Monday, May 2, 2005

Veiled Response

The last thing I need right now following the startling announcement of the Marquette Gold, the university’s new official ‘mascot’ (loosely applied of course), this afternoon is more stress and emotional anger, but surprisingly I was not as angered as I was frustrated in replying to Salma Khaleq e-mail message to me following the posting of my response to her Marquette Tribune staff editorial which appeared in the April 26th edition of the university newspaper.
You know, I was waiting for you to give me your two cents on my column. Since I don't see very many people like yourself at our ASA events or confronting me in person or even complaining to the Tribune or OSD about my work, I figure there must be some other way that you discuss my overtly "liberal" and "politically correct" self. I wish you would have emailed me when something I discussed outraged you so much.
Why, might I be so polite as to ask, should I have contacted you first via e-mail messaging? No, I am not one those crazed lunatics, in spite of what others may claim otherwise, who comes to events such as the ones held by the Arab Student Association and sideswipe individuals such as yourself just to rant in their face in front a public audience. There is no legitimacy in that. There is no honor in that. Blogs are the new wave of the media. I will report what I want to report, I will post what I want to post, and I offer up my opinions on whatever I feel is worthy of comment. Unless it is a subject which requires verification of facts or statistics, which this article did not, I will post it on the weblog without so much as an afterthought to those who I am responding to. The editorial did not outrage me; I simply disagreed with what you had to say.

I'm not going to attack your arguments or how you feel about them.

That is quite disappointing. I always enjoy a good argument and would have preferred you to have done that then to have sent me this. I appreciate the effort nonetheless, but that can not wipe away my chagrin.

I'd also like to encourage you to attack a writer's argument and not the writer's background, religion or tradition (or even political leaning). That allows you to construct a better argument.

That sort of defeats the entire purpose when the writer’s argument concerns religion, background, tradition, or politics directly, now does it not? Thanks for the supposed advice but if you wish to censor me, or other bloggers like myself, be direct about and do not cover it up as supposed advice. I assume that you are legitimate in your advice presented in your e-mail message but your statements contradict what you wish to suggest to me.

Lastly, I'd like to remind you that the world isn't black and white. We are all human. I really hope you see things you have in common with others, rather than segregate people into races and religions. If you are able to view people, even those you may strongly disagree with, as human nonetheless, you will find yourself to be more tolerant of others and hence them of you.

If the world is not black and white, good and evil, then we are seriously in a lot of trouble. There has been nothing in the posts I have made concerning this subject that would indicate that I view Muslims or Arabs as anything less then human. I realize that their opinions are different from my own and I respect that. However, if I view something as morally objectionable, as I have come to view the Muslim religion in the way in which its leaders have used and corrupted it, I will voice my disagreement even if it offends someone. I will do my best not to but I can not be held responsible for someone’s misinterpretation and/or opinion that may be in disagreement with my own. We [as an American Society], particularly the officials here at Marquette University, are quite quick to disguise a minority’s ability to walk over our own set of beliefs and values as “tolerance”. Tolerance to me does not include voicing my own objections to certain practices or beliefs that I feel deeply conflict with my own and I feel others are being corrupted by, intentionally or not.