My circuitous path to Cornell included two-year stops at the U.S. Naval Academy and the Island of Borneo, where I served as a Mormon missionary. My cocktail hour inquisitors often focus their questions on the discipline and adventure of that period in my life. They want to explore the differences between Cornell and life in uniform — military or priestly. What was basic training like? How about the guns? Did you meet a headhunter? (In order: awful, awesome and I think so, but Borneo is the same as America in at least one way … you don’t just ask a guy if he’s a killer.)

To the Editor:

Re: “To Debate Evolution Is To Appear Nutty — Why?,” Opinion, Oct. 5

The author’s effort to find common ground between “liberal moderns” and “fundamentalists” is admirable but misguided. Those who believe that worth objectively attaches to human beings due to their belief in a creator are in a fundamental sense not in accord with the beliefs of “liberal moderns.” The latter assign affirmative value, whereas the former assign value “in spite of.”

Kirk Cameron is headed towards a college campus near you.

Cameron, the one-time star of television’s Growing Pains, has planned a rather unique commemoration of the upcoming 150th anniversary of the printing of Darwin’s The Origin of the Species. Along with of a cadre of volunteers, Cameron plans to distribute 50,000 copies of a “special edition” of the Origin on the campuses of the “top 50 universities.” Its “specialness” is due to its introduction, that details, among other things, “Adolf Hitler’s undeniable connection to the theory” and Darwin’s “racism,” “disdain for women” and “thoughts on the existence of God.”

As self-proclaimed “moderns,” we often immediately brand the claims attempting to “debunk” evolution as sheer lunacy, the work of fundamentalists whose world view is entirely incommensurable with our own.

To the Editor:

Re: “Panel Explores Free Speech and Religion,” News, Sept. 23

Yesterday, The Sun chronicled the dialogue that took place over religious freedom at Cornell. This debate is far more significant and urgent than some friendly academic sparring taking place in Sage Chapel, however. President Skorton recently asked the Codes and Judicial Committee of the University Assembly to consider affording greater protection to freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion in the changes to the Campus Code of Conduct that it proposed last semester. It is reassuring that the President and administration are cognizant of these important issues, even while they deal with the pressing financial strains on the University.

After a long and stressful day, there’s nothing like a sip of your favorite beverage to help soothe your soul. For freshman girls, no other premium malt beverage can match the delicate taste and subtle flavor of a bottle of Smirnoff Ice. Robert Pattinson, of Twilight fame, prefers to quaff a tall glass of AB positive. But for me, all other drinks taste like a mixture of antifreeze and turpentine when compared to the closest thing we mortals have to the ambrosia of the gods: a Peanut Butter Cup Smoothie from the Maté Factor Café.

Life is strange. Last week, I participated in one of the most powerful demonstrations I’ve been a part of at Cornell. I found myself crying outside of the Chi Alpha meeting as Chris Donohoe ’09 and Jarrod Schaeffer ’09 stood on the steps of McGraw Hall, addressing the crowd of 200 people after we had stood for 20 minutes in reflective silence. I was there with my mother at my side, acknowledging faces I recognized from all over campus — from first-year fraternity members to Hillel friends to radical gay rights activists — in the physical center of what has been my academic locus at Cornell. It seemed to be almost too suiting of an end to my time here on the Hill.

To the Editor:

Re: “Glancing Back, Looking Forward — Toward Diversity,” Opinion, April 20.

To the Editor:

Re: “Unfolding Nuance Concerning Jesus and Homosexuality,” Opinion, April 27.

Never did I think that the first piece I would write to The Sun would be a rebuttal on a column involving a religious issue because as the author of this column so readily points out, religion is a terribly divisive issue. So divisive that many people cringe at the idea of discussing it in public. So divisive that you would definitely stay away from it as dinner chat on a first date. Now, here on campus we are dealing with just how divisive it can be surrounding an issue like gay rights.

To the Editor:

Re: “Alleged Homophobia Causes Outcry: Gay student asked to step down from leadership post by Christian group,” News, April 23.

As an LGBTQ-identified person of faith, this incident brings about many emotions. Part of me is sick to my core, and part of me is simply disappointed. Most of all, though, I am very saddened by this turn of events. For many people, myself included, finding a meaningful way to integrate two fundamental, yet seemingly irreconcilable aspects of our existence proves nearly impossible. Chris’ efforts to prove that it is possible to be a gay, devout Christian are truly inspiring. What upsets me is that instead of receiving support, he was rejected for having found a solution that affirms his sense of self in multiple ways.

Albert Einstein believed in a static universe. On a grand scale, the universe looked essentially the same 14 billion years ago, and would look essentially the same for the next 14 billion years. Then Einstein’s very own theory of general relativity led physicists to hypothesize a beginning — the Big Bang. The result proved the universe was not static, but very much dynamic. It was “an instance of creation in the equations of a hard-core scientist,” Prof. Sylvester James Gates, professor of physics at the University of Maryland, said.