Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
No, Snowflake, We’re Not Responsible for Your Student Loan Debt
No, Snowflake, We’re Not Responsible for Your Student Loan Debt
Jan 9, 2026 12:26 PM

“No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible,” said Stanisław Jerzy Lec. Whether that is true in nature, it’s certainly seems to be true for many of the precious little snowflakes who find themselves, after making poor educational decisions, buried under anavalanche of student loan debt. Consider, for instance, this op-ed by Tad Hopp, a student in “his last semester in the MDiv program at San Francisco Theological Seminary.”

Before we delve into what will be one of the worst opinion pieces of the year, let me offer a word of caution. Reading Mr. Hopp’s op-ed may affect you, as it did me, by filling you with despair. Can America survive when millions of people have such a self-centered sense of entitlement? I’m not sure. And if you’re prone to declinist thinking, you’ll want to skip the rest of this post. Here’s pilation of kitten videos to watch instead.

Let’s start by reviewing the circumstances Mr. Hopp finds himself in:

1. Goes to an expensive private college and majors in a subject that is in low demand on the job market (English).

2. Graduates with $50,000 in debt and is unable to find a job.

3. Goes to another expensive private college and majors in a subject that is in low demand on the job market (Master of Divinity).

4. Nears graduation with an additional $50,000 in debt and no prospect for finding a job.

As Mr. Hopp says,

Perhaps you can see my dilemma here. Here I am, about to graduate from a very prestigious master’s degree program, saddled with student loan debt and the constant worry that I won’t be able to find a job once I graduate.

Based on that list of events you might expect him to provide a wise, experienced-based warning that others should not follow his example. You might expect him to advise, “Don’t go to a college you can’t afford, don’t wrack up debt you can’t pay, and don’t major in a subject that won’t help you get a job. And for goodness sake don’t do all those things twice!”

But instead, Mr. Hopp takes a different approach:

So, what are we doing about it? Is the PC(USA) doing anything to address this crisis?

Wait, what? What are we going to do about it? Why do we need to do anything, other miserate with him over his poor choices?

Mr. Hopp repeatedly says he was “called”: “I went to the school where I felt I was being called . . . I felt called to go to seminary – and I felt called to my particular seminary.” But who exactly was doing the calling? Certainly not his denomination:

I imagine at least a few of you are familiar with the difficulties of the call process in the PC(USA) right now. Churches are closing their doors left and right. There are fewer and fewer pastoral jobs out there and more people seeking those jobs. Churches that were once thriving are now having a hard time paying a salary that can cover all of a pastor’s living expenses, especially when you take into account those student loan payments.

The PC(USA) was apparently not the one calling him to go to two expensive colleges to prepare for a pastoral job that likely didn’t exist. Maybe Mr. Hopp is confusing “calling” with “doing what I want to do.”

As it turns out, his denomination is not the only one to blame for his plight:

What has our government done to address this issue? I would argue: absolutely nothing. Things are no better now than they were when I graduated college eight years ago. I, like so many in my generation, voted for Obama hoping for large-scale change under his leadership, and yet he’s been stalled at every turn by a Congress who, judging by their approval ratings at the very least, doesn’t seem too preoccupied with caring for the people they claim to represent.

Yes, what is wrong with Congress? Why don’t they care about the people who make dumb educational choices and agree to take on mounds of debt they cannot (or do not want to) repay? Why isn’t the government rushing to spend the taxpayers money to help this poor, unfortunate group of entitled folk?

Oh, and you know the one person we shouldn’t blame at all? That’s right: Mr. Hopp.

Yes, I chose to go to college and graduate school, with much support and encouragement from friends and family. Yes, the economy tanked right before I graduated from college. And yes, I am graduating seminary at a time in our nation’s history when religion is statistically ing less and less important to people’s lives.

So, is it my fault? Should I have ‘known better’ – or done something more financially responsible than get an education? I personally think that’s the wrong question. Chalking the plight of the 40 million Americans shackled by student debt up to ‘poor choice’ by individuals sounds a lot like blaming the victims. Such an approach does nothing to address the root cause of the problem: the fact that we as a society unilaterally encourage people to go to pursue higher education but fail to support them with adequate financial assistance.

Sounds a lot like blaming the victims? Perhaps. You know, if I punch myself in the face, I am both the perpetrator and the victim. If I were plain that my jaw hurt and someone replied that maybe I shouldn’t have socked myself in mouth I could claim they were “blaming the victim.” I could claim that, but I wouldn’t because it’d make me sound like an idiot. Adults take responsibility when they knowingly and willingly harm themselves. They don’t expect someone else to take full responsibility for their self-harm.

And what about all the friends and family who supported and encouraged Mr. Hopp to go to schools he couldn’t afford? Has he approached them yet and asked them to pay up for “failing to support him with adequate financial assistance”? I doubthe did.

Besides, it’s not really their fault. The problem is the system. What other choice do we really have but to take out loans for expensive colleges?

It seems to me that we’ve bought into the lie that student loan debt is brought on by the individual person and not by the fact that our system doesn’t encourage or even allow for any other model. Who in middle-class America has $100,000 saved up that they can just give away to the institution of their choice so they won’t incur any student loan debt?

Actually, there is another model: don’t go to colleges you can’t afford. Mr. Hopp suffers from an affliction that strikes many middle-class Americans: higher education entitlement. If they want to go to an expensive school but can’t afford to go to an expensive school then someone else is obligated to pay for their education. That’s only fair, right?

Oh, but it gets worse. Hobbs then jumps into some of the most absurd economic analysis you’ll ever read:

You know what I think might stimulate the economy? Automatically canceling every single outstanding student loan! Go ahead, call me crazy; people have been responding to my proposal that way for years.

But think about it for a minute, will you? Cancelling student loan debt would mean upwards of 40 million people who would suddenly have money to spend on things that they couldn’t before – things like houses, cars, plane tickets, you name it! Think about how fast the economy would improve if 40 million Americans suddenly had more disposable e. But of course, that would never happen, would it? That would mean valuing the people taking out loans for their education over the corporations doing the lending! And, as Citizens United never ceases to remind us, corporations are people too.

Mr. Hopp can probably be forgiven for this type of reasoning (he probably never had to take a class in economics). What he fails to recognize is the effect of canceling the debt would have no effect. Whether a person spends money on “things like houses, cars, plane tickets” or on paying down their debt doesn’t matter. Oh, it might matter to them personally. But it wouldn’t affect economic growth since the exact same amount of money would enter the economy whether it was spent on plane tickets or loan repayments.

In reality, though, student loan forgiveness would make the economy worse off. Mr. Hopp doesn’t seem to care about the “corporations doing the lending” because he fails to recognize that corporations are just people. The money was lent by people who expected to get repaid so that they could spend the money on “things like houses, cars, plane tickets”—or expensive private colleges for their kids. If they don’t get paid they are much worse off.

Why not just have the government pay the loans? Because, again, “government” in this case is just another word for “American taxpayer.” Every dollar that the American taxpayer gives to pay off someone’s student loan debt is one less dollar they can use for “things like houses, cars, plane tickets.”

What Mr. Hopp’s is really asking for is a redistribution of e from people who didn’t make bad educational decisions to people who feel entitled not to pay their debts. Mr. Hopp is making the case that he and millions of other Americans should be freeloaders. They want the taxpayer equivalent of moving into their parent’s basement and living rent-free.

The one thing I agree with Mr. Hopp about is when he says, “We need to have a serious conversation about student loan debt.” Indeed, we do. The main thing that needs to be said is that if you take out a loan to buy luxury goods (like expensive colleges) you have a moral obligation to repay it. It’s time we start expecting that all Americans—especially those who want to lead our churches— to start acting like adults instead of whiny, entitled children.

There are many issues of economic and social justice that should be of concern for Christians. Paying back the student loans of middle-class snowflakes who feel “called” to make bad decisions is not one of them.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Women Speak For Themselves: ‘Don’t Insult Our Intelligence’
Ever since the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that requiring most employers to cover birth control, abortificients and abortions as part of employee health care coverage, there has been a firestorm of attention focused on the mandate. Both secular and religious employers have fought the order, stating that it violates their moral and/or religious principles to pay for these things, which many do not believe fall into the category of “health care.” (See Acton PowerBlog posts here,...
How Church Foreign Aid Programs Make Things Worse
In an interview with Forbes‘ Jerry Bower, Peter Greer, president and CEO of the the Hope International, explains why church foreign aid programs often hurts those its meant to help: Greer: There’s an entrepreneur named Jeff Rutt, and after the fall of the Soviet Union he had a desire to go over with his church and help. So, initially they did what people so often do, which is see that people don’t have food and then send over food, and...
Contraceptive Mandate Divides Appeals Courts
Two different federal appeals courts have issued opposite rulings on whether Obamacare can pany owners to violate their religious beliefs by providing contraception and abortifacients to their employees. A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ruled that a Pennsylvania pany owned by a Mennonite family ply with the contraceptive mandate contained in the Affordable Care Act. The majority said it “respectfully disagrees” with judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit...
Has Foodie Culture Forgotten the Poor?
Food has been an essential part of Christian culture since Jesus shared a last meal with his Apostles in Jerusalem before his crucifixion. So it’s not surprising that Christians — especially young Christians in urban areas — are the epicurean hobby culture of “foodies.” But as Erik Bonkovsky, a pastor in Richmond, Virginia, says, a truly great and thoroughly Christian food scene is one that blesses the privileged and under-privileged alike: Foodie culture—particularly with a local and healthy dimension—is now...
How Improving Vocabulary Improves Human Flourishing
One of the core principles of the Acton Institute mitment to wealth creation since material impoverishment undermines the conditions that allow humans to flourish. We consider helping our fellow citizens to escape material deprivation to be one of the most morally significant economic concerns of our age. But how to do we gauge whether our neighbors are able to improve their economic security? A key metric that is often used is e or social mobility, the ability of an individual...
Europe’s Curious Conception of Religious Freedom
By failing to recognize the importance of religion and its relationship to human rights, says Roger Trigg, European courts are progressively eroding religious liberty: [T]he Council of Europe affirmed in 2007 that “states must require religious leaders to take an unambiguous stand in favour of the precedence of human rights, as set forth in the European Convention of Human Rights, over any religious principle.” It is ironic that freedom of religion is expressly protected by the Convention and that the...
The Growth Of The Global Middle Class
It’s true: the middle-class is growing, globally. Here in the U.S., we keep hearing dire warnings about a shrinking middle class, but not across the globe. Alan Murray, president of The Pew Research Center, says witnessing its third great surge of middle-class growth. The first was brought about in the 19th century by the Industrial Revolution; the second surge came in the years following World War II. Both unfolded primarily in the United States and Europe. While those undergoing this...
The DIA, Public Art, and the Common Good
In today’s Acton Commentary, “It’s Time to Privatize the Detroit Institute of Arts,” I look at the case of the DIA in the context of Detroit’s bankruptcy proceedings. One of my basic points is that it is not necessary for art to be owned by the government in order for art to serve the public. Art needn’t be publicly-funded in order to contribute to mon good. In the piece I criticizeHrag Vartanian for this conflation, but this view is in...
Oikophilia Will Save the World
The central thesis of philosopher Roger Scruton case for an environmental conservatism, says Leah Kostamo, is that the primary motivation for care for the earth is oikophilia—a love of home. Oikophilia, Scruton argues, is what emboldens people to make sacrifices for their surrounding environment and neighbour. Scruton spends many pages tracing the history of oikophilia, particularly in his native Britain, and howoikophilia has been destroyed by internationalism and big-government subsidies and regulations. [. . .] In light of the success...
Pat Robertson, Poverty, and Possibilities
Television evangelist Pat Robertson is certainly known for saying provocative things, and he’s done it again. When Robertson’s co-host, Wendy Griffith, said not all families could afford to have multiple children, Robertson replied, ‘That’s the big problem, especially in Appalachia. They don’t know about birth control. They just keep having babies.’ ‘You see a string of all these little ragamuffins, and not enough food to eat and so on,’ he said, and it’s desperate poverty.’ Let’s not discuss how horrible...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved