- The Washington Times - Wednesday, September 2, 2009


“Muhammad and man at Yale” (Opinion, Monday) states, “American universities have no problem questioning the most cherished Western values and American cultural norms.” While this is factual, it need not prescribe how debate should proceed on American campuses. Censorship of any sort has become a dirty word, but an argument can be made that academic freedom ought to seek a balance between unencumbered reason, prudence and civility. Unfortunately, prudence, no matter how it is measured, is now seen as cowardice. Civility is now seen as a quaint anachronism or a disposition of the timid.

In this context, is there a way to highlight the disdain for human liberty and tolerance that exists in much of the Muslim world without visually carpet-bombing the many Muslims who are themselves concerned about this issue? Do we need to resort to the same tactics as those who have no regard for our own deeply held principles and beliefs? What one can do is not necessarily what one ought to do.


Plymouth, Mich.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide