Not UNC's Business to Force Students to Read, Learn About the Quran

For a political science major, Dan Harrison's argument in his column "National Spotlight On Quran" was woefully inadequate.

In order to facilitate his understanding of why the book was opposed by many, I would like to clear up some of his misconceptions.

"These crusaders proclaim to protect free speech but embody that noble idea by trying to keep us from reading books about cultures other than our own," Harrison wrote.

These "crusaders," as Mr. Harrison refers to them, do not wish to "protect free speech ... by trying to keep us from reading books about cultures other than our own."

The opposition comes to the University's policy of forcing incoming freshman to read this book.

None object to UNC offering courses on a myriad of different religions, because the student has the choice in whether or not he or she chooses to take that course.

To turn Crusader Dan's quote on its head, supporters of the reading assignment proclaim to protect free speech by trying to force us to read about cultures other then our own.

As a political science major, Dan should understand that integral to the idea of free speech is the idea that, despite your right to say what you will, I have a right not to listen.

Mr. Harrison then moves on to suggest that all those people who protested this reading assignment equate Islam with terrorism.

While I am not in a position to speak for every loon in our society, most people understand that Islam is fundamentally a religion of peace.

However, given the current political climate after Sept. 11, it is increasing clear that sects of Islam wish to pervert the Quran and turn it into a book of violence.

To ignore these fundamentalist Islamic sects, and the terrorists they engender, was one of the faults of this reading selection.

A book such as Caner's "Unveiling Islam: An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs" would have been not only thought-provoking but worthy of selection as a reading assignment for incoming students.

Instead of analyzing the core book of a religion, which is unlikely to provide much insight into said culture, a book which approached Islamic culture in light of the Islamic Revolution and Khomeini would have been much more enlightening and still would have created the intellectual climate and the controversy that UNC administrators sought to engender.

I agree that UNC has a duty to expose its students to a wide array of varying viewpoints.

The cultural diversity requirement for undergraduates strives to do just that, while still allowing the student a choice in what to study.

Where UNC crossed the line was in forcing its freshman class to read a book of suras; suras that, as Mr. Harrison pointed out, are commonly taught to people studying the Quran as their personal religion.

An approach to Islamic culture would have clearly been a better choice.

All this being said, I must still wonder if Dan would have an objection to the university assigning its next freshman class to read the Gospels?

Richard Pierce
Senior
Computer Science

The length rule was waived.