The Crusader Newspaper - Cardinal Gibbons High School

May 29, 2011
Catholic versus American
perspective on bin Laden
Balancing loyalty to faith and country
By Elly Williams
Copy Editor
Osama bin Laden’s death is a controversial
topic for many because it has
forced us to consider our loyalty to our
faith and our loyalty to our nation.
Should we as Catholics view his
death through the eyes of a Catholic,
or through the eyes of an American?
While I’m glad his death brings relief
and justice, it’s never okay to rejoice
simply in someone’s death.
When I first heard about bin Laden’s
death, I didn’t fully realize what
it meant. All I knew was that the man
who orchestrated one of the most tragic
events in America was finally dead,
and the victims of 9/11 could have
some small reward of justice after ten
long years.
It seems to be a difficult thing to
process for Catholics, since the Catholic
faith does not rejoice in the death
of anyone, even an apparently evil person
such as bin Laden. However, as an
American, it’s so difficult not to rejoice
and to feel proud the strength and intelligence
of our nation prevailed.
Living in such a privileged country
as ours, we easily forget that people
all around the world don’t have access
to basic necessities that we take for
granted.
Water, for example, is so easily
attained in the United States that
it’s hard for many of us to imagine
someone not having clean water, or
simply not having enough water at all.
When North Carolina was
suffering from a drought last summer
everyone tried to conserve water.
Conservation sort of became a fad
and for a few weeks everyone seemed
to really care about it. Sadly, the fad
ended when the drought ended, and
most people returned to their waterwasting
ways.
Now that summer is here again,
we should be even more conscious
of our water use at all times, not just
during droughts.
Last summer, I went on a
delegation to Nicaragua. For part of
the time I was there, I stayed in a rural
town called El Regadio. Our group
Bin Laden rejoiced in his attack on
America, and in the death of so many
Americans. Therefore, if we rejoice in
his death, some people think we are
no better than he is. I do understand
the Catholic Church’s opinion, but it’s
so hard to not be happy. While we as
Catholics certainly rejoice in at least
the relief his death brings us, it’s a difficult
task to not feel happy in his death
specifically.
The families of the victims have
every right to be happy—someone
they love was cruelly murdered by this
man. They deserve a token of justice,
no matter how small. While his death
doesn’t end terrorist threats, it is the
beginning of the end to them. That certainly
brings relief not only for me, but
also for my entire generation.
The Bible says an eye for an eye.
But Jesus says to turn the other cheek.
It’s hard to determine which is right. I
am glad he is gone because his death
brought relief and justice, which I feel
is long overdue.
Official White House Photo by Pete Souza from www.whitehouse.gov
President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, along with
members of the national security team, receive an update on the
mission against Osama bin Laden in the Situation Room of the White
House, May 1, 2011. Seated, from left, are: Brigadier General Marshall
B. “Brad” Webb, Assistant Commanding General, Joint Special
Operations Command; Deputy National Security Advisor Denis Mc-
Donough; Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; and Secretary
of Defense Robert Gates. Standing, from left, are: Admiral Mike Mullen,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; National Security Advisor
Tom Donilon; Chief of Staff Bill Daley; Tony Binken, National Security
Advisor to the Vice President; Audrey Tomason Director for Counterterrorism;
John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland
Security and Counterterrorism; and Director of National Intelligence
James Clapper. Please note: a classified document seen in this photograph
has been obscured.
As summer approaches,
it’s time to conserve again
By Moira O’Neill
Executive News Editor
brought our own water to drink, but
showering was a different story. My
host family had running water, but they
didn’t have it 24-7. They also didn’t
have a sink, so any water they needed
came from a hose. Buckets of water
and the river were my only options
when it came to showering. Staying in
El Regadio, even only for a few days,
really changed my perspective on
water.
We all have heard how to conserve
water: take shorter showers, turn of
the water when you brush your teeth,
install low-flow shower heads, the list
goes on and on.
The problem isn’t that people don’t
know how to save water. The problem
is that for some reason people don’t
care. All around the world people die
because they don’t have clean water,
and here we complain when we can’t
water our lawns.
It’s time to appreciate the natural
resources we have, and make sure
we’re using them wisely.
Next time you turn on a faucet,
think about it.
This article first appeared in the
October, 2010 issue.
Opinion & Editorial
By Karthik Sundaram
Contributor
The Crusader 5
Rethinking U.S. foreign policy
now that bin Laden is gone
U.S. should work with all nations
Many in the U.S. celebrated the
death of Osama Bin Laden, the leader
of Al-Qaeda. Now some pundits are
using the U.S. government’s accomplishment
as a springboard to reevaluating
the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In light of this, it is perhaps important
to assess U.S. foreign policy in the
Middle East with respect to its ubiquitous
military intervention.
While the death of Bin Laden and
the institution of democracy in Iraq
exemplify how the strong arm of the
U.S. seems to achieve its ambitions, we
must not overlook the negative consequences
of the War on Terror.
Our nation has not only experienced
the physical and emotional loss
of over 5,000 soldiers but also suffers
a price tag nearing $1.5 trillion since
2001. In addition, the U.S’s failure to
acknowledge a higher world authority
contributes to political turmoil globally.
By neglecting to wait for a U.N.
Security Council resolution to engage
in armed conflict in Iraq, the Bush administration
effectively damaged the
backing of its allies and opened the
door for other nations to defy global arbitration
and to act entirely of its own
accord. In short, our government’s use
of military in the Middle East accomplishes
its own goals yet is quite clearly
outweighed by economic and political
repercussions.
While it is apparent that complete
aggression isn’t the answer, the right
balance of military interference seems
to tip near none. By December 31 of
this year, all U.S. troops will be withdrawn
from Iraq in accordance with an
agreement between the Iraqi and U.S.
governments.
So the U.S. is headed for the polar
opposite in terms of its original military
intervention in Iraq, which did
ultimately result in the removal of Saddam
Hussein’s dictatorship and established
the representative democracy in
place currently.
The withdrawal of U.S. troops solidifies
the Iraqi government as an ally
by acknowledging it as an independent
state and at least doesn’t perpetuate
anti-American sentiment among the
Iraqi populace.
It is because of these respective
benefits, the U.S. policy in Afghanistan
should also shift to match that of Iraq:
let’s withdraw our troops as soon as
possible.
The issue with withdrawing from
Afghanistan, however, is that groups
similar to the oppressive nature of
Saddam’s regime, such as the Taliban,
pose a threat to U.S national security
as well as that of numerous other nations.
So instead of taking matters into
its own hands yet again, our government
should work to achieve a U.N.
consensus on the future and security of
Afghanistan.
It is a natural tendency for nations
to follow their own agenda, yet this is
realistically only possible for the countries
with the power to do so. And of
those few powerhouses that are able
to pursue their self-interest, other nation’s
expectations could limit these
seemingly imperialistic attitudes.
Russia’s veto of sanctions against
Libya a few months ago in the U.N.
Security Council due to its economic
self-interest clearly demonstrates the
self-concerned mindset, which can be
attributed to the U.S., not only in its
policy in the Middle East, but also its
foreign policy globally.
By working with the U.N. and other
nations, the U.S. would ultimately
be setting a precedent for the rest of
the world and would eliminate, or at
least mitigate, the tendency of states to
act primarily in its own interest.
Address obesity
with mandatory athletics
Advantages outweigh risks and rights
By Donna Steinbacher
Copy Editor
The widespread and major issue of
overweight and obese high school students
is a very real problem. Many solutions
have been proposed and some
have been put into action to help solve
this crisis.
Despite these efforts the fact remains
that in 2008 17% of children
ages 2-19 were obese and no doubt
that number is growing. Along with
trying to get cafeterias to serve healthier
food, another fix could be requiring
every high school student to participate
on a sports team.
Why should this be part of education?
Being on a team teaches values
and lessons that are just as important
as those taught in the classroom when
it comes to living in the real world.
First, it will keep teens in shape
and teach them how to stay in shape,
which can prevent obesity when they
are young and when they become
adults. This is not the only advantage
though. Being in shape and not being
obese is bound to raise student’s confidence
and sense of self-worth.
In addition to this, being on a
team teaches many things other than
just physical health. Playing on a team
teaches you how to work with other
people and how to put your trust in
some one else to do what they are supposed
to do. It also teaches teens how
to put themselves out there and learn
to accept that it is okay to fail at something
as long as you learn from it and
put yourself right back out there again.
Being on a team teaches that success
cannot come without discipline
and hard work. Along with building
character and teaching life lessons,
playing on a team builds friendships.
I understand that people may
think that this idea would be a violation
of personal freedom but some
kind of physical education is required
if the problem of obesity among the
young is going to be fixed.
I know that not everyone is very
athletic or great at sports but more
teams than just varsity and junior
varsity could be made so that everyone
can play even if they are not great
at the sport. This will also help teach
young people about how you must always
work to make yourself better.
For students who have other responsibilities
such as a job or taking
care of a younger sibling there could
be multiple practice times in order to
accommodate these responsibilities.
Altogether, the advantages of requiring
participation in a team sport
greatly outweigh the disadvantages
and would be very beneficial to implement
in schools.
Page design by Op-Ed Editors Rachel Pratl and Matthew Burnette