ONE OF the hot button issues of college life is the issue of diversity. For this purpose, groups that support various races, creeds and sexual orientations have sprung up as a way to unite in response to those who discriminate against them. More often, these groups are created as a way of fostering pride for that particular minority, and creating acceptance for that religion, culture or lifestyle. All of these measures to create awareness for these various groups in the University ought to be applauded.
However, among all the support for the smaller factions, the University must not forget the spirit of accepting everybody, regardless of their beliefs. Included in the groups attacked for their beliefs are Christians, who somehow are neglected in the quest to find civil equality. Denouncing one religion or way of life to promote others is hypocrisy to the highest degree, and it greatly hinders the goal of creating equality.
In the past fall semester as well as in recent weeks, there has been a lot of criticism about Christianity, the practice of it and the validity of it. In particular, there was a backlash toward an individual who openly converted to and praised Christianity, and a more dated commentary went as far as to equate Christians with terrorists.
As an agnostic, I often am confronted with questions about faith and my own set of moral beliefs. Yet I do not look down upon other religions simply because I disagree with them. This is not a criticism of all religious debate because there is a way to express opinions without deliberately insulting an entire lifestyle.
However, this form of courtesy definitely has crossed the line at times. Like any other religion, Christianity is a belief system that is protected by the First Amendment. More importantly, it is a way of life for some individuals at the University. There are people here who worship the Christian God, and take it personally if someone were to equate their religion with perverse behavior.
But this type of insulting and stereotyping of Christianity has not been condemned like an insult toward a minority would be condemned. This makes little or no sense, because attacking religion beyond the level of civil debate is an equally hateful and discriminatory act. There is an unfair double standard at work here, and it has become acceptable to some to insult Christianity because it is the majority religion in this country.
Those who insult Christianity often do so as a way to make themselves appear more liberal and see themselves as being progressive, since Christianity stereotypically is equated with conservatism. However, how progressive is someone who insults Christianity? It is hypocritical to accept in principle all minorities and lifestyles, yet at the same time denounce one because it is in opposition to what one believes. A commentary that lashed out against Asians or spewed hate upon women would not be suitable for public consumption. Christianity should not be exempt from this minor level of self-censorship.
|
As a minority, I personally am offended when I see any type of faction targeted for abuse. Just as I do not wish to be referred to as a "chink" or a "gook," I do not think that it is right to denounce Christianity or to derail positive opinions on the subject. In order to have true diversity, students need to embrace all of the differences between individuals rather than feel threatened and reactive toward a majority.
I consider myself moderately liberal, and we have been given a bad name by those who use a religion as a scapegoat for the problems of society. A true liberal would accept all people regardless of their beliefs. To do otherwise would be to dwell in a corrupted philosophy.
(Kevin James Wong's column appearsTuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at kwong@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
