive, what is your motive?
What is your, or anyone else’s, motive for your being? Why live? Ex-
tremely necessary? No. Achievement .of something?. .Why?
The correct answer is a blank. There isn’t a reason. So don’t sweat
it. You’re here and that’s the thing to do (be here). So the next time
someone asks you why, laugh.
lie Pendulum Swings Rightly
By RON QUITNE
In the wake of the Democratic
landslide, there is only one course
open to the Republican Party.
That is to return to pre-Goldwater
days — whether the senator likes
it or not.
The evidence presented by the
American voters indicates thai
they clearly want no part of Sen-
ator Goldwater or his brand of
Republicanism. Mr. Goldwater
not only has deeply hurt his party
but has mortally wounded the con-
servative philosophy. Conversati-
vaism could well become the wor-
shipping of dead liberals. Not only
did the man from Arizona go down
in a crushing defeat, but he drag-
ged down scores of talented men
with him.
The absence of men like Keating,
Taft, Percy, Wilkinson, Bush, etc.
. . . will sorely be missed.
While the author still clings to
the conservative philosophy, it is
clear that the nation would rather
support an echo and not a choice.
The quicker the Republican Party
returns to the center of the
political stage, the quicker they
will recover their losses.
But the change back to pre-
Goldwater normalcy will not be
easy. The conservative forces are
still very much in control of the
party’s machinery. They did not
fight for control just to hand it
aw7ay after one election try. It’s
also foolish to try to discount the
youthful, vitamin-filled fervor of
those 26 million rooters of conser-
vatism and Barry Goldwrater.
They’ll still be around and itch-
ing to fight again for control in
’66 and ’68!
But if the moderates do gain
control of the party again, it wil
be modeled in the image of m^u
like Nixon, Scranton and Romnlv.
I’m afraid this move would be fdi^
the best. You can’t give the people
something they don’t understand
even though you know it’s for their
own good. In your heart you’ll
find out he was right.
Well, it’s over for another two
years. To all Democrats and turn-
coat Republicans: We who hate
your gaudy guts—salute you!
Lone Star Lutheran
The Lone Star Lutheran is pub-1 Larson, Sally Moll
lished weekly except during holi-J Reporters: Paula Kelley, Steph-
days and between semesters. It is anie Lochte, Ronnie Rinn, Bill
a student publication and editorial Blume, Dusty Barnes, Vic Ander-
opinions reflect the opinions of stu- son, Delores Mahlmann, Janice
dent writers. Peterson, Beverly Angell
Subscription Rates: $4 per year. Sports Writers: Woody Wilk,
Member: Texas Intercollegiate Harold Bennett
Press Association. j Columnists: Mike Holm, Sharon
Editor: David Bronstad j Ryan, Ron Quitne
Managing Editor: Art Kaufman j Cartoonist: Colby Jones
Sports Editor: Walt Balderach i Faculty Sponsors: Dr. William %
Circulation Manager: Carolyn 1 V. O’Connell, Theos Morck.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Lone Star Lutheran (Seguin, Tex.), Vol. 46, No. 7, Ed. 1 Friday, November 13, 1964, newspaper, November 13, 1964; Seguin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1073247/m1/2/: accessed June 30, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Texas Lutheran University.