LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Monday, May 5, 2003 - The Michigan Daily - 5 What does my religion have to offer? JASON PESICK ONE SMALL YOICE Governor's remarks distasteful, she should apologize TO THE DAILY: I am a graduating senior, and I am thoroughly disappointed and upset about the outcome of the commencement ceremony. Gover- nor Jennifer Granholm's remarka in her speech were inappropriate for a day of celebration. Being called potential "total losers" and reminded of the terrible economic crisis facing graduates damaged all the graduates' sense of accom- plishment and joy. Granholm should issue a statement of apolo- gy to the graduating class of 2003 for her remarks. I only get one col- lege graduation day, and mine was dampened by her rude behavior. Thanks Governor. You know, being elected to office does not guaran- tee success. There are some who have been elected to office that you have never heard of and will never hear of. Some are complete and total losers. NATALIE MORAN Alumnus Letter inaccurate, 'U' should divest from Caterpillar TO THE DAILY: In his letter (Story left out important details of divestment vote, 4/29/03), Brad Sugar false- ly claims that, "Realizing that this resolution was asinine for singling out Israel, two-thirds of the assembly voted to take the resolution off the table." In reali- ty, a large number of MSA repre- sentatives voted to table the resolution because of their belief that the student government should not consider resolutions dealing with international issues. This took place, unfortunately, } despite an overwhelming pres- ence of supporters of the resolu- tion and hundreds of supportive e-mails that flooded representa- tives' inboxes. Sugar himself forwards the argument that the resolution, which would support divesting from Caterpillar Corp. for its role in illegal house demolitions, was asinine for singling out Israel. Apparently, with this logic, one cannot criticize an immoral act without criticizing every immoral act in the world. This is absurd, and goes to show the desperation of Israeli apolo- gists, including the mainstream pro-Israel groups that rallied against the resolution in their attempts to find excuses for any and every Israeli act, no matter how overtly sadistic and criminal they may be. Specifically, Israel's practice of house demolitions contra- venes countless doctrines of international law, human rights and any sense of morality. This act of collective punishment has resuilt; n tit drdstrction of over 1,000 Palestinian homes over the past six months. As a result, it has brought the criti- cism of countless Israeli and international human rights orga- nizations, international bodies and even our own president. For those Israelis, Palestini- ans and supporters of either side that strive for peace, it is impera- tive that we take principled stances against acts that only fuel the wanton death and destruction, no matter who may be committing them. This in mind, urging the University to divest from Caterpillar Corp. until they cease knowingly sell- ing their equipment for illegal Israeli actions will exonerate us from some of the loss of morali- ty we share as our tuition dollars bring down innocent Palestini- ans' homes and subsequently, peace in the Middle East. FADI KIBLAWI Alumnus Opposition to war groundless, Iraqis better off now TO THE DAILY: I am writing this letter partly in response to a letter to the edi- tor in your paper (Coverage of war in Iraq balanced, yet inade- quate, 04/29/03) and partly in response to the ridiculous com- plaints I keep hearing about U.S. involvement in Iraq. Everybody keeps complaining about how many civilians have died, but when you compare it to how many civilians have been killed by Saddam in the past, the num- ber of deaths is very low. Sad- dam was the dictator of Iraq for about 23 years. During that time, his regime brutally murdered at least 750,000 people. If you take 750,00 murders and divide it by the number of days he was in power, 8,395, you see that on average, his regime was respon- sible for 89 deaths a day. Grant- ed, many of these deaths came in large mass murders, such as the gassing of the Kurds, but you get the idea. It is important to limit civilian casualties of any war, but some will die. The bot- tom line in this case, however, is that more people are alive in Iraq than would be the case had we not invaded. Not only that, but everybody is free now. No matter if you had doubts before, all legitimate worries in this regard have been proved false. I suspect that the only people still complaining do so because they would rather still have Saddam in power. No doubt that was the goal of the Marxist organiza- tions responsible for organizing worldwide anti-war protests the past few months. DAN KRAWIEc LSA unior When I went home for Passover a couple of weeks ago, I gained a valuable insight that reinforced some of my fears about the way that my religion is practiced and crushed some of the naive idealism I have associated with Judaism my whole life. As I sat around the table, the younger children began teaching everyone the new things they had been learning about Passover. Some of it was cute, some of it interesting, some of it inane, but something that one of these children said was truly frightening and at the same time, very telling. One of them, who attends a promi- nent local Hebrew elementary school, told us that his Hebrew teacher taught him and his classmates that ifa non-Jewish person touches some of the traditional Passover food, it is no longer acceptable to be con- sumed or"kosher for Passover." Besides the fact that anyone with such an antiquated belief system should not be teaching young children about religion ina secular society - or any society for that matter - this ridiculous statement is part of a larger pattern of behavior within my community. Many supporters of the state of Israel try to make their case by implicit- ly arguing that somehow Jews are superior to their Arab neighbors. There can be no denying that this takes place, and anyone who tries to should take a look at the cam- pustmth.org advertisements that have run in the Daily. Jews study and play sports while Arabs teach their kids to blow peo- ple up is how the argument goes. My other story before I get to the point is one that took place during the most recent High Holidays (Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur). Every year, the members of my synagogue purchase Israel bonds to help support the Jewish state. This year, the president of the congregation shouted his way through an impassioned speech about the importance of purchasing these bonds because Israel is surroundedby hos- tile neighbors and desperately needs the support of U.S. Jews. He was clearly try- ing to tap into the segment of Jewish thought that feels that Jews are continually under attack. A large segment of the Jew- ish population believes that it is important to adhere to Jewish doctrine because Jews are often persecuted. Jews should marry Jews to halt the decline in the Jewish pop- ulation for example. Every issue is seen through this lens of persecution. Unfortunately, those who hold these beliefs are not merely rank and file U.S. Jews. They are often the leaders of the Jewish community. Synagogue boards are packed with people who send their kids to the day school mentioned above. These "leaders" try to appeal to their fellow U.S. Jews by teaching them that Jews are supe- rior to non-Jews, by rejecting a secular interpretation of Judaism and by constant- ly reminding them of the persecution Jews have faced for thousands of years. I use Judaism as an example to make my point because I am the most familiar with this community, but U.S. Judaism has adapted to modernity as well as - likely better than - any other major religion. Religions typically try to appeal to their followers through these tactics. Religious leaders, however, would be wise to start making their belief systems appealing in and of themselves. No religion deserves to survive by playing upon the fears of its fol- lowers. Instead, religions should attract supporters through the power of their ideas. Arab and Muslim leaders too often stress how evil Israel and the United States are, not the richness of their own culture's history. Likewise, my congregation's presi- dent would better serve his faith by asking for funds by saying that Israel, despite its flaws, is a democracy, a country where more Arabs have the right to vote than in any other country in the world, except the United States. He would be a more effec- tive advocate and leader if he would appeal to his congregation's ideology and beliefs, not its fears. This negativity further divides peo- ple of different traditions by making everyone fear everyone else. This strate- gy has been moderately effective in get- ting people to cling to their faiths, but negativity cannot be all that the world's great religions have to offer. I think that they can do better, and recent events show that the world's future depends on them doing better. Pesiccan be reached at jzpesick@umich.eds. Squelching abortion's flame AYMAR JEAN No RHYME, NEW YORK - uring the past two months, one word, hidden in headlines and outshone by sto- ries on the war, the economy and affir- mative action, is omnipresent in the news: abortion. Certainly, over the course of its history, abortion has always made the news, it's a pressing and controversial issue. Yet recently, it seems the issue is coming to a head. And so this raises some valuable questions: Is abortion the next affirmative action? How will this issue change our social fabric? Will it? Let me quell your concerns. Abortion is here to stay. This, I feel, is not a brazen declaration by a self-proclaimed liberal, but it is what I assume to be fact. In the grander scheme, abortion is in many ways like the issue of contraception or Medicare, issues that starkly divide con- servatives and liberals but are nonetheless unavoidable and irrevocable. As Ameri- cans, we can fear or extol the conservative or liberal judicial, legislative and execu- tive powers that be, but we must reconcile that getting rid of abortion would be polit- ical and social suicide. Where is the fire and controversy over this issue? Legislators and citizens fight the abortion battle over seemingly minor issues that represent larger ideological wars, like the battle over late-term abor- tions, which, though medically minor in scope, scared pro-choice advocates because of its overt conservative overtones. For another example, President Bush's Global AIDS Initiative bill stalemated in Congress over this very issue - whether or not to finance organizations that "pro- mote" (i.e. "offer") abortion procedures. That said, in order to moisten this incendiary issue, Americans need to iden- tify the flaws in each extreme ideology and discover that, by meeting in the mid- dle, both sides can be equally satisfied. On the conservative side, there are the adamant pro-life advocates like current federal appeals court nominee Judge Priscilla Owen, who wants abortion to be illegal. These opponents, who mix reli- gion and law, negate individual rights and ignore cases of rape and parental irre- sponsibility. They fail to realize the com- plex interplay between government and society. The stock example is Prohibition, which taught the nation that government regulation of an entrenched, widespread social practice is simply impossible. Vio- lence, societal agitation, and various ille- gal practices inevitably arise from this sort of government action, so making abortion illegal is not practical. On the other less reprehensible extreme, are those who are resolutely pro- choice and secular. Justifiably, these advo- cates factor in incidents of rape and sexual abuse into the abortion equation and renounce the puritanical overtones of abortion opponents. Yet, there is a small- mindedness here too. Often, liberals negate the complexities of the issue, including rare late-term abortions and the scope of government regulation. They also neglect the adoption option, which is a very viable alternative to simply ending an embryo's existence. The solution to the abortion issue is this: Make pragmatic concessions. Abor- tion opponents need to be practically con- servative, base their dissension on a general morality rather than religion and consider the legislative reality of abortion. Understanding that making abortion ille- gal creates all new problems, a practical conservative separates personal conviction and political persuasion. It is possible to disapprove of and discourage an abortion procedure for a friend or family member but realize that it is impossible to sway the hearts of thousands. On the other hand, by conceding that religion and abortion will fbrever be linked and that certainly some abortions are unnecessary, pro-choice advocates will refine their viewpoint. Ina South Carolina court case, a judge ruled it permissible for a clergyman to be on call at abortion clin- ics. A pragmatic abortion advocate should concede that this action, though riddled with church and state issues, does little to challenge the existence of abortion. The final lesson for America: Meet in the middle. It is very possible to compro- mise on the smaller issues and still retain personal conviction. The sooner Ameri- cans learn the healthy parameters of legis- lation, religion, society and personal preference, the sooner abortion ceases to be such a divisive issue in this nation. Jean can be reached at acjean@umich.edu.