I found Andrew Stearns’ article “Peace of Mind” to be a disgrace to both the East Tennessean and the ETSU community. I respect Stearns’ right to speak his mind; however, I do not feel that the East Tennessean is the appropriate outlet for his condemnation of homosexuality and other “sins.”
Stearns said that Matt Bourgault, the controversial minister on campus last Tuesday, was merely telling the crowd that they should repent their sins or else they would “burn in hell.”
What Stearns seemed to miss was that none of those protesting seemed to believe that homosexuality, interracial relationships, fornication, or much of anything that the minister was preaching, was sinful. Indeed, that is why they were protesting. They did not believe his message and were promoting a counter-argument.
Stearns said that he “won’t condemn them, they do that to themselves through their own actions.” However, that seems to be a condemnation to me.
It is inappropriate for Stearns to use his position as an ET viewpoint writer to condemn people on the basis of Biblical scripture for their supposed sins. Students have a right to the choice of lifestyle of their liking, and the ET should not be a source of discrimination against them. Nor should ET writers label people as sinners or their actions as sinful. To proclaim scripture as the “true authority,” as Stearns did, makes a religious statement that offends non-Christians.
Stearns represents ETSU by writing his articles. His article was a disservice and a complete disgrace to our school. The East Tennessean viewpoint section should be a forum for students to discuss sensitive issues concerning our community, nation and world. It should not be a pulpit for any particular faith or religion. I doubt that Stearns would feel that an article written by a radical Muslim which condemned students for their Christian faith would be appropriate, so why should his article be considered as such?
If Stearns considers homosexuality, fornication and interracial relationships as sinful, then he is entitled to that opinion. He is not, however, entitled to use the school publication as a means for evangelizing the campus community and/or condemning certain lifestyle choices as “sin.”
-Michael Sheffield

Author