It’s Friday night and the week’s been a bit rough. Papers are piling up and the homework load makes me feel like the Greek god Atlas, bearing the world upon my shoulders. Although not typically a drinker, I do enjoy a good glass of wine on occasion; especially with an excellent piece of cheese. The only thing barring my way from this Friday night relaxation is Biola’s community standards, known more commonly as “The Contract.”

This contract, which all Biola students have signed, is one that often gives rise to a bit of discontentment. After all, I am of legal drinking age and a drink would be the perfect thing. You might glance at my situation and feel that I should be able to drink.

Now, as a signer of the contract, I have expressly stated that I have “chosen, freely and willingly, to abide by these standards.” The last thing I would call for is disobedience to the rules to which we have freely and willingly submitted ourselves. If your goal is to not follow and uphold these standards, then Biola is most likely not for you. However, just because we obey these standards and have affixed our name to them, does not mean we cannot discuss them.

The contract gives biblical support for certain items, saying that “the scripture condemns sins of the heart, such as covetousness” and that is a true statement. Yet the Bible never condemns alcohol as a sin, in fact, Jesus’ first miracle is to turn water into wine, so the wedding could continue to be an enjoyable one. Yet the final clause of the contract seems to be more curious, informing the signer that “for the purpose of character development and the creation of a healthy, vibrant Christian community, students at Biola commit to abstain from the use of alcoholic beverages.” It is a valid question, however, as to whether the elimination of alcohol really is conducive to better character development or the creation of a healthy vibrant Christian community. One could indeed fathom a community where students were allowed to consume alcohol that was also “vibrant and flourishing.”

It is clearly apparent that one’s spiritual integrity remains whether one imbibes or not. The question is not about the validity of alcohol or of obedience to the contract. The question is whether it is right to discuss this contract around campus, even if you are in disagreement with it. My answer to that is an emphatic “yes”! After all, the spirit of debate over controversial topics (read: things some people agree on and others don’t) is one that can only breed healthy action. If enough people disagree with a certain issue, the administration will be notified of it, contacted through the proper channels and maybe change will come about. Or maybe change will not come about. The spirit of debate keeps the administration accountable to its main clientele, the students. After all, a university filled with faculty but not students is no university at all. If the only way to disagree with the contract is to speak to administrative personnel, the spirit of debate is quashed and the administration is no longer accountable to students – the main proponents of necessary and fruitful change.

Debates and discussion ought to be filled with open-mindedness, thoughtful responses and vigorous, active debate, but never censored. Just because a person signs a contract and abides by it does not mean that they are not allowed to discuss or disagree with it. After all, if academics are the main focus here at Biola, one might need to subscribe to the community standards as a necessary byproduct of attending an excellent school. Debate never signals a bad attitude or uncouth people. After all, mobs are characterized by lack of thinking – lack of debate. It is the civilized ones who will do what is right (i.e. obeying the contract) while still engaging in discussion over the merits or demerits of the aforementioned contract. Continue to be civilized, continue to think, and be eager to appropriately challenge the things which seem amiss to you.