100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

April 08, 2016 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Opinion

SHOHAM GEVA
EDITOR IN CHIEF

CLAIRE BRYAN

AND REGAN DETWILER
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LAURA SCHINAGLE
MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St.

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at

the University of Michigan since 1890.

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s editorial board.

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Friday, April 8, 2016

F

lip
through
the
teal

journal I always carry in
my backpack, and among

torn-out pages
and
blocks

of
diagonally

written
paragraphs,
you’ll
find

this
sentence

buried in a list.
It’s an odd list,
haphazardly
scrawled
in
two
very

distinct sets of
penmanship.
The phrase sits there on the blue
line, scrunched together by my
frantic,
cursive
handwriting.

Originally,
this
sentence
was

intended as one of many broad,
innocuous prompts for a project
my best friend suggested we do to
keep in touch with one another.

We each had to write down a

few questions. They didn’t need to
be specific or extremely detailed.
In fact, the broader the question,
the
better.
Really,
the
only

requirement was the question had
to make you think. Once we had
our list of prompts established,
we were supposed to — within the
course of a year — spontaneously
respond to whatever question we
felt was relevant in the moment
and send these thoughts to each
other in letters.

Well, someday soon, my friend

is going to receive a large envelope
of overdue letters — a delayed
correspondence that’s mostly due to
my mindset being: If I wait a little
while longer, I’ll think of much
better responses. I keep returning
to the prompts, refining bits here
and adding more there. Yet, no
prompt has as many pages devoted
to it as the “distance” one does.

“Tell me about distance.”
It was a question disguised as

an imperative. Perhaps, in reality,
it was a bit of both. Maybe it
was just an attempt to ask for an
explanation for the undefinable
concept that regularly permeates
my thoughts in various forms.

I remember sitting in my first

apartment as a sophomore and
chatting
with
my
roommate’s

parents when they were visiting.
Both of them attended college in the
Upper Peninsula. They understood
my references to random Upper
Peninsula towns and landmarks and
could relate with the experience of
going to a university located several
hours from home. My roommate’s
father — in an attempt to continue
the sense of camaraderie — told me
I was smart to find a school that was
as far away from home as possible
but still in-state.

That hadn’t been my intention,

but, as I looked at a map later, I
realized I’d basically done just
that. I had moved from one corner
of the state to another. I even
switched time zones. I’ve lived

in Michigan my entire life, and
I’m an in-state student. Yet, I’d
be remiss to deny that sometimes
I feel I relate more with out-
of-state students than with my
fellow Michiganders on campus.
Honestly, I never even used that
phrase until I came downstate.
I’ve always just been a Yooper.

Ever since I left my hometown,

distance became the ever-apparent
constant in my life — whether I
was actively trying to create it
or to diminish it. It’s a continual
negotiation
of
space.
For
me,

roughly 470 miles apart are two very
different lives and two very different
definitions of who I am. For some
students, 470 miles is miniscule in
comparison to the distances they
travel to return home. Others are
dumbfounded when I tell them a
trip back to my hometown requires
about an eight-hour drive.

While you could easily quantify

the space in a matter of miles, the
disconnect is often immeasurable.
My phone regularly buzzes with
Snapchat notifications from an old
friend who now lives in Pittsburgh,
friends going to college in the Upper

Peninsula and a friend studying
art in Grand Rapids. My voicemail
inbox is full of missed calls from my
parents as attempts to contact me are
hindered by my cluttered schedule
and an hour time difference. I’m
grateful technology allows me to
stay connected with everyone, but
it’s a conversation that relies upon
mere snapshots of our lives and
clusters of text messages. Visits back
up north transform into playing
games of catch-up as my friends
and I attempt to retrace everything
that’s happened since the last time
we all saw one another. Roaming
around familiar streets fills me
with a peculiar sense of recognition
that’s rooted primarily in nostalgia,
and each subsequent trip leaves me
feeling more and more like a visitor
in my hometown.

Yet, I can’t deny space was

exactly what I wanted. Distance
wasn’t a priority, but it certainly
was an advantage when I departed
for college. I can’t detach from the
past experiences or places that
shaped me nor would I ever want
to. However, I needed to create
some space from that town and
from that old definition of myself.
I wanted anonymity and a blank
slate to redraw the contours of my

life. Regardless of whether it’s been
four months or four years since I
left, I continually miss my family,
my friends, roaming around trails
in the woods and driving along
back roads with my best friend
as he teased me for driving too
slowly. But as distances widened,
the resulting space provided me
with room to grow and to question
the world. In turn, my faint voice
found the opportunity to traverse
spaces that extended far beyond
the rural and conceptual borders
it was accustomed to.

If my time at the University

has taught me anything, it’s that
distance is developmental, and more
often than not, it’s far more than
a physical measurement of miles.
There’s distance between ideologies
and experience. Throughout the
years,
I’ve
encountered
voices

calling to diminish obstacles and
gaps created by discrimination,
indifference,
ignorance
and

inequality. We, as students, immerse
ourselves in these discussions and
continually seek to uncover voices
previously
excluded
from
the

conversation. As both a student and
a writer, I’ve seen distance diminish
as viewpoints align, but it’s very
evident some gaps and inequities on
campus, and in society, are still far
from being closed.

Often,
I’ve
heard
college

described as a bubble, insulating
and distancing students from the
realities of world. Yet, research
conducted by Richard Arum and
Josipa Roksa suggests this distance
grows and our engagement with
the world may drop after we
graduate.
According
to
survey

data, 40 percent of recent college
graduates rarely participate in
conversations concerning politics
or public affairs. Regardless of
whether physical distance expands,
separation from an institution of
learning shouldn’t deter us from
interacting with the world. Rather,
it should spur us to engage more
and to continue conversations we
began in the classroom.

As both the school year and

my college career rapidly come
to a close, I expect distance
will continue to remain at the
forefront of my mind for the
next few months. I walk along
State Street on my way home and
wonder whether these streets,
these buildings and these familiar
scenes will dissipate into the
same nostalgic atmosphere that
comes to mind when I think of my
hometown. I think of the various
parts of the country my friends
are dispersing to and where I’ll
eventually find myself next, and I
think of how far I’ll soon be from
the dialogues and discussions I’m
accustomed to. But, I take solace
in the fact that distances can be
bridged as well as created.

— Melissa Scholke can be

reached at melikaye@umich.edu.

Tell me about distance

MELISSA
SCHOLKE

I

n
light
of
the
racist

chalkings on the Diag last
week and violent rhetoric

across the nation at large, Muslim,
Middle Eastern and North African
students have been confronted
with a seemingly hostile climate
on campus. When we witnessed
these public attacks in the name
of free speech that targeted both
our faith and our place at this
University of Michigan, the fear,
apprehension and isolation of the
current political cycle suddenly
seemed justified.

But we also witnessed another

movement shortly thereafter: an
outpouring of support and love
from individuals and organizations
alike on campus. The examples
of genuine solidarity are endless:
a resolution passed by Central
Student
Government,
proactive

chalk
on
the
Diag
Tuesday

afternoon spreading a message
of solidarity, a collective letter
of support signed by more than
50
student
organizations
and

commitments from outside groups
like the Open School in Ann Arbor
and the Arab American Anti-
Discrimination
Committee
in

Dearborn, to standing with Muslim
students. The expressions of love
and unity have not gone unnoticed.

Thank you for your support.

The Muslim Students’ Association
is grateful to anyone and everyone
taking a stand against the vitriol
and hate exposed on campus.

There is a lot of work yet to be

done. The reappearance of bigoted
messages just yesterday — and
the
administration’s
hesitation

to remove them — is indicative of
that. We seek to root out actions,
both internal and external, that
center around excluding groups

on campus and turning them
against one other. We will not
stand for injustice perpetrated
toward any identity. We hold the
Muslim community to the highest
standard
of
protecting
other

groups as well.

We look forward, though, to

building
on
the
constructive

responses, to a joining of hands
between
Muslims
and
non-

Muslims, and student groups and
community members, to mold this
campus into a more inclusive one.
Our tradition is one of healing
and cooperation, and the MSA is
devoted to fostering the seeds that
have been sown in the last few
weeks. May God ease and facilitate
this effort and spread its rewards.

— The Muslim Students’

Association can be reached at

msa-eboard@umich.edu

MSA thank you letter

MUSLIM STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION | OP-ED

“I’ve heard college

described as a

bubble. Yet ... our

engagement with the
world may drop after

we graduate.”

T

he LGBTQ community has made
impressive advances in recent years,
and we celebrate every victory that

brings us closer to full equality for all. But there
is still a lot of work to be done before LGBTQ
Michiganders cease to be treated as second-
class citizens.

The 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision

legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide is a
significant milestone, but it has also sparked a
backlash among those who oppose equality for
the LGBTQ community. As an active member
of Outlaws — Michigan Law’s LGBTQ student
organization — I know many Michigan citizens
and students are watching with concern as
more anti-LGBTQ bills are introduced and
passed across the country.

Among the most troubling of these bills

are so-called Religious Freedom Restoration
Act legislation, like those currently causing
controversy in Mississippi, Georgia and North
Carolina. While each bill differs slightly, the
effects of this type of legislation includes
limiting the power of local governments and
extending
antidiscrimination
protections

to LGBTQ people to allowing businesses
to refuse to serve LGBTQ people by simply
saying they have a religious objection to
doing so. Not only do these bills deny LGBTQ
people equal treatment and expose them
to discrimination in their everyday lives,
they are also simply unnecessary to protect
religious freedoms.

State RFRA bills are a prophylactic layer

atop the protections already afforded by the
U.S. Constitution and the federal RFRA law.
The federal RFRA clearly states that it is
intended to protect individuals who want to
practice their religion, as long as the practice
doesn’t place a burden on others. For example,
a prisoner who wants access to religious
materials isn’t harming anyone. Unlike
the federal RFRA, which only applies to
government intrusion into religious practices,
the state-level RFRA would allow a religious
objection to be used in interactions between
individuals. State RFRA legislation that allows
businesses to claim a “religious objection” and
legally refuse service to someone is in fact
harmful to others.

The problem is that in Michigan, LGBTQ

people do not have equal protection under
the state’s civil rights law. Most of our state
law protections against discrimination are
found in the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act
(ELCRA), which prohibits discrimination
based upon religion, race, color, national
origin, age, sex, height, weight, familial status
or marital status. The law does not include
any protections for LGTBQ people, meaning
that LGBTQ Michiganders fired or denied
housing simply because of their status as
LGBTQ have no recourse under the ELCRA,
unlike someone who is fired for their race or
religion.

The result is that a gay man or a transgender

woman could be denied employment strictly
on the grounds of sexual or gender identity,
not on their qualification or merits. LGBTQ
people could be denied housing or turned away
from a hospital if a health care provider states a
religious objection. A police officer could refuse
to protect someone who is LGBTQ or of another
religion, or whose behavior they object to on
religious grounds. Is that how we treat people
in Michigan? The LGBTQ community is made
up of our neighbors, our family, our friends, our
coworkers, even members of our church. They
deserve protection.

Despite the lack of state law protections for

LGBTQ persons and the religious protections
extended in the federal Constitution and under
federal law, Michigan politicians continue to
push forward harmful RFRA-like legislation
in our state. Although Gov. Rick Snyder denied
that it was a RFRA-type bill, legislation signed

into law last year, which allows faith-based
adoption agencies to deny service based
on religious objections — even when they
accept state funding — clearly discriminates
against LGBTQ people and others. The same
discrimination that is illegal when exercised
against other members of the community is
acceptable under laws such as these when
aimed at the LGBTQ community.

Michiganders don’t have to look far to learn

that RFRA bills are bad for equality, bad for our
community and bad for business.

In North Carolina, more than 119 business

leaders signed a letter to Gov. Pat McCrory
urging him to repeal the state’s recently passed
RFRA law. Employer PayPal announced it
was canceling a major investment in North
Carolina, resulting in a loss of at least 400
jobs and $3.6 million dollars. Another major
corporation, Braeburn Pharmaceuticals, stated
it was “reevaluating” its plans for a $20 million
project in Durham.

In Georgia, House Bill 757 passed through

the House and Senate before the governor
vetoed the bill after public outcry. The
pushback to the bill was swift and serious,
with major employers (Home Depot, Coca-
Cola, Google and Microsoft) opposing the
bill. Atlanta, “the Hollywood of the South,”
also received criticism from members of the
entertainment industry, an industry that
added approximately $1.7 billion to the state’s
economy just last year. Passage of the bill could
also have disqualified Atlanta from hosting an
upcoming Super Bowl, with the NFL stating
that the law would be a relevant factor in the
hosting decision. Agencies within the state
estimate the bill could have cost between $1
billion and $2 billion.

In Mississippi, Gov. Phil Bryant signed

House Bill 1523 this week, which protects
private businesses that discriminate against
LGBTQ for proclaimed religious or moral
reasons. Major employers in the state,
including Tyson Foods, AT&T, IBM, MGM
Resorts International, Nissan and Toyota,
have all objected to the bill. The Mississippi
Manufacturers Association has expressed
its fear that the law will affect business and
development opportunities in the state. New
York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an executive
order banning non-essential state travel to
Mississippi, which follows a similar ban on
nonessential state travel to North Carolina.

In the case of every RFRA-type bill,

supporters claim they only intend to protect
people of faith. But religious organizations and
individuals are already protected by the U.S.
Constitution. Meanwhile, it’s still legal in most
states to deny housing, services or employment
to LGBTQ people.

Freedom of religion is one of the cornerstones

of our democracy, and no one is asking religious
organizations to perform same-sex marriages
against their will. But LGBTQ people do have
the right to equal treatment under the law.

Opposition to RFRA-type bills is not anti-

religion, it’s pro-equality. In fact, many members
of the LGBTQ community are religious
themselves. This isn’t about curbing the rights
of religious individuals and organizations, it’s
about preventing anti-LGBTQ legislation from
harming our communities under the guise of
religious protection.

In Michigan, advocates are working hard to

extend civil rights protections under ELCRA
to LGBTQ people, but it will take time. During
that time, it’s almost certain that RFRA-type
legislation will be introduced in Michigan.
When and if these bills start moving through
our legislature, you can be sure the LGBTQ
community will make our voices heard. We
hope you’ll join us.

— Abbye Klamann is a University

of Michigan Law School student.

Protect the LGBTQ community

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Gracie Dunn, Caitlin Heenan,
Jeremy Kaplan, Ben Keller, Minsoo Kim, Payton Luokkala, Kit

Maher, Madeline Nowicki, Anna Polumbo-Levy, Jason Rowland,

Lauren Schandevel, Melissa Scholke, Kevin Sweitzer, Rebecca
Tarnopol, Ashley Tjhung, Stephanie Trierweiler, Hunter Zhao

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and

op-eds. Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds
should be 550 to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and

University affiliation to tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

E-mail inchan at tokg@umich.Edu
IN CHAN LEE

ABBYE KLAMANN | OP-ED

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan