One Man Watching
Vol. 3, no. 1
A recurring commentary on politics, faith, and culture
Jan. 31, 2002

EDITOR'S SIDEBAR
In the debate over making Martin Luther King Junior's birthday a national holiday, it's almost an article of faith that anyone who opposed it must be opposed to civil rights. Undoubtedly, some do oppose it for that reason. 

However, there is at least one other reason that deserves some thoughtful consideration. It boils down to this: There is no other holiday devoted to celebrating a single person with the exception of Christmas, and even then, you can hear dozens of Christmas messages and speeches without hearing a single mention of Christ. 

So the question is this: Is Dr. King really the only individual deserving of a holiday to honor his memory? Without question, he was a great man and is rightfully a hero to many people. But there are certainly others who have equally contributed to our national heritage. Why aren't any of them singled out for a holiday on their birthday? 

If we are going to honor individuals (and there's nothing wrong with doing that), perhaps we ought to return to having Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's Birthday celebrated separately instead of being combined into a generic "President's Day". 

If not, though, then perhaps we ought to celebrate of the message he proclaimed and the things he stood for by working toward "the day when a person will be judged not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character." When we reach that day, it will be something we can all agree to celebrate. 

Brad Pardee
Editor

If you have any feedback, I'd love to hear it. Contact me at:
[email protected]
Acts of Kindness, Random and Otherwise
As part of the campus-wide celebration of Martin Luther King's birthday, I saw a most intriguing sight. Strips of blank "tickets" were distributed, and the idea was that people would perform a "random act of kindness" (from the expression "Practice random kindness and acts of senseless beauty" attributed to Anne Herbert in 1982). 

After performing the act of kindness, whether it be helping someone scrape the windows of their car, bringing donuts for their co-workers, or doing anything else, a person would fill in what they did on the first ticket in the strip, and then post it on a bulletin board, and someone would see it and then fill in the next ticket with an act of kindness they had done, and so forth. The whole idea was to start the ball rolling and each act of kindness would inspire another, and so on. 

Now it's certainly true that we don't see enough acts of kindness in our world, and it's certainly true that examples of unkindness (to say the least) fill the pages of our papers every day. What I wonder, though, is why we need to wait until a special day in order to do something kind for someone. 

Put it another way. On Sunday, we scrape our windshield and ignore the person in the next car who is trying to scrape theirs. On Monday, it's a day to practice random acts of kindness, so we go help them. What do we do on Tuesday? If we help them, then we didn't we help them on Sunday and why did we need a special holiday to tell us to do what was right to begin with? If we don't help them on Tuesday, then what was the point of Monday? 

Before Martin Luther King, Jr., was a civil rights leader, he was a preacher, and you don't have to look at too many of his speeches to see that he didn't stop being a preacher when the subject was civil rights. He spoke out for civil rights because we are all God's children and we have a duty to one another for no reason other than the fact that we ARE all God's children. 

Consequently, although I'm not a student of the history of the civil rights movements, I can't help but wonder if this is the way Martin Luther King, Jr., would want to be remembered. Would he feel we were honoring him by taking a day out to serve others, only to return to our self-absorption the morning after? Or would he have rather seen us change who we are by making service a thread that runs thread every aspect of our lives all year long? 

I know that's a radical thought in our increasingly "what's in it for me" world. I remember hearing a story about colleges that are able to find donors to build them new buildings (that would bear the donor's name) but they can't get those same donors to donate the same way for teacher salaries, supplies, etc. I find myself wondering what that says about how much of the donation is about giving and how much of the donation is about getting your name up in lights, so to speak. 

Maybe we need to take a fresh look at why we do things. Does someone need help? Then we help. Not because it's a certain day. Not because we'll write it on a ticket to motivate someone else. Not because we'll receive public acclamation for it. We meet a need for no other reason than the need exists. If we are to celebrate Dr. King's legacy, we ought to do so by changing our culture for a lifetime, not simply for a day. If we do that, then maybe a later generation won't need another voice to cry out for justice because this message was forgotten all but one day per year. 


© 2001, Brad Pardee
Return to Home PageReturn to Archive
Page last updated February 22, 2002
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1