Letters to the editor
Dear Editor:
In response to article “Scholarship will reward gay-friendly students” (Jan. 28), I want to say that Dr. Rushing was correct. Dr. Rushing predicted that “there will be people who just don’t like the idea at all.” I am indeed one of those people.
The difficulty in being against programs such as Safe Space, and even not being supportive toward a scholarship, is the labeling you subject yourself to. Labels I subject myself to include backward, bigot, dogmatist, extremist, repressive, gay basher, and many more. Yet, knowing the risk, I press on to hold my ground.
I have no spirit of hate or sense of fear for what I do not understand serving as motivation. I am simply determined to hold to my firm belief in moral absolutes. The issue I hold against programs such as Safe Space is not necessarily bound to the specific actions of the program within itself. I would never argue people’s right to give money to any organization they please, nor would I argue an organization’s right to sponsor a scholarship. My complaint and hesitation are brought about from the larger implications the program ushers into our lifestyle. Programs like Safe Space are small steps in moving the large society away from a common belief that moral absolutes exist and into the doctrine of moral grayness. The fast growing idea that programs such as Safe Space bring with them is that no action, no person, and no lifestyle can be classified as right or wrong. Moral grayness holds that society should embrace anyone’s decision about their lifestyle.
Do not be confused, I am neither advocating hatred nor cruelty from anyone, toward anyone. I merely stress the responsibility of the society to forsake-not the long proven standards for right and wrong behavior. I cannot support Safe Space because it gravitates towards other agendas. Efforts to disestablish the family, allow children to be adopted to unbalanced parental figures, and a movement to promote homosexuality in schools are all steps in the path programs like Safe Space trod. These objectives are harmful to the established ways of life and the values of our society. Such an agenda must be resisted by brave people who hold true to the longstanding conviction that moral absolutes exist.
Again, I do not wish to hate or to advance any discord toward any individual. I only object because conscience and morality dictate that I must call wrong, wrong, and call right, right.
Sincerely,
Brady Soop
Senior, Political Science
Posted by Colonnade Archives
on Feb 11 2005. Filed under Letters to the Editor.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
