Letters to th editor

Posted on Oct. 30, 2003, at 12:00 a.m.

* Just another ‘civilian?’

I’m writing in response to a Letter to the Editor that appeared in the Oct. 20 issue of The Maine Campus. Seth Mitchell responded to Marshall Dury’s article on misguided American pride in the “post-Sept. 11 United States.”

Mitchell chastised Dury for his “Nalgene bottle-toting, granola-eating, anti-everything-American [stereotyping].” It struck me as slightly ironic that Mitchell began his rebuttal by listing all the stereotypes that Dury had mentioned in his own article and emphatically claiming that he belonged in none of those classifications. Then, by the end of his own rant, he discredited himself by slinging his own set of stereotypes at Dury.

First of all, I must say I agree with Dury … to a point. The current American society often blindly grabs the hand of pride because we are expected to as a result of the tragedy that befell us on Sept. 11. Though I take much pride in my country and our ability to unite after such a tragedy, I find it utterly disgusting that our society has the sheer gall to use Sept. 11 as an excuse to police the globe and to put all our faith in Bush as if he’s infallible. I also find it ignorant and silly for someone to assume that they are an expert on the events of Sept. 11 simply because they are enlisted in the armed forces.

I support my country. I support the troops. I get choked up when I think about the events of Sept. 11 and my fists shake with anger when I think about the stupid and misguided people who made that day a reality. But I also own a Nalgene bottle. Occasionally I eat granola. Sometimes I’ll watch some NASCAR on ESPN – one of Dury’s stereotypes. I’m an American, and I’m allowed to disagree with whomever I choose, including my president.

I’m not ignorant enough to believe that Sept. 11 was not, in part, my own fault simply because I am American. I’m not ignorant enough to believe that we don’t have an obligation to seek out the attackers. But I’m also not ignorant enough to believe that the bumper stickers and American flags that have become so prevalent in recent years often belong to people who would prefer to accept the word of reporters, rather than form their own educated opinions about this world.

To Mitchell, I’m glad you’re proud of your country, but please do not assume that just because you are in the military that we “civilians” are incapable of fathoming the depth of Sept. 11 and national pride. To Dury, don’t assume that there are none of us in the country who really do believe what’s printed on those stickers. And to both of you, don’t you dare assume that a sticker, a flag, or the inconvenience of having your car searched is the real important issue at hand.

Daniel Cavallari

Senior English major

* Misquoting America’s founding fathers

This letter is in response to a letter in the Oct. 23 edition of The Campus by Timothy Surrette. I think it’s unfair for the right wing conservatives of this country to be represented here by Timothy Surrette. He clearly does not know what he is talking about because he claims that our founding fathers wanted the Christian God to be present in every aspect of our daily lives. He cited four references to this in the Declaration of Independence. I’m not sure what “Christianize the World” brochure he read his version of the Declaration of Independence from, but in the real version there is no reference to the Christian God. This is exactly the way Benjamin Franklin, the editor of the document, wanted it to be written.

I truly cannot imagine how he quoted our first president, George Washington, as making a reference to our dependence on God after signing the Declaration. Not only is Washington’s name absent from the Declaration of Independence, he was not even present at the 1776 signing. I would really like to hear Surrette explain this to me.

Matt Shaer stated that religion in schools is not fair to “Jenny Atheist,” and Surrette countered by stating that it’s not fair to “Suzie Baptist” to not be exposed to religion in school. If a parent wants to send his child to a public school and wants religion to be part of her life, then it is up to the parent to teach the child religion after school. I can think of only one group of people that would want its children saturated with religion every minute of their lives.

Everyone tells me that Christianity is not a cult. My thinking is that parents want religion taught in school so they don’t have to spend that time teaching it to their kids. The fact remains that this country was founded on a separation of church and state. It’s up to parents and the Church, not school teachers, to expose kids to religion. It would be nice to read an editorial where the author knows what he is talking about every once in a while.

Ryan Phennicie

Microbiology major

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 30th, 2003, 12:00 am. You can follow any responses to this article through the RSS feed.