Maddie Trier straight-up accuses the residents of Hamtramck of being anti-Muslim racists in terms of their motivation for voting on the noise ordinance that regulates the calls to prayer from the local Al-Islah Mosque ("Controversy over call to prayer in Hamtramck showcases intolerance" SN 7/20).

Certainly we can admit to the ignorance of extremist zealots frightened that the call will destroy their faith. Yet I highly doubt that the majority of non-Muslim residents are genuinely and singularly motivated to alienate the Mosque.

Is Trier's knee-jerk column condemning Hamtramck stemming from a deep-seeded hatred of the non-Muslim Polish residents? I say no, because I believe that people should take the time to examine all angles of the story as opposed to laying blanket accusations upon a group of diverse people.

The Muslim call to worship is a beautiful practice that takes place five times a day.

This includes a time we like to call sunrise. This was the issue that sparked the original amendment regulating sounds from religious institutions by requesting that the Mosque not broadcast the earliest and latest prayers. This is the issue to which good majority of residents are agreeing. Indeed, even Al-Islah has whole-heartedly adhered to the council's request. Radicals on both sides of the issue have made the debate much more volatile than reality would show and these minority opinions seem to buzz around the media like flies.

Because of this, it is unfair to characterize all the non-Muslim residents of Hamtramck as being as stupid as your classmate. I mean, you don't think the rest of your class is stupid because of the actions of that one student do you?

Matt Gwynn
history and theater senior