The first image that comes to my mind when I think about loyalty, or loyalty to a cause, is in the context of nationality. As American citizens, we share in the "pride and prosperity" of our country, and are taught to be proud to be Americans. America is seen as a community through its common language, common ancestral background, and often common moral principles as well. We agree to the concepts of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We are all subjected to the American Dream, our image of success and happiness in society, whether we realize it or not. We all want to go to college to be successful in the "real world," and a good education is valued by nearly everyone. These all encompass the American community on a more individual level, but America often stands for so much more.

On a more global scale, Americans are often regarded as the beacon of light to the rest of the world. Our capitalist free market is a model to developing economies, and our successful economy is one of the worlds wealthiest. Everyone loves our pop music, our movies, and our clothing. These might not always be the most positive, though, and while they sound great in theory when spoken of with such a positive spin, there is also a down side. There are some aspects of America I don't care to associate myself with.

For example, when I went overseas (I spent my junior year of high school as an exchange student to the Netherlands), I went over with a different view of being American. I was proud of my family, and to an extent, my hometown, my school, etc, but I shied away from being called American. Where most people might proudly announce they were American, I would try to avoid it. Was I not proud of my country? Yes, I was... to an extent. Was I being disloyal? Probably. What I saw as being American at home was very different from being American overseas. Part of my reluctance to admit my nationality was the fear of being labeled like all the other American tourists, which I tried to avoid like the plague. Americans do not always have the rosiest reputations in foreign countries, and I did not want to be seen as "another one of those Americans." I was different from them: I spoke the language, was conscientious of world issues, and knew my geography like the back of my hand. Why then all this fear?

This experience taught me a valuable lesson in loyalty. Nationalistic sentiment is easy to have in your home country. In America, where I was in my safe community of Americans who were more or less like me, agreed with me, and shared similar backgrounds, loyalty was a given; loyalty came naturally in such a group. However, when placed in a group where I was the only one with such loyalties, I quickly saw my loyalties change. I kept my nationality, but I questioned America and its values. I was not proud of our portrayal as the commercial nation we seem to have become. Chain stores were rampant, and I was disgusted by some of the "globalization," as nearly every downtown center became oddly the same with their similar clothing chains, etc. Was this what it meant to be American? To shop at all these stores, wear these clothes, go to see these movies, and have these kinds of "Friends"? I quickly seemed to become a traitor to the cause. Anything that would keep people from labeling me solely as "American," and I don't mean simply as my nationality.

I still find loyalty to be a very tricky topic. Was I wrong to abandon certain "loyalties" I held as an American? Should I be labeled a traitor? Maybe it was simply a discovery that certain loyalties aren't worth keeping, and it took a step outside the American borders to realize some of those. As I mentioned already, loyalty within a friendly environment is easy, but loyalty in the face of adversity is very different. Where our loyalties lie, or who they are with, form a very important aspect of who we are as people. If we are defined by our loyalties, though, I might carefully consider the next time I claim loyalty to any sort of community or group, and though I support loyal patriots, we too must avoid allowing our loyalties to impede the path of better understanding and greater community.

At Professor Hubbs' Cultural Event on Thursday, I found his discussions of loyalty very interesting. Up until the lecture, I had never considered loyalty to be a negative thing. To me, loyalty just showed a serious committment to a certain cause. I did not stop to think that in a way, loyalty is also synonomous with exclutivity. To use the football example, if you are a loyal Auburn fan, you have to exlude being able to root for opposing teams such as Alabama. However, I think there are many degrees of loyalty. In my opinion, it is possible to be loyal to something (like being an Auburn fan), but still be able to enjoy other endevours (like being happy for Alabama if they won).

Another thing that struck me about Professor Hubbs' lecture was the eagarness of the men in Greensboro to go to war. Professor Hubbs mentioned that there had to be a town lottery to determine who would not be allowed to enlist. I realize that the recent war with Iraq in no way compares to the size of the Civil War, but the reception of Americans is unbelievably less enthusiastic today. Not only are there not young men and women lining up in mass to enlist, there are countless protests against America's invovlement in Iraq. Getting back to loyalty, America today has seemed to lost our sense of it. Excluding the few months following September 11, America has been a very divided nation for the last couple of years. The Democrats hate the Republicans, the Republicans hate the Democrats, and neither can seem to find a common ground. Our president is Republican, and it seems that many people can only see him as that. The non-Republicans will never be able to accept that George Bush is our president, and that maybe being president should be reason enough to give him our support and loyalty.

On the subject of communities, I think it is very easy for them to lean more on the exclusivity side and less on the loyal side. I also find it very possible for a lot of that exclusivity to occur inside the community. I can remember plenty of instances in elementary school of feeling left out because I was not one of cheerleaders for the pee wee football team, or because I lived in one of the older neighborhoods. I have lived in the same town since the age of five; however, I have never felt an extreme sense of loyalty to that particular town. Part has to do with the fact that not being born there made me somewhat of an outsider, and part is probably because I never cared quite that much. Even though I do not have any undying sense of loyalty to my community, I know those who did. Some of these people would have rather been run over by an eighteen-wheeler than go to high school or live anywhere else. I am sure some may disagree, but I think loyalty that extreme is somewhat unsettling.

I thought Professor Hubbs' lecture was interesting because I have never thought of loyalty as being an almost negative thing. I've always though of loyalty as an admirable trait and I guess I never really thought about the fact that it can make us exclude or discrimminate against others. I think that a lot of times groups, or communities, reject people with loyalties opposite theirs out of fear. A community that supported the Confederacy would not welcome a person who didn't for fear that this person would try to interfere with their beliefs or other things. Also, a lot of people are born into loyalties. If a person is brought up an Auburn fan or brought up a Methodist, then that's all they know. Befriending someone with different loyalties could influence your own, which can be frightening.
As far as the issue with Alabama and Auburn fans goes, the more ignorant or intoxicated fans are usually the most disrespectful and there are just as many horrible Auburn fans as there are horrible Alabama fans. I think the level of discrimmination depends more on the individual than the group they are loyal to.

I thought that Professor Hubbs' lecture was insiteful and sparked new ideas for me. I had never thought of loyalty that way. Even though I couldn't really hear all of the concepts, I am able to easily connect with some of the topics Professor Tatter brought up. I am very loyal to my football teams such as Alabama and Prattville High school. Although I am a fan of these teams, most of my friends are not, so mostly I have to respect their opinons more than just being loyal to a team. I also have seen many people who are not like this though. I have even been disculded from some church activities because I was the only Alabama fan during a bad season and that to me is ridiculous.
About Heaven, I believe that anyone who believes in God and Jesus Christ will go to heaven. I don't think the different church beliefs really matter in the long run such as Baptists v. Methodists or whatever. I think that as long as you believe in God and Jesus you shouldn't have to worry about the church you go to as long as your church helps you and brings you closer to God. I also believe that the Jewish people will go to Heaven, even though they don't believe in Christ the son, they are in the old testament, God's chosen people and they will have a place in Heaven. I think in some aspects Heaven can be considered an exclusive community because it clearly states in the bible that to get to Heaven, one must believe in the Father through the Son.
I also think that I would take anybody to church with me because I believe that it doesn't matter about your past experiences as long as you practice your faith and believe. I don't believe that churches should be exclusive, and that they should welcome anyone into the church, because Jesus even hung out with the worst of the worst people.
Dealing with communities, I don't think I have ever lived in an exclusive community because I have always lived on Air Force bases so I have never had to really try to fit in because we all had something in common because all of us had at least one parent in the Air Force.

[I love the stream of consciousness style of writing... and sometimes it is hard to follow. And, for that, I am sorry.]

Loyalty. I had never really thought about the groups I am loyal to... Christians, Alabama fans, the members of my neighborhood and community. In my neighborhood, we aren’t exactly the Mountain Brook of Alabama but we are of where I live. We have no sidewalks and people are always gathering around to compare the bank statements of the other members of the community. And, I guess that is where my family does not exactly fit in. We are probably the poorest of all the other families. My dad is no CEO or rich cardiac surgeon and he certainly did not start his own multimillion dollar company. Simply, he is a dentist and my mom is an administrative supervisor. Not horrible jobs, not horrible money, but, in our neighborhood, we are the people that do not have the house that can beat the Jones’ [However, our house could resemble the guest house or something.] I guess what I am trying to say is that my family, although we have loyalty to our community, is not exactly completely accepted. So, therefore, being rejected by a community I am loyal to, I can understand the darkside of loyalty.

As far as the exclusive nature of loyalty, I had never really entertained the idea of loyalty having a negative connotation. Rather, I thought one should have pride in the groups that they were loyalty. Now I have started to question whether I should be loyal to any group. All of them are exclusive and all create hostility amongst rival groups. But then again, if we are all not divided into the groups with other like-minded people, our ideas could eventually fade away. However, in the same token, loyalty and group-forming in a society creates the ability for questioning to eventually disappear. For, if someone is continually around other individuals that are just like them, it makes it hard to question those ideals. I do not really know where I am going with all of this...

Is it bad for me to be loyal to my fellow Christians? Christianity, by nature, excludes certain people - those that do not believe that God the Father sent His only son, Jesus Christ, to earth to die on the cross and wash away our sins with His blood. And, it is through this act, that we, the sinners, have the opportunity to have faith and believe in Him and, consequentially, can receive the gift of eternal life. That is the only way according to the Bible and therefore we believe that we are the only ones that will enter Heaven. Exclusive? Yes. Right? Well, I think so. But am I wrong in being loyal to them? I am not so sure now...

The thing that intrigued me in Professor Hubb's lecture was the meaning behind southern racism. Racism is basically the unlike of someone with different beliefs. Greensboro was a prime example. Similarities and loyalties made them a close knit community. The participants were very threatened by different people or cultures becuase their own beliefs may be affected. The questions you asked about sports teams, sororities, and religions have really made me think. Everyone exhibits some form of dislike to someone who believes differently. This dislike may not be violent, but it is still very evident. Auburn fans and Alabama fans may sit together at the game, but anger is present if ones team starts to lose. People of a different religion may get along well until religion is brought up in their conversations. Then many situations are lengthly debated such as if Baptism is necessary to enter Heaven.
Racism and hatred seem to have greatly died down over the years, but I believe it will never cease. Most people just have that personality trait to be loyal to their beliefs and dislike others who believe or act differently.

I enjoyed Professor Hubbs' lecture on "The Origin of Southern Distinctiveness." I found it interesting that he mentioned that the Old South lacked communities because it had few tools to build communities. I had never thought about the tools that it takes to build a community. I suppose it would be hard for one to form relationships with the selfish "autonomous individualists" filling the Old South. With only the one-sided interests of their neighbors, members of that era would find it difficult to cultivate meaningful relationships and share common interests. Without these tools, a community cannot be formed. Dr. Hubbs said that the thinking of the agriculturalists followed these lines: "I came here to make money." While this statement parallels the "survival of the fittest" mentality, this thinking resembles the mental drive of our present society members. Dr. Hubbs also made another point that the drive for riches leaves no room for attachment. This likewise is reflected in today's urban society. This thought led me down a road to question whether or not we have stable communities in today's world. We have religious communities, scholarly communities, and interest groups. I suppose that the existence of communities is not threatened because we have greater access to communication tools. Instead of being limited to our surrounding neighbors to form a community, we can now use means of long-distance communication to bridge together members from around the nation and around the world to form our own communities.

Dr. Hubbs also said that communities are forged out of necessity. The people of Greensboro and other Southern towns banded together to form religious organizations, fraternal groups to establish credit, reform societies, and agricultural improvement societies. However, one of the most important alliance was the militia who came together to protect the white population from slave rebellions. These men shared a sense of purpose and a common drive to protect their families and homes. I found it interesting that it was this premature bonding that evolved into the Confederate army--a community also forged out of necessity to protect men's families and homes.

Dr. Hubbs' discussion of the term "loyalty" also sparked my interest. By committing oneself to the cause and defense of a community, one knowingly or unintentionally commits oneself antagonistically towards another community. By mentioning this exclusion principle, Dr. Hubbs brought up a very intersting topic for me to ponder. How have I excluded others? I have always discouraged clique forming, but I must admit to shuning some people. If I exculed anyone, it tended to be because of other's morals or value systems and their religious background. Because religion is the most important aspect of my (as Dr. Tatter likes to describe it--) "multi-dimentional personality," I sometimes "diminish a complex individual" into categories of religion, denomination, or doctrinal stance. My loyalty to my own convictions, interpretations, and beliefs can even become contradictory toward my view of loving the people around me. The irony of this thought impacts me with full force. Even though I strongly argue for kindness and charity toward all, if I allow my stance on issues to segregate those with opposite views, I am being discriminatory. This is what impacted me about Dr. Hubbs' discussion about loyalty.

Until Dr. Hubbs lecture I had never considered the idea of a community being exclusive to more inclusive. But it makes perfect sense. I think loyalty is crucial in community. Loyalty is like trust without it a relationship cannot thrive. When we each entered high school we all were expected to show up to sports events to cheer on our peers, participate in outside activies promoting our school spirit, and be ready at a moments notice to defend the honor of our school. I think this is a type of exclusion. Anyone who represented a different high school was an outsider and it took a lot of effort to break that barrier. Just like sitting on opposite sides of the bleachers. The set up of bleachers really feeds into this idea of defending "our side." At basketball games it is obvious when one team makes a good play or scores the fans are almost taunting the other teams fans instead of cheering for their own team. Alabama verse Auburn is a very sensitive subject for make sports fans. But I think the idea of inclusion and exclusion in these two communties only plays its self out during football and basketball seasons. I know that I have many friends who are both Alabama and Auburn fans and other than common disagreements like who the best team is or who will win the big game we get along great. But I do believe that some football fans lump all Alabama fans together and others lump all Auburn fans together in an attempt to say "Well they are this way and we aren't." A good friend of mine has often told me that "All Auburn fans are horrible drivers" this assumption basically excludes alabama drivers from this bad driver sterotype. An older man also informed me that my parents should me to Alabama instead of Auburn if they wanted me to go to a really college.

I also think it is interesting about Tatter comment on heaven being inclusive. You damn right heavan in going to exclude people. We are taught all of our lives that we are being watched and judged and that in the end we during final judgement God determines whether we enter heaven or not. How is excluding people because of their past wrong doings not exclusive? I all believe that the Catholic Church which I have been raised in my whole live is exclusive. We do not allow people who have not gone through the sacriment of communion to receive the body and blood or Christ but they are otherwise allowed to fully participate in the Church. I also believe that the church should allow women to fill in positions of priests but the Church won't allow them to because they believe that priest should be like Jesus... is that not exclusion. I am also confused by the mixed statements the church gives about equality and homosexuality. When I read the Cathcism of the Cathlic church it plainly states that it is wrong to exclude others despite their race, gender, economic status, age, etc. If the Catholic Church believes that we are all created equally in the image and likeness of god and that we should not judge our neighbors then how can they church condemn an entire community of their people because they are created differently no matter what their motives are.

The thing that was most interesting to me about Dr. Hubbs lecture was not anything he literally said, but instead, it was a realization that came to me after listening to it. I have always seen southern predjudice as an issue between white people and african-americans. Granted, this issue is at the forefront of predjudice issues the majority of the time, but I realized while reflecting on what i had heard that "southern racism" is not limited to the colors of our skin. The main point that I took away from the lecture was that everywhere, but especially here in the south, people of all colors are excluded and persecuted for various reasons. Growing up in what i would consider the deep south, I have been taught that a man's word is all that he has, therefore loyalty and pride are two values of the highest importance. Although I believe that this is completely true, and that loyalty and pride in one's community is what makes the south a great place; I also understand now that these same values that hold us so closely together can be the very things that tear us apart. This can be proven by observing a subject as simple as a football game. It is a well-known fact that on the last Saturday in November, there are no "I don't really care who wins" aloud. On that day, you choose who to be loyal to, Auburn or Alabama. For those four hours, families are split and loyalty reigns supreme. You can observe the same situation when you look at churches with different denominations or religious beliefs. The attitude taken by most churches is that "I am right and you are wrong, and if you don't agree with us, then you don't belong here." I am not agreeing or disagreeing with this viewpoint, because truthfully the religion that I follow take this outlook on things. I am only saying that by doing this, the people who do not believe as you do are excluded, and in a sense, persecuted. I do not believe that Dr. Hubb's lecture was an attempt to imply that the south is wrong for being the way that it is. I believe that he was only bringing the issue to our attention and stating that whether or not we want to admit the problem is there. I guess the lesson I took away from the lecture was to examine the ideals and morales that you consider to be strong and right, at all cost, and realize that although some things seem to be very good at first glance, they can also be the very things that completely destroy us.

Until listening to what I could hear of Professor Hubbs' lecture and reading some other classmates responses I have never considered the concept of loyalty to be exclusive. My opinion has changed though from considering other people's ideas. The closest association with loyalty that I have had has been with my friends. I have always considered myself to be a very loyal friend. This only applies to a few select people though and I suppose already I have become exclusive with my loyalties. I have a some friends, a few from home and two or three that I have become close to once coming to school, that I will defend to the death. Although I will support most people I consider friends in a casual encounter with a stranger, if anyone I considered a friend was to turn on one of my close friends I would untimately be on their side no questions asked. Once you have gained my respect and trust and will extend the same to you even if it means trusting you over others whom I know. Therefore I am exclusive and I never even realized it quite like that.
For me personally though not all loyalty has to be taken to the extreme of complete exclusivity. The Alabama/Auburn rivalry is one instance of this for me. I am more of an Alabama fan than an Auburn fan, and I won't apologize for this. But when Auburn is playing any school other than Alabama I will support it too. The only instance where I am exclusively loyal to Alabama. Many people may say this means that I am not a true fan of Alabama, but I don't think that is true. To I support the state of Alabama as a whole and I support all football teams from the state. My loyalty lies to Alabama the state in the union. When instances arise where I must choose between the two, I will, but either way things can not turn out too bad for me because Alabama the state wins either way.

I want to comment on the proposed question of whether Heaven will be an exclusive community. Everyone has the choice to believe in God or not. He, himself does not exclude anyone. We, ourselves, choose whether or not to accept him. Heaven can be a place for everyone if they choose. People who do not choose to accept Him would have a prospective that heaven would be an excluded community, but in reality they chose not to believe.

The Greek system on the other hand would be an exclusive community. The people within the system choose who they want to join their sorority or fraternity. When one chooses to join either one of these organizations, their loyalty to that group is a must, but not to an extent that anyone who is not in your sorority can not be your friend. There are activities within a sorority that exclude non-members, such as chapter meetings and such things as that.

One thing I picked up on during Dr. Hubbs¡¯ lecture was the comment that loyalty is a special relationship. Loyalty has two sides; inclusion and exclusion. Loyalty can be a good thing if it is for the right purpose because we all put loyalty in our lives somewhere, whether it is in school, work, friends, organizations, or family.

As a few other people, I too was sitting in the back of the auditorium and was therefore not completely able to hear all that Professor Hubbs was saying. However, his lecture made me think about a lot of things that have gone on and are currently going on not only in Greensboro but in many other places including my neighborhood and this college. Loyalty is such a conceptual topic and so each individual defines it in a different way.
I cannot really relate to having loyalty to my community because I simply live there and am not extremely close to any of the families within it. As far as school loyalty goes, I think that it depends on if you like your school that will determine whether you will be loyal to it or not. Almost every highschool has rivals and though I had not really thought about it until after Prof. Hubbs' lecture, the cheering and such that goes on at games is not so much support for the team to which you are loyal but cheering against the other team. This is indeed a outward reflection of loyalty but at the same time is a negative effect that extreme loyalty has.
Though it is said that all of the fraternities and sororities here get along, which for the most part I believe that they do respect each other, there are definitely rivals simply because of human nature. Obviously, there is a reason that you chose a certain Greek organization, if you did at all, and you will thus feel that they are better than the rest. There is healthy competition that goes on which I believe is a positive effect of loyalty.
The church that I went to when I was growing up was a very open minded and accepting one. Though it was a Baptist church, we still had female preachers and homosexual deacons. Everyone who went to this church had loyalty to it because it was so accepting of all people. This again, is an example of a positive effect of loyalty without prejudice. I think that all religion are, in fact, equal. Like Courtney said, I too get angry when people suggest that there is only one religion that is right. As she said, a higher being is a higher being whether you call it God, Buddha, etc...; who is to say that you are right or wrong?
Overall, I think that loyalty is a good thing but I do understand that it can have negative effects. Moreover, loyalty can be taken too far to the point of being unfair and prejudice. Really, it depends on the person and how dedicated to whatever organization, person, etc... that they are. Professor Hubbs' lecture brought to my attention that loyalty, which is usually thought of and considered a very positive thing, can in fact have negative effects on people and their communities, as was the case in Greensboro.

Professor Hubbs' lecture put a spin on loaylty and really made me think when I applied it to my own life experience. I was not fortunate to be sitting up front listening intenely, but instead was sitting in the very back row behind someone else's chair having multiple leg cramps from the hard surface. None the less I did get some things out of it. I heard bits and pieces of a "Gone With the Wind" concept and how it is very pioneer-like. Moving on, I would like to answer Mr. Tatter's questions on loyalty. I am Jewish and have have always grown up with lots of non-Jewish friends. I have been in many circumstances where I was offered something not Kosher, being that food, and I've needed to explain why I must not consume that particular product. I have been asked to attend youth group or church's with friends and families and have been asked to bow my head in the church basketball court when I was 8 before the game. Each time I kept my head up because I was afraid God would hate me for not being loyal. I have obviously become much more optimistic since those instances and have developed a more independent outlook on my religion. All of these situations I have been faced with are examples of loyalty. I was taught rules and regulations to live by in pure respect adn loyalty to my religion. I never thought I was better than anyone because they were eating meat and cheese, nor did I think the cross was a negative symbol. I simply respected it for what it was, but have remained loyal to my religion because it gives me a sense of accomplishment. I do not want to think I have cheated on Judaism or have been sneaky in my ways. Over the years I have definitely tapered down the rules and I am not harsh on myself with the rules like I used to be. I have realized that loyalty is not wethere or not I wait 2 hours to eat dairy after meat, or wether or not I put cheese on my burger. These are simply traidtions that I can choose to weigh myself down with. I believe in them from a reformed view but do not find it necessary to treat them like I did when I was younger. Loyalty is dedication and respect to one's community and it helps one with there dignity. If they nkow they have not done anything deceitful, then they are being loyal, and it has it's benefits of feeling respectful and accomplished

I think Professor Hubbs described loyalty very well. Many times when an individual becomes a part of a group they feel the need to exclude others. Maybe they do this to devote all of their efforts to serving the group. This exclusion and devotion is very prevalent in competitive arenas. I know that it is possible to be loyal to your group, but still mix with others. This type of loyalty is a weak form of devotion, so therefore such people are not so committed to their group that they look at others as outsiders. The individuals that do this, I believe, are just more loyal in personality and have a greater need for the kind of attachment that this loyalty to a group brings. Ultimately, all unified loyalty comes down to is that a number of people that share common likes and dislikes join together to support their likes and dislikes, so therefore each other. I think this atmosphere is good for the people involved because they do not wish to be alone, like to have similarities with others, and need others' support. That need for support during the war, about which Professor Hubbs was speaking, I believe aroused because of the current time of hardship that the town of Greensboro was facing, and it is easier to accept people and join together when you’re all in the same boat wishing the same things for your town and/or country.

What does it mean to discriminate? Is it always a bad thing? If one is loyal does that mean that he or she is discrimanatory? Well, first let me give you an example: I have hopes to one day attend medical school and receive my doctorate. I must possess good grades, show strong leadership and dedication qualities, perform well on the MCAT (Medical College Admissions Test), and go through several interviews, this is just to get in to Med School. Once I am there the work only begins, but I want to back up for a moment and talk about the selection process. As I have shown, it is not simple to get into Medical School, but if it were would you trust jsut any doctor with your life? I know I wouldn't. This whole process of becoming a doctor is designed to be discriminatory, but that does not mean it is a bad thing- it simply sets apart the qualified from everyone else. So, discrimination does not have to be a bad thing, and loyalty does not ever require one to hate another. Therefore, discrimination is sometimes necessary, not always bad, and loyalty has little to do directly with discrimination. I want to talk today about the more heavenly side of discrimination, God's discrimination

I am a believer in a Holy God, who by His sovereign choice created man in His own image. He did not choose to make any of the animals or plants in His image, but us! He also chose to give us the freedom of choice. Sometimes we make a bad choice and we face the consequences, but none the less, we can make our own decisions. God also "created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1), and because of man's sin, a place called Hell. Every man/woman who sins is punished to spend eternity apart from God in Hell, but (please don't miss this) being the wonderful Creator he is, God created a way for man to escape this punishment; God sent his Son, Jesus Christ to be the atoning sacrifice for all who have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. For the Bible says, "In fact, the law [Old Testament law] requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22). So what does this have to do with discrimination? Jesus' blood only covers those who accept God's gift of grace through faith, and the only way to accept that gift is through Jesus. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). Therefore, heaven is a place were only those people who have accepted Christ will abide eternally. How can I join this community? The bible says in Romans,"That if you confes with your mouth and believe in your heart that God raised [Jesus] from the dead you will be saved" (Romans 10:9).

Community is one of the things that Professor Hubbs mentioned in his lecture. I had often considered the term "community" only to mean a place in which a person lives, but then I realized that it wasn't a city or neighborhood that made up the community, it was the people. Just as God created the heavenly community as a place for all those who accept Him as Lord, so did the people of Greensboro, AL create a community of people that have a common way of life. Pofessor Hubbs said that when the men from Greensboro got back home from the war there was a stronger sense of community among all the residents. It is my prayer that when this life is over I will be able to see all of you in God's community.