4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, November 14, 2005 OPINION Uwe wtrhfqan:43ailv JASON Z. PESICK Editor in Chief SUHAEL MOMIN SAM SINGER Editorial Page Editors ALISON GO Managing Editor EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com NOTABLE QUOTABLE It was a mistake to vote for this war in 2002."l -Former Sen. John Edwards, accepting responsibility for his vote to give President Bush the authority to go to war with Iraq, in a piece published in Sunday's Washington Post. MICHELLE BIEN Ti-i E B AN ARC-1. VES l~ v,."u:. ,w ~ r+ wx r. ' t). Y r / i ' j W f -- 2Q~.M~ 0 0 The great American ... theocracy? SUHAEL MOMIN NO U RRENDER A nyone who attended elementary school in Michigan remembers the "Core Democratic Values" program. Complete with its own textbooks, the sequence present- ed "the fundamental beliefs and constitu- tional principles of American society which unite all Americans." Because of that program, I grew up thinking - along with the millions of students across America who benefited from similar programs - that America was the land of individual equality, individual freedom and individual religion. I grew up thinking, not in such fancy terms, that America was a secular democratic republic - a land Thomas Jeffer- son envisioned as offering "Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persua- sion, religious or political." If recent events are any guide, I grew up believing a lie. While America accepts in theory that secular government is a good idea, our political process completely discredits the concept. While our unstated national policy is to oppose religious fundamentalism abroad, Americans welcome it at horpe. While our leaders denounce the illiberalism of Islamist states, many influential conservatives are enamored with the idea of America as a Judeo- Christian one. Since President Bush's re-election last year, religious and "moral-issues" conservatives have stepped up their campaign to, quite liter- ally, force religion upon the rest of the coun- try. One by one, successive religious interests have emboldened each other; the Right is now waging religious war on abortion, immoral television and video games, contraception, Spongebob Square Pants, homosexuality, sex- a] uality in general, sex education, HIV-positive Sesame Street characters and even the scien- tific theory of evolution. Underlying each "moral initiative" is the burning desire to create a more Christian state, to impose public morality on private decisions, to enact public policy that elevates certain beliefs as more righteous than others. This isn't speculation: Focus on the Family aims "to 'turn hearts toward home' ... so people will be able to discover the founder of homes and the creator of families: Jesus Christ." The American Family Association exists "to moti- vate and equip citizens to change the culture to reflect Biblical truth." The Christian Coalition, beyond its obvious name, exists to "preserve, protect and defend the Judeo-Christian values that made this the greatest country in history." These powerful political groups exist solely to inject a good dose of religion into our suppos- edly secular political system. The agenda is broad. Heterosexual marriage should be elevated to the exclusion of homo- sexual marriage - even though the two are not mutually exclusive - because heterosexual marriage is the traditional Christian way. Gov- ernments should ban same-sex benefits, even though they make economic sense, because they promote a lifestyle contrary to the traditional Christian way. Teachers should not expose stu- dents to safe-sex techniques because teaching abstinence, no matter how ineffective, is the Christian way. All these initiatives, grounded in Christian theology and morality, aim to shape society and restrict individual liberties in the name of preserving traditional values. If America were secular, the close relation- ship between the White House and these not- so-subtly Christian organizations would raise alarm. If we actually believed the core demo- cratic values each nine-year-old in Michigan learns, we'd be outraged: Religious interests are dictating government policy! If America bought into secularism, society would have responded with indignation when Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court - not only because she was unqualified (she was), but also because the president and his allies insinuated her religion was an important part of her judi- cial philosophy. If America is actually a secular nation, where is the public opposition to the current course of events? Why are religious lobbying organizations the most powerful nongovern- mental organizations in Washington? Why are religiously backed initiatives such as Michi- gan's Proposal 2 from 2004 - which banned gay marriage and potentially same-sex unions in an effort to "protect traditional marriage" - so successful across the nation? Why did Kansas's elected school board change the defi- nition of science so that supernatural explana- tions for events can be classified as scientific? Why must every presidential candidate meet a certain bar of spirituality if he's to stand a chance? Bottom line: If America is actually secular, why doesn't it act like it? As a nation, we recognize the problems with religious governance abroad. We recognizp, when looking at other nations, that secular leadership is more likely to protect minority rights, individual freedom and self-determina- tion. The founders of this nation realized this when they wrote strict limits on government power and sweeping guarantees of personal freedom into the Constitution and Declara- tion of Independence. I'd like to think the core democratic values I learned aren't lies; I'd like to think this nation truly embodies the secular ideas it claims to uphold at home and around the world. I'd like to think we can - and will - put an end to the illiberal politics of the Religious Right. 40 Momin can be reached at momin@michigandaily.com. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 'U' not unique in its apathy toward student government TO THE DAILY: To answer the question the Daily's editorial board posed last Monday (Does anyone care?, 11/7/2005), the answer is no: Students don't care about student government. But that's OK. The Michigan Student Assembly gets what it wants: a couple of friends voting for each other, photos in the Daily, lots of important talk and a resum6 builder. In fact, one of the best things that can hap- pen to a student government is to be ignored. Take the University of Illinois as an example. During my four years in Urbana as an under- graduate, presidential candidates vowing to end student government were overwhelmingly elect- ed twice. The first time, the elections commis- sion member threw out the results to save their "jobs." But after evidence of abuse of student funds for personal enrichment came to light, the existing student government had no defense and was eventually taken down. So go ahead, hold your meetings, chalk the Diag and get your picture taken with John Edwards. Just don't try to convince us that it's all that important. And please, don't lie to yourself and say that it really matters here at the University, because it's just like everywhere else. David Swedler School of Public Health Divestment an unfortunate roadblock on path to peace TO THE DAILY: Last year, when the Michigan Student Assem- bly overwhelmingly voted against forming a com- mittee to look into divesting from Israel, it gave me hope. I naively believed that now we could work past our differences, that we could sit down and start an open dialogue as individuals and as groups with a common interest: peace. My optimism took a serious blow Wednes- day with the return of a new divestment cam- naion (Pacultv ani rbwants nmmitteneon Israel. between the governments and the people. In addition, the divestment campaign seri- ously undermines the idea of open and educated dialogue. When an individual is presented with a petition, that person is looking at the issue through a one-sided lens. For a person uneducated in the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that is a difficult position to be in. This only perpetu- ates a culture of animosity based on one-sided information, which is counterproductive to peace- ful discourse: As University President Mary Sue Cole- man stated when she expressed her opposition to divestment, the University campus provides a unique opportunity for positive student dialogue given the large number of Jews and Arabs on this campus. As disappointed as I am with the return of divestment to campus, I still have some hope left. Call it naivete, but if the Israelis and Palestin- ians in the Middle East can both take steps toward working together, why can't we? Josh Berman LSA junior The letter writer is the educational co- chair for the campus chapter of the American Movement for Israel. Divestment an important advance on path to peace TO THE DAILY: According to the article Faculty group wants committee on Israel (11/09/2005), the University has not taken a position on Israel's brutal occupa- tion of Palestinian land. This is not the case; by silencing student voices against the occupation, the University has taken an active role in favor of the occupation. The letter is written by numerous faculty mem- bers is in support of the formation of a committee to investigate the validity of investing in military corporations that fund the atrocious human rights violations taking place in Palestine today. The let- ter is not in support of terminating relations with all companies doing business with Israel. Divestment is the most effective way to impact change in onnregsive Lovernments Peace workers ment that political and philosophical ideology is irrelevant to the investment portfolio of the Uni- versity is incorrect. In the same statement, she cited cases in which human rights were in fact relevant -South Africa and tobacco. Upholding human rights is not a political issue, but an obli- gation that we all have. The University is using politics and bureaucracy to circumvent addressing serious human rights violations in Israel. Or Shotan's statement that "There's not going to be an end to this situation without dialogue" is correct. The creation of a body to investi- gate the validity of investments is precisely the forum necessary to create productive dialogue beyond a level of theocracy, and opposing the current movement to form this committee is not in support of dialogue, but rather directly con- tradicts progress. Rama Salhi LSA junior The letter writer is the president of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality. 'The Laramie Project' addresses hate in society TO THE DAILY: I applaud the Daily for its coverage of the campus-wide action to counteract Rev. Fred Phelps when he visits campus to 'protest the Department of Theatre and Drama's production of "The Laramie Project" (Protest at play to slam gays, 11/07/2005; Apocalypse Now, 11/11/2005), but I would like to make some corrections to your coverage. "The Laramie Project" by Moises Kaufman and the Tectonic Theatre Project is not about the murder of Matthew Shepard. The play is about the effect of this hate crime on the residents of the town of Laramie, Wyo. Through 200 inter- views over a two-year time span, Kaufman and the other writers gathered the perceptioi of Laramie's residents on the crime, the media blitz that followed and the issue of homosexuality from the event itself through the subsequent tri- als. "The Laramie Project" offers a deeply mov- in2 tale of a small town forced to face its loss of 0 6 4 Editorial Board Members: Amy Anspach, Reggie Brown, Gabrielle DAngelo, John Davis, Whitney Dibo, Milly Dick, Sara Eber, Jesse Forester, Mara Gay, Ashwin Jagannathan, Theresa Kennelly, Mark Kuehn, Will Kerridge, Kirsty McNamara, Rajiv Prabhakar, Matt Rose, David C,: D-:--. . 1 . - 1 - C.: . 11 .n., Q - R I