| Letters 
             
             The 
              Human Footprint 
             I was horrified 
              to read the author's advice on how to erase the human footprint. 
              (Summer 2002) Did he pay any attention to logic and Oberlin-style 
              rhetoric? In the memorable words of a Fred Small song, "Don't 
              blame the children." THEY aren't the problem, and merely 
              cutting down the number we have will do nothing to solve consumption 
              problems. The typical American family (with few children) consumes 
              more than a large, starving family in Africa. I'm not a statistician, 
              but it seems logical that merely to replace our current population 
              we need to have two children per family, but this assumes everyone 
              has children and there are no accidental deaths. Ask the victims 
              of any number of tragedies: accidental deaths happen. And there 
              are people who don't have children (for any number of reasons). 
              You're not proposing limiting the damage we humans cause. 
              You're proposing either genocide or species-wide suicide. 
              You don't want to erase the footprint, you want to obliterate 
              the beings who made it. Surely this is inconsistent with valuing 
              biodiversity, human and civil rights, among other things. 
              Chris Garton-Zavesky '90 
              Gastonia, North Carolina 
             
            I was 
              disappointed and offended by Professor Carl McDaniel's article 
              in the OAM entitled "Paradise for Sale." It contains 
              a thinly veiled attack on religious belief, which Professor McDaniel 
              dismisses as "demonstrably false," "naive," 
              and a "fantasy worlds estranged from biological and physical 
              reality." Furthermore, Professor McDaniel expresses the hope 
              that what happens "in a home, school, or place of work" 
              holds hope for preventing another "mass extinction of life" 
              for which we humans are responsible. It is sad, and offensive, that 
              he makes no mention of the role religious institutions might play 
              in preventing such an extinction of human life. Professor McDaniel 
              needs to develop an appreciation of the role of religion in nurturing 
              respect and care for the earth. He needs to see that religious faith 
              can come to the aid of his cause! For example, the Biblical tradition 
              speaks of the world as a garden lovingly created and ordered by 
              God. And it tells us that the "earth is the Lord's" 
              and is therefore not to be despoiled by careless humans. At the 
              end of his article, Professor McDaniel lauds Oberlin's "traditional 
              concerns of equity, fairness, social justice, and respect for diversity" 
              as utterly essential to overcoming environmental destruction. Professor 
              McDaniel would be rewarded by studying Oberlin's early history. 
              He would learn that Oberlin's passion for "equity, fairness, 
              social justice, and respect for diversity" was born of the 
              passionate evangelical, Biblical faith of Oberlin's founders. 
              Professor McDaniel, like so many others, have conveniently forgotten 
              the religious roots of Oberlin's heritage, which has alienated 
              me greatly from the College in recent years. 
              Rev. James D. Edwards '73 
              Doylestown, Ohio 
                 
             |