I can understand the reasons for distributing the Jesus videos in the residence halls. I consider myself to be a Christian and totally support the spread of Christianity.

However, protecting the rights of the residents is also a very important issue.

I missed the Jesus video, but it was first brought to my attention through numerous articles, editorials, Quick Es and letters to the editor in the Daily.

Many of the residents blamed Randy Alexander, the director of residence. Mr. Alexander sent a letter to the editor of the Daily to clarify the details behind the Jesus video and eliminate the confusion. While he stated that “offering students a free product is clearly not prohibited,” I don’t feel that it justifies the intrusion on the students in the residence halls.

A while back, I was interrupted by a knock on the door and as I shouted my permission for the visitor to enter, I was shocked to see a stranger dressed in the typical “college wear” complete with the backpack.

The visitor quickly entered into the room and closed the door almost completely behind him. As he began his speech, he opened his backpack and began to display the contents.

Various popular colognes and perfumes at “special reduced prices” overflowed his bag. He quickly and quietly gave his sales pitch and upon being refused thanked us, zipped his bag and went on his way.

Not too threatening, but if it were permitted, I can see where it would quickly get out of hand.

After all, if I were a salesman of any sort, college kids would definitely be a great target.

Band fundraisers selling pizza, 4-Hers selling candy and adorable 9-year-olds selling Girl Scout cookies would be regulars in the dorms.

After all, if you’re selling food of any kind, college kids are the way to go.

I understand the people behind the Jesus video were not looking to make a profit, but it still crosses the line.

Some residents feel they were pressured into taking the video. As one person told me, there were six people at the door to give him his video, and he felt pressured to accept. Maybe a one-on-one ratio would have been less threatening to the residents, or an alternative way of distributing the videos such as a table where they would be available if you wanted them, with no pressure to accept them.

While I don’t think the video itself caused any damage, the way that it was presented did.

---

Crystal Cox

Sophomore

Elementary education