LU#13 "Triple Dog Dare"
Volume VI - Number 153
April 11, 2000


Hey, fellas!!!  You're back in The Undergrond.

prepare yourself for:
.390 lead-off hitter
re: LU#12
club take w/ personal experience
LU-founder gives some history
websense out of control



After much thought on whether I should reply or not, I've decided that this time I will.  I have been a subscriber to the LU for quite some time, and have often had opinions that I would like to have shared, however I have never written in--I hated to be the cause of more arguing (I also realized that after my reply I would probably have fewer friends).  But I've thrown all of that to the wind and am now going to reply to my heart's content.

It is Kacy's letter that caught my eye, and I would like to first thank you, Kacy, for explaining in a very polite way what your social club means to you (I really mean that).  I hate to group myself with the "complainers" as you call them, but I suppose that is what I am making myself.  It's just that I feel you have shared your "insight" with me, and I would like to share mine with you.  And Kacy, these comments are not to you yourself or to your club itself, but rather to the club system as a whole.

I don't have a problem at all with people paying to be in a club.  And I don't have very much of a problem with the pledging process.  I don't have a problem with the clubs in themselves--nor with their members.  I don't have a problem with a social club's main purpose not being Christianity (after all, they are called 'social' clubs).  But I do have a problem.  My problem is that we attend a Christian school, and these clubs are associated with that Christian school.  If you are in a social club, then it is a Lipscomb University social club.  Therefore, even if you don't want your main purpose to be encouraging one another in Christ, I expect you (and believe the school should too) to at least act in a Christian way.  If you, as a club, are not willing to do that, then I believe your club should not be in anyway associated with our Christian school or much less the name of Christ.

And I am not referring to people within the clubs that may participate in sinful activities.  Those are individuals responsible for their own actions.  I, too, am an individual who sins--more often than I like to admit--and so are the many independents on our campus.  Of course clubs on our campus will be made up of sinners--just as our churches are.  But when a club as a whole (or even enough of the members to make it seem like a club function--ie. "the ____ guys got together last night and...") decide to do something unChristian, that reflects badly not only on those individuals and on their clubs and on their Christian school which provided them the opportunity to have the club in the first place, but on Jesus Christ Himself.  And that is what I am tired of.

If individuals want to go to their apartments and drink until they can't walk anymore, that's great, but when it becomes a reflection on the Christian school that I attend and the clubs housed by that school and, therefore, the name of my Lord, then I have a problem with that.  There are plenty of state universities that would be glad to be home to a bunch of fraternity and sorority members who don't want to be subject to Christian ideas and morals.  I've been to two of those schools, and I might add that neither of them are as concerned about identity in clubs as we are at Lipscomb (a Christian school).

Another problem I have is one that probably not many of you in clubs will understand.  Kacy said that "when you see it from the inside you understand" what being in a club is really about.  But what about those people that don't get to see it from the inside?  "I believe that most people who hate clubs are people who have not gotten bids...."  So how exactly is it decided which people do and don't get bids?  Who is good enough and who isn't?  What standards do you use?  I may be a mistaken outsider, but I don't believe they are in any way similar to the standards that God has--accepting of all.  I believe that placing a value on someone else is a pretty harsh thing to do, and I don't understand how you can vote on people and not call that placing a
value.  Please explain.

Some time ago I was a new student at Lipscomb, and I met some pretty cool guys that happened to be in a club.  We got to be friends, and I decided at that time that I would like to be in a club.  So I did as I was told--I met all the 'right' people, remembered their names, was sure to say 'hi' when I saw them in the student center, and all the other nonsense political stuff that sometimes goes on.  I was even told that if I wanted in I would have to do some things differently--that's where I drew the line, though.  However I still went to prospective and open rush.  When it came time to check my mail to see if I was invited back to closed rush, my box was empty.  It seems that a couple of the guys with 'pull' didn't like me, and one even said some things about me that were not true during their discussions.  I never again tried to pledge--partly because I was hurt and partly because I didn't want to be a part of an organization that hurt others.  Since then a few of the guys have apologized to me, and I am still good friends with many guys in that club.  I have no hard feelings towards most, but that hasn't changed how I feel about the system.  It seems to me to be a system of labeling and "price-tagging" other people, and that is not only unChristian, but it hurts people.  Kacy wrote that he just got back from formal and all the newcomers were readily accepted.  But what about all the guys who never made it to 'newcomer' status?

Brett Harrison




I was pretty set on just remaining silent on social clubs.  It is fun to argue over them for a few issues every semester, but as we all know, it gets pretty old after awhile.  But, once I read the following statements from one Kacy Maxwell, well, I figured my thoughts at least warranted one more reply on the issue: 

"I believe that most people who hate clubs are people who have not gotten bids or have come here predisposed to not liking them . . .The main thing that is always stressed is that we may be brothers in this club, but above that we are brothers in Christ"

I nearly laughed out loud when I read this and then realized that you were defending yourself with these words.  You people who take part in social clubs just don't get my argument.  I admit, there are those out there who go round and round on this issue and never make any valid argument.  But this is very valid and something that I think anyone in a social club who is serious about his/her faith has to consider.

My first point is this:  Can you blame someone who did not get a bid for having such a bad attitude about clubs?  If I had had my heart set on getting into a club and not gotten in I would be pretty frustrated with the whole system.  Fortunately, none of you clubs have had the opportunity to do that to me.

My second point (and probably more valid than the first) is simply a thought for everyone to consider:  In reference to the second statement quoted above, I sure am glad that Jesus does not have such ridiculous requirements to be "above all" His brother.  Correct me if I am wrong here, but I guess some people just aren't good enough to be "brothers in a club."  Thankfully we are all good enough to be brothers in Christ.  Jesus does not pick and choose who is worthy to be His friends, how can you?

If you are fired up now, before you respond, especially if you are in a club, first consider this. If you have never turned someone down to be in your club, that is the only grounds you can have for responding to anything I have said.  Now I really don't expect many replies with that said.

Food for thought,
Metz '79



In the future you might want to learn what you're talking about. You are correct in one thing. You won't see AKPsi jerseys on Thursday. We are not a social club, and have no desire to be a social club. We are a NATIONAL fraternity. We wear our letters on Friday, so that would explain why you haven't seen us wear our jerseys on Thursday.

Secondly, I would guess that you aren't a brother in our fraternity. That would explain why you don't believe that we learn the same type of brotherhood and commitment. I guess in your logic, you have to humiliate yourself in order to learn brotherhood.

Thirdly, you won't see an "alpha kappa psi stunt spectacular" in Alumni. Our functions aren't designed to make everyone think we are the best organization on campus. What we have to offer is much more than a show. We offer the opportunity to be a member of one of the most respected fraternities IN THE NATION. We don't limit this offer because we don't like you either. Alpha Kappa Psi is open to anyone, male or female, that can make it through our six week pledge process. In that six weeks, you learn what brotherhood is because without it you fail.

Finally, I don't think, by any stretch of the imagination, that you will ever have the authority to tell me what to do.


(Only my momma can tell me what to do.) rg



And now for something completely different...I've been playing in's Virtual GM fantasy league since the beginning of the NBA season.  I check my progress almost everyday, but today when I tried to log into the game, I got a sweet little message from the nice folks at Websense, telling me that access to the Virtual GM page was restricted because it involved gambling.  Blink, blink.  Yeah, that's what it said.  Why?  It's a free game.  There's no money involved, unless I were to win.'s new 3play game (also free) is blocked off too.  I have a Netzero connection I can use, but still...that's weird, isn't it?  These sites were ok yesterday, but evil today.  What's up?

Jonathan Bradley



Satire, as defined by The Bald Bison
(David Lipscomb College, 1969)

        . . .obviously, there is a distinct line between satire and sarcasm.  Sarcasm is the "poking of fun" purely to produce pain.  Satire is the "poking of fun" to aid in the search for truth, to strip away the facades which obscure reality.  In this capacity, satire can be a tremendous weapon for truth and right.  But admittedly, the line between satire and sarcasm may often become indistinct, but we will earnestly endeavor to keep our humor and observations within the realm of satire.

        And perhaps it will be worthwhile to interject another note of satire here.  Satire almost always indicates respect.  If we do not satirize someone, out of fear of his reprisal, it indicates a lack of respect for the individual's humor and nature.  However, if we openly satirize someone, it indicates respect that we have for him, for we realize that the individual's sense of humor and nature will enable him to take the "jab" with grace.  Now, we realize if we allow the satire to degenerate into sarcasm, it indicates a lack of both respect and taste.  However, satire, properly used, often demonstrates respect. . .

(Want more Bald BisonSpring '99 LU#15 and Fall '99 LU#17The Bald Bison, in its entirety, will be available shortly.)

As the new millenium approaches, we find the Lipscomb Underground entering into itís sixth official year of publication. In six years, many things can be forgotten or misrepresented about the history of such a list. Here is a humble attempt at clarifying and telling a little more of the Underground story.

It would be difficult to credit the beginnings of the Underground to one particular person. I penned all of the early issues, while Justin handled the incoming mail with aplomb. Control then shifted abruptly to Justin in the Fall of 1994, who subsequently discovered the female gender and lost all but a small scrap of interest in the list whatsoever. What caused the abrupt switch in control? Ah, it was that fateful combination of sperm and ovum. Yes, Mikaela was born and I dropped out of school altogether to make an attempt (failed) at family life. We never got married and I gave college that good once again, twice again, and then gave up completely, choosing instead to enter (a life of crime) the working ranks as a computer professional. Turns out this was a good choice for me, and as of May 28, 2000, I will officially be known as Todd DuPriest MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, CCNA. (arenít titles wonderful?)

But returning to the humble begininnings of the LU, we would have had nothing to work with if it hadnít of been for Mikeís (last name forgotten to protect anonymity) lovely open-dorm parties (complete with Janaís cookies and brownies) Tryggís never failing push from the Babbler side of things, the urgings from Paul Prill and Stephen Prewitt, an oppressive Student Government, the Zealots, Shelf Life, James Rose, Harold Hazelip, Dean Davis, Patrick Cameron (whom I see has landed a cushy job at his alma-mater. Does this mean you FINALLY arenít taking classes anymore?) and last, but definitely not least, Big Oís Donuts.

Yes, the origins of the LU lie with many, many people, including those who faithfully contributed their two cents (sometimes more, up to several hundred dollars) worth. Through the capable hands of Justin, Clay Chambers, Brian Holoway, and now, Ryan Gates, the LU has flourished and taken the world by storm. It continues to be a bastion of free speech and the last bit of wholesome Internet entertainment this side of The Onion. Treasure it, love it, live it, and donít forget to tell your grandkids about the LU!!!

Humbly, Todd Aldin DuPriest
Supreme Executive Ruler of All Things LU
Comfortor of the Oppressed
Thinker of Good Thoughts
Traveler of both Time and Space, and
Halfway Decent Brad Majors in the live
Rocky Horror Picture Show




        I wasn't trying to make you scared, Alexander. I write only to prepare you for what I am going to do to you.  To my main goon in Alpha Kappa Psi, Death has a point, and you don't know what you're talking about. Try to get some information next time before you write in, that way you won't look so stupid. Just trying to help you out, Chief...




First of all, let me say that Iím NOT writing to be negative about social clubs, chapel, Marriott, or any of the other things that weíve beat around in the LU over the past several months.

I thought about responding to Kacy Maxwell and telling him how arrogant his "most people who hate clubs are people who have not gotten bids or have come here predisposed to not liking them"-line was, but I decided against it. Someone else will probably handle that one for me.

But putting that aside, itís Sunday afternoon and I donít have much to do, so I am writing to mention a few positives about Lipscomb. The first one being the LU. For all of you who read and respond in the LU, thumbs up. How boring would Lipscomb-life be if we had no LU? Sure, some people make it through Lipscomb without the LU, but why not have a little extra fun?

Lipscomb Radio has also been pretty fun. I canít say I like the death metal thatís occasionally been known to spew from the Student Center Speakers around lunch time, but the walks through Bison Square to my classes have been nice with good music to listen to and the djs have been better than expected.

I would also like to drop a compliment to a few of the chapel leaders this semester. Some people are cut out for leading worship, and others arenít. Iím still not a chapel fan, but guys like Joe, Bart and Dean McD have definitely made chapel a cool place to be. Or at least as cool as it possibly could be.

Long live the LU,




You remember how this works.  You write stuff to me, and I print it. . .simple as that.  Respond to an issue mentioned above, make up your own, or just write something that you think someone else might find interesting.  Give it a try.  It's fun.

"The Undies" will be presented in the next issue.  Those of you who haven't voted, do so quickly, as the Undie panel will be meeting soon to make their final decisions.

Until there's intramural stick-ball
in Bison Square,
I am,

To reply, submit possible cheesy fillers, request past issues, correspond or subscribe
write to

Go to The Lipscomb Underground homepage
|   Subscribe

LU#13 "Triple Dog Dare"
Volume VI, Number 15
11, 2000

The opinions expressed in The Lipscomb Underground are solely those of the particular contributor,
and are not necessarily representative of the opinions of the University, the subscribers,
or most definitely, the Lipscomb Underground Host.
If something in this issue offended you, lighten up.

Copyright © 1999-2000
Use of the replies, graphics, cheesy fillers, or any other materials
contained in The Lipscomb Underground without written consent of
The Lipscomb Underground Host is strictly prohibited.