LordMoneyG

1 - Not a class, as such. Part of what UNC refers to as a "First-Year Reading Initiative." All entering Freshman are required to read the book, then attend a 2 hour class/discussion forum on the book later, sort of as an icebreaker/tool to get to know the campus/your peers, and encourage intelligent debate. Also, many freshman courses refer later to the book as part of their syllabus (I.E. - Comm 9, a debate class, will address issues proposed by the book as part of the class itself).

2 - Yes. Although, many people have gotten by without reading the summer book (I, for one, know many people who didn't read the book for my freshman year - "The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down"). Required, but not heavily enforced, as such. I feel that this one will be, though. Or would have been, had the outrage not been so great.

3 - Again, not a class. UNC is however, of course, a liberal arts school.

4 - Not a question.

5 - Yes. What reason would I have to make this up? I think I could have come up with something a little more outrageous/inflammatory, no?

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]</p>

LordMoneyG

An arguement proposed by the Managing Editor where I work -

_________________________________
UNC reading assignment retains a basic flaw -

For such brilliant people, the folks at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are having a mighty hard time getting that summer-reading assignment right.

First, they announced that this year's assignment, which applies to all incoming freshmen and transfer students, is to read a book that discusses, and quotes extensively, the Quran.

It would be a good thing for more people to learn about the Quran, the foundation for Islam, but picking one religion for the reading assignment was wrong. Islam should be studied in the context of history or in comparative religion classes. No religion should get favored treatment. The university is a government institution, remember.

As was noted here earlier, there would have been a deafening roar of denunciation if the university had required that the Bible be read. Those who would have hollered the loudest have been strangely silent on the Quran requirement.

But others have not, and, accordingly, the university has changed its requirement.

The reading of "Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations" is still required, and incoming students must write a one-page paper on it and be prepared to participate in a two-hour discussion when they get to school. Under the new rule, incoming students are allowed to opt out, but if they do they must write a one-page paper on why.

That might sound like a benign assignment, but it isn't. The university has no business forcing its students to defend their religious beliefs, which is what it is doing with this new requirement.

The wording of the opt-out provision indicates that the folks up there in the Ivory Tower still don't catch on to the essential problem with the assignment.

The new rule says "if any students or their families are opposed to reading parts of the Qur'an because to do so is offensive to their own faith, they may choose not to read the book ..."

The problem isn't just that reading it would be offensive to their faith. It's that assigning a book on a particular religion, without historical or religious context, is not a proper function of a public university.
___________________________________

- LMG

LordMoneyG

Oh, and something else about where I work (the Goldsboro News Argus) - The newspaper today printed a number of stories regarding the whole UNC debate. When the final edition hit the presses, however, "Quran" was misspelled many times throughout all of the articles, wholly the fault of the editors. When I approached them with this, the basic response I got back was "big deal."

Now, I know, if anyone would have misspelled "Bible" as "Bidle" or something like that, today's edition would NOT have hit newsstands until the errors were corrected.

Hmph.

LordMoneyG

Personally, I've applauded UNC throughout this whole debate. Especially for taking on such a controversial, timely issue in an open, liberal forum.

And regarding the arguement that the same people who support the Quran idea would object to having the Bible as required reading - I, personally, would object to having the Bible as required reading, simply because the fucker is too LONG.

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]</p>

Godless Dave

Comparative religion classes used to be required at many colleges. Would the fundies object to that? Probably.

Whoever said that a book about Islam is not the same thing as a book extolling Islam was right on.

But to the fundies both are equally evil. If impressionable young Christians learn about other religions it will eventually dawn on some of them that those other religions have believers too, who are just as sure of the truth of their faith as Christians are of their own. The really astute students may notice similarities between the various religions. Some may even be tempted to study the history of Christianity. Uncomfortable questions follow.

Incidentally, my (non-Southern) Baptist grandmother was disappointed that the college I attended didn't have comparative relgions as a requirement. "How can we understand the Islamic world if we don't know what they believe?" She's not the most tolerant person in the world but she has a brain in her head. I wish there were more Christians like her to tell the fundies how stupid they're being.

LordMoneyG

Agreed. It's sad that so many are so unsure of their faith that they are too afraid to study another religion, or even read a book. I have a feeling that many of the one page papers defending why the student refuses to read the book are going to be pretty damn weak, and testaments to the many basic flaws of Christianity.

...I'll see if I can't get my hands on a few of them and post them here. That is, if anyone is willing to share, which I seriously doubt they will be.

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]</p>

LordMoneyG

Oh, and just to clarify, I do NOT agree with my Managing Editor's editorial.

I don't agree with a lot of the stuff that goes on where I work. Being the lone agnostic in a newsroom full of southern baptists can be scary sometimes.

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]</p>

simian

I did not mean for this to come across is you making it up. I apologize if it came across that way. I know I have been on several religious mailing lists/discussion groups. It was not unusual for the issues I saw there to be stated incorrectly. I was wondering if that was the case here.

Simian

LordMoneyG

Ah. Duely noted, chief. No problem at all. Unnecessary apology accepted.

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]</p>

Veil of Fire

Apparently, the push to make high school English classes study the Bible as 'literature' doesn't extend to other religious texts being used in a similar fashion.

Typical hypocrisy, which always makes me toy with the idea of making a necklace from Christian testicles