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
Aug 12, 2026 12:01 AM

“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
Capitalism and the opportunity for a more united conservative front
Last week the Heritage Foundation hosted an event featuring Samuel Gregg, the Acton Institute’s director of research, in which he highlighted the importance of providing not only an economic justification for capitalism but also a moral justification. At Juicy Ecumenism, Mia Steupert considers Gregg’s talk in light of the recent debate among conservatives: Gregg discussed this topic in the framework ofAlexis De TocquevilleandMichael mentary on the moral justifications of capitalism. Gregg mainly focused on outlining Novak’s views on the connection...
Brexit and Trump’s UK visit
I was recently in an interview on NTN24 (a CNN-type TV channel for the Spanish-speaking world) about President Donald Trump’s visit to the United Kingdom. Although the topic of Brexit was not supposed to be on the agenda for this state visit—especially in the presence of the queen—it seemed that Brexit was the first topic Trump brought up. Trump also expressed support for Boris Johnson, a leading contender to succeed Theresa May, and suggested that the United plete Brexit and...
What exactly is Christian about the Christian’s work?
There is no shortage of Christian books about work and vocation. Indeed, there are entire movements centered on faith and work, or faith at work. These movements are now old enough that their history has e a subject of academic study. A couple of years ago the NIV Faith & Work Bible put the entire Bible into a faith-and-work frame. And, for the sake of full disclosure, the Acton Institute itself has contributed to the stream of publications about work...
Alejandro Chafuen in Forbes: Theresa May’s exit
Today marks British Prime Minister Theresa May’s last day as leader of the Conservative Party. Alejandro Chafuen, Acton’s Managing Director, International, wrote yesterday in Forbes describing some of the factors leading up to her exit. Whatever one’s opinion of her performance, it is undeniable that hers was a difficult time to be prime minister, and it has been made more difficult by the seeming determination of some in the British government to frustrate what the British people voted for two...
Psalms in war time
As part of reflecting on the seventy-fifth anniversary of D-Day, I write about “The D-Day price and the Prince of Peace” over at Acton’s Transatlantic channel. The Dutch theologian and statesman Abraham Kuyper invoked Psalm 88:15 in his essay on the outbreak of World War I, “Your terrors,” (translated by Harry Van Dyke). The title is taken from this verse, which reads: “From my youth I have suffered and been close to death; I have borne your terrors and am...
Stewardship as the Christian’s cultural mandate
“Economic issues entail first and foremost a stewarding of resources,” says J. Daryl Charles in this week’s Acton Commentary. “To properly understand this task, we must begin with the doctrines of creation and providence.” Our mandate, based on creation (which has not been overturned or altered), is that we co-create (with God, based on the imago Dei, his likeness); that we develop, shape, and extend what God has called into being. Therein we utilize the endless and varied resources that...
Jordan Ballor: The price of D-Day and the Prince of Peace
In a radio address broadcast 75 years ago today, Franklin D. Roosevelt asked Almighty God to lead the United States “with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men, and a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.” Yet as the world looks back at the sacrifice of D-Day, FDR’s vision – which was not...
Providence magazine reviews Kuyper’s ‘On Islam’
Last year, in collaboration with the Abraham Kuyper Translation Society, the Acton Institute and Lexham Press teamed together to publish On Islam. The latest in the 12-volume series Abraham Kuyper Collected Works in Public Theology details Kuyper’s observations while traveling in the Mediterranean. At Providence magazine, Tim Scheiderer reviews On Islam and considers Kuyper’s Christian advice for foreign policy: In the bookOn Islam, the Acton Institute has translated into English for the first time portions from Abraham Kuyper’s larger work,Om...
Acton Line podcast: Understanding the Equality Act; Why Sweden is no utopia
On this episode of Acton Line, we first cover the Equality Act, a bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Keisha Russell, associate counsel at First Liberty Institute joins the podcast to break down the basics of the bill and explain how the bill would threaten religious liberty. Afterwards, Charlie Weimers, a Swedish politician newly elected to the European Parliament joins the podcast to discuss “Sweden’s Dark Soul:...
5 Facts about the Nineteenth Amendment
This week marks the centennial anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Here are five facts you should know about women’s suffrage and the amendment: 1. The 19th Amendment doesn’t directly mention women. The text states: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. In fact, the...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved