Letters to the editor

Last week's silence signals improvement

Regarding 'Closeted conservatism' (Monday, Oct. 20, 2003):

Criticism of the LGBT community on campus takes many forms, and is NOT merely expressed through submissions to the Prince. When Pride Alliance posters are torn down and vandalized, when students remain closeted during their four years here because of an unwelcoming campus climate, and when derogatory comments are aimed at those who do find the courage to openly express their true selves, the 'Prince' should take a responsible and respectful look at the reality of the LGBT experience at Princeton. And it certainly should not shame the campus for its failure to criticize. Wow! An entire week went by without a single rant about the "extremist agenda" of the LGBT community! What is WRONG with our campus? Maybe something is actually right for a change. Katie Brennan Ally Affairs Chair, Pride Alliance

Disagreement is often labeled 'intolerance'

Regarding 'Closeted conservatism' (Monday, Oct. 20, 2003):

The reason for the silence regarding homosexuality is the enforced dogma of moral dalliance and political correctness among the liberal American society and on this campus.

Since the origins of civilization, men have enforced standards of behavior on each other; the truth of these moral norms has never been empirically verifiable; nevertheless, our moral sense has allowed our society to advance to its present height and greatness and, thus, should not be ignored.

And, indeed, I wager that polyamory (like polygamy) offends the moral sense of the vast majority of people in this world and on this campus; I also wager that homosexuality offends the moral sense of some people. But, as you reported in your pages some days ago, there is a movement on this (and most every) campus for "respect" for various behaviors and attitudes. But in our modern liberal society, "respect" often means an absence of criticism and blind acceptance and amorality, which are, in reality, quite malicious forms of disrespect, for they allows the perversion of beliefs to horrid extremes, beliefs unchecked by reason and criticism.

This case presents precisely the magnificent and mortal danger of the movements for universal acceptance of everything and everyone: Great is the fear among those who think to criticize the behaviors of a protected class — great is the fear that criticism of any sort will be construed as forbidden intolerance. Think for a moment — how many worse insults are there in our modern society than 'homophobe'? Also consider how extensive its domain is. It is thus that the movements for "respect" stifle debate, free inquiry, and, ultimately, truth itself. Andrew Moroz