|
|
|
Michael Sells is at the center of a firestorm at the University of North Carolina
|
Did
you hear the one about the Writer, the University Chancellor and the
“Educational” Blowhard? See, the three of them were sitting in
Federal Court one day arguing about students reading an Islamically
themed book. The Writer said, “It’s not meant to be a
controversial book.”
The
University Chancellor said, “It’s a timely, non-promotional
topic!”
The
Blowhard said, “Foul! You’re forcing students to read a
religious book that’s not ‘neutral’ about Islam!”
Then
the Judge spoke up: “Reading about the Qu’ran doesn’t impinge
on religious freedom.”
The
punch line? The Blowhard is claming a victory that belongs to the
Chancellor because the Chancellor has made reading the book an
optional choice. Please join me in laughter here. (Ok, it’s not a
great joke, but the situation is a joke, truly.)
By
the time you read this, most of the controversy will have passed. On
Monday, Aug. 19th, University of North Carolina’s (UNC)
3,500 freshmen will have met in two-hour non-credit seminars across
campus to discuss Michael A. Sell’s Approaching the Qur’an:
The Early Revelations.
Each
year all incoming freshmen are assigned a book to read to create a
sort of universal link between classmates, something many
universities do. UNC chose Sells' book for its “fresh”
translations and “multiple interpretations” of 35 Surahs, or
chapters, considered to be the earliest revelations near the end of
the Qu’ran. When word spread, Christian evangelists besieged the
university while other conservatives cried, “Forced religion!”
Radio
talk show discussions and inflammatory speeches ended up in a
lawsuit against UNC filed by three un-named freshmen supported by
the Virginia-based Family Policy Network, which calls itself a
“socially conservative Christian educational organization.”
To
hear what the Family Policy Network and other opponents of UNC’s
decision say is shake-your-head-funny. The piece d’resistance
are the comments of my favorite infotainment TV talk show host Bill
O’Reilly of Fox News Network. He questioned the purpose of making
freshmen study “our enemy’s religion” and compared the book
assignment to teaching “Mein Kampf” in 1941.
Come
on. Are you kidding me?
The
situation itself is ludicrous enough without firebrands like
O’Reilly pitching in their two cents. In fact, at the heart of the
religious melee is Sells’ book, a relatively intelligent piece of
work dissecting the final Surahs of the Qu’ran. Truth be told, by
focusing on those Surahs, it does skip over others that are often
misconstrued for advocating violence against non-Muslims.
I
don’t profess to offer a review of Sells’ book here. But it
seems to me from a surface sweep of his book that it offers an
interesting interpretation of the early Surahs, ones that lay the
groundwork for the peaceful nature of Islam and Muslims’ love of
Allah. So if a university wants its students learn the basics of
Islam, aren't the early revelations to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) a
good place to begin?
This
is what irks those opposing the selection of Sells' book by UNC. Joe
Glover, president of the Family Policy Network, told the Washington
Post that the book is a one-sided presentation of Islam, leaving
out Surahs that “contain exhortations to kill infidels and that
have served as inspiration or justification for some terrorists.”
This in itself goes against the very nature of Sells' book, which he
wrote to “avoid the whole argument about the violent or nonviolent
nature of Islam,” Sells said earlier.
“The
point of this book is to say, let’s put that vital question aside
for a moment and ask, ‘What is it in the religion that makes 1.2
billion people see it as meaningful?’” Sells told the Post.
For
that reason alone, reading Sells’ book, or others like it that
intelligently study the mainstream, peaceful nature of Islam, is a
good thing. It’s not a violation of separation between
church and state. In fact it illustrates the wonderful degree of
academic freedom in this country.
Moreover,
in these post-September 11th times, isn’t it better to
have a dialogue on the pillars of Islam, its glorious history and
beautiful revelations rather than highlighting passages often taken
out of historical context by terrorists and anti-Islam conservatives
alike?
Similar
passages are prevalent in the Bible and Torah, many religious
scholars acknowledge. So more important now is for all to gain an
understanding of the basics of Islam, the religion of choice for a
vast number of the world’s population – most of whom are
peace-loving people.
Lastly,
I hardly think Sells’ book is something that outright advocates
Islam to those UNC freshmen that read it. As James Bowman writes in National
Review Online,
“The
mistake being made on both sides is to suppose that the academic
study of religions can have anything to do with influencing the
kinds of things that people are prepared to do in their name. Belief
is not a matter of studying history or theology or Biblical (or
Koranic) exegesis. … It should be remembered that the whole
business began as a kind of memorial to the events of September 11
and in the mistaken belief that those events had something to do
with intolerance of different religions.”
But
perhaps UNC’s student body president, Jennifer Daum of Pewaukee,
WI put it best. As she said to the Post: “At the very least it
starts a dialogue. My feeling is that if you’re not prepared to
read ideas that are not your own and that you might disagree with,
you do not belong at an institution of higher learning.”
Put
that in your pipe and smoke it, Bill O’Reilly.
|
