The sins of a preacherman

On Wednesday A&M students were graced with the presence of evangelist Jed Smock, or as most people call him, ''you're going to hell guy." Smock travels to many universities in Texas "preaching his message," but his rhetoric is based on hate and turns people away from Christianity.

Walking out of my morning class, the sound of "You're a hussie and going to hell!" shook me awake. As I glanced around to hear who was talking, I saw a man with the "You deserve hell" sign around his neck.

Instead of going home and watching some television, I found this much better entertainment, so I sat down and let Mr. Smock embrace my thoughts and emotions. I had the privilege to watch him, try and understand his message and get to know him.

First let me say, aside from the yelling and screaming, I'm sure Smock is a delightful man to talk with about nonbiblical related stuff. But during the span of 15 minutes talking with him, I heard the terms "masturbator," "hussy" and "homosexual'' used and directed at various students numerous times.

I was surprised to see the extent to which he took the extremes of his views, seeing him bash on a couple for holding hands, giving them an in-depth and descriptive view on how "pre-marital holding hands leads to pre-marital sex, which puts you in hell!"

While Smock is entitled to his First Amendment freedom of speech, a line should be drawn at harassment and publicly degrading people. I'm all for preaching the word of good and helping people, but Smock's methods are not, which backfires against his misguided goals.

It is rude, obtrusive, and just not morally acceptable to yell such things at people passing by. Generally when trying to bring people into a particular view or interest, it is not helpful to scare them into it. Calling people names or telling them they are going to hell actually pushes people away, due to the ignorance and close-mindedness of the presenter.

If Smock wants to help people, why not give them lollipops and pamphlets that answer questions, rather than repeating a nondescriptive "you are going to hell, because of …." Random onlookers simply think "why am I going to hell, what did I do? He doesn't know me or my beliefs." A more passive, positive and clarifying way would actually help people.

It is not very Christian-like to pass judgment on others. Saying such slandering words to people without actually knowing them personally creates tension and aggression. This judgment being passed by a "preacher" is not acceptable in the Christian faith; it is hypocritical.

As I was walking away, I heard him say, "This boy is an agnostic; he hasn't found Christ, which means he's not saved and will suffer!" While the majority of religious students at A&M are Christian, there are many other religious groups. Had I been one of them, I would have personally been offended if he had slandered my beliefs.

We live in an ever-changing society, and people adapt to our surroundings, forming beliefs and morals in what benefits us most. He is right in the sense that we are abusing and extorting some views. And yet, while our role in society changes, we still face persecution in the face of religion and morality.

Religion requires abiding by a moral code, and some things are not acceptable. Zealots such as Smock ignore the teachings of their religion, using God to hurt others. Extremists seem to think they know everything, and while "trying to help others" only offend and hurt people.

Causing mental damage and anxiety upon the onlooker defeats the purpose of helping.

Regardless if students do need his advice or him "saving" them, we need to first learn the simple task of communication. To talk to, rather than talk at people. By learning from people like Smock's negative example, maybe we can turn calling people random obscenities into a constructive message that can help people.

Cole Allen is a senior political science major.