ON JULY 22, three unidentified incoming freshmen at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill and the Family Policy Network, a conservative Christian group based in Virginia, filed a lawsuit against the University of North Carolina claiming violations of students' First Amendment rights. The lawsuit implies ignorance, apathy and insensitivity on the part of UNC. However, the school should be credited for its efforts to promote tolerance and understanding, specifically by exploring fundamental roots of a different culture.
Traditionally, UNC has required incoming and transfer students to read a book over the summer break and write a one-page report to be discussed during the first weeks of school. The selected book this year was "Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations," which has about 35 passages from the Islamic holy writings. The book, written by Michael Sells, Professor of religion at Haverford College, is supposedly a breakdown of the religious and historical context of many "suras," or chapters in the Qur'an. The selected texts have been translated into English, but the commentaries focus on the linguistic and tonal inflections that are lost during the conversion from Arabic. Sells focuses on the poetry and fluidity of the language as a way of better understanding a large part of Middle Eastern culture. However, many have refused to see the book in this light over the past few months.
The current lawsuit is based around the supposed infringement upon students' freedom of religion. The plaintiffs claim the First Amendment clause against establishment of religion has been violated because students are being "forced" to read and study the Qur'an and Islamic principles against their will. This argument is one of the most ignorant and deceptive examples of interpretive First Amendment rights. UNC asked students to read a book, not take on the religion as their own. There is no doubt that students were "forced" to read about mythology, a polytheistic religion, in previous classes. No one is questioned when passages of the Bible are read in an English class because it is considered to be a classic. So, what makes this book -- an educational resource and insightful tool, especially in light of recent events -- any different from historical religious texts? Nothing.
Perhaps the key phrase is "in light of recent events." There probably would have been much less controversy and coverage of this incident had this book been assigned in the summer of 2001. However, UNC's summer reading program is designed to stimulate discussion and critical thinking about a current topic in order to enhance a sense of community between students, faculty and staff, and to provide a common experience for incoming students. Thus, the book is quite appropriate for the intended purpose. It is not some politically biased document; rather, it is an insightful look at something most people have no knowledge of whatsoever. When discussing the problem, the Family Policy Network put a lot of weight in the book's exclusion of certain contentious excerpts from the Qur'an, giving a false sense of religion. However, this claim works both ways in that the media portrayal of the Muslim religion only includes aspects seen as negative in our American society. It is unfair to categorize an entire religion by the actions of a few crazed terrorists, and the same goes for using passages from any holy text out of its environment. UNC, however, was wholly justified in inspiring true discussion about a topic as pertinent as the Islamic faith.
No matter how severely these people refute the Islamic religion, none of their basic rights were infringed in any way. In fact, the University made special concessions in advance concerning the assignment. According to the UNC Web site, the reading is required; however, "if any students or their families are opposed to reading parts of the Qur'an because to do so is offensive to their faith, they may choose not to read the book." Instead, students can write a one-page report on their personal decision not to read the book. Still, how unfortunate for the person who refuses to gain insight into the culture and viewpoint of many people in this country and around the world.
Rampant emotion has clouded the perspective of many around the country, making people underestimate the negative repercussions of a biased and partial higher education.
If some UNC students don't want to read the book, fine. However, they should be aware that selective learning and knowledge is the same process that created the narrow, radical followers of the Taliban in the first place. Ignorance is bliss, until the ignorant become angry and emotionally provoked. UNC should be commended for its efforts to promote understanding and unity for all students, regardless of religious background. An appeals court decided in favor of UNC and saw past the shadow of fear to which these unfortunate students and their families have succumbed. Hopefully future courts will do the same in similar cases.
(Amey Adkins is a Cavalier Daily
columnist. She can be reached at aadkins@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 3 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 | 2 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.
