A FEW FOLKS down in North Carolina are getting ready to build themselves a big old bonfire. In anticipation of the upcoming school year, they've been struck by the desire to burn books, and academic freedom along with them.
In late July, three incoming freshmen at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill filed suit against the school in federal court. The students are suing the institution for including a book about the Koran on a required summer reading list. Identified as an evangelical Christian, a Catholic and a Jew, the plaintiffs object to "Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations" on the grounds that it violates the constitutional separation of church and state. The Family Policy Network, a Virginia-based Christian group, filed the lawsuit on behalf of the trio. An appeals court rejected the lawsuit, and rightly so. The suing students should drop further attempts to appeal.
Given the current state of world affairs, the choice of "Approaching the Qur'an" is not wholly unreasonable. A visible backlash against Muslims occurred in the United States after September 11, much of it as a result of ignorance that eventually led to intolerance. UNC Chancellor James Moeser told USA Today, "We're not spoon-feeding [students] a set of beliefs. We're asking them to read and tell each other what they think" ("Assigned reading spurs rights lawsuit at UNC," Aug. 4). It's clear that the motive of UNC officials in selecting the book was to foster understanding and intellectual discussion rather than solely "create a favorable opinion of the religion of Islam," as the lawsuit claims. "Approaching the Qur'an" is an academic piece by Michael Sells, a professor of religion at Haverford College, not someone intent on coaxing the masses into blindly accepting or following the Koran.
In addition, the lawsuit asserts that students who choose not to read the book on moral or religious grounds will be "exposed to ridicule and hostile questioning" and "ostracized as dissenters." Realistically, these kids aren't going to be ridiculed any more than your typical college student who skips reading "Othello" in favor of the Cliff's notes. Their grades, as well as their egos, won't suffer needlessly either. While the summer reading is required, grades of those who opt not to read Sells' book will not be affected. The president of the Family Policy Network also scoffs at the option that students can write a one-page paper on their objections in lieu of reading the book. So really, there's no way to placate these people other than by eliminating the book from the curriculum altogether.
Furthermore, it's ironic that a group such as the Family Policy Network has taken on the UNC freshmen's plight. Yes, it's a Christian group, and two of the plaintiffs are Christian. Their defense of these students nonetheless is confusing on a deeper level. The basis of the lawsuit is that by assigning "Approaching the Qur'an," UNC has crossed the line of church-state separation. Groups like the Family Policy Network have no problem doing that. However, when it comes to prayer in school or posting the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Bluntly speaking, its beef isn't that the book is about a religion -- it's the fact that the religion is Islam. Let's face it, had UNC required students to read the New Testament instead, the sponsors of the lawsuit would not be exhibiting such hypocrisy.
Not only has the students' crusade hampered UNC's efforts to educate, it also has made the school an ideological hostage of the North Carolina state legislature. Responding to the controversy, the Appropriations Committee of the North Carolina House of Representatives voted to withhold public money from UNC's reading program unless all other religions were equally represented. That leaves UNC looking down the barrel of the economic gun with the threat of a shot between the eyes for sticking to its convictions. That's probably why the UNC Board of Governors failed to pass a resolution in early August affirming a commitment to academic freedom. Dissenting members said the resolution would easily pass in October -- conveniently after the state budget will be passed in the legislature.
There's no better place for learning acceptance of other people's beliefs than a college campus. For that to happen, however, students have to know what those beliefs are. The plaintiffs in the case against UNC are hindering that process. With a fair amount of students coming to school only having been exposed to Protestant white suburbia, it's refreshing when college kids can attend a school such as UNC or the University can take classes like "Contemporary Hinduism" and "Chinese Family and Religion."Those protesting Tar Heels should drop further appeals and try to figure out why reading a book on Islam really bothers them.
(Becky Krystal is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at
bkrystal@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 15 hours agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 3 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
