I read The State News everyday, and I've been struck by the reactions to the columns by John Bice. It seems that the majority of the opinions in opposition of Bice's point of view (and I don't pretend to speak for either party) believe that any criticism of Christianity, Judaism, Islam or other religions, is tantamount to belief in the illegitimacy of that faith in the public forum of ideas.

A case in point would be the letter by Jessica Byrom, "Attacks on Christians untrue, blasphemous" (SN 4/24).

As a Catholic who is a weekly attendant at Mass, I believe there is a place for individuals in the public square who are motivated by their faith. However, Byrom states that those who are Christian (and that's a broad term) have an obligation to share their faith by "pushing their faith-based ideas onto others."

She forgets that spiritual journeys are as distinct and individual as the human beings who take them. Therefore, it is difficult to stand silent as Christianity (or any other religion or faith) is used in the public square as fact by certain individuals or groups.

For example, it is virtually impossible for a Republican to be a nominee for president unless they agree with the spiritual views of people such as James Dobson or Rick Warren, two individuals who I believe have Christian beliefs that are exclusionary of individuals who do not fit into their mindset.

Also, Christians are certainly not the only group that can be exclusionary — recall the case of the Afghan man Abdul Rahman who was almost executed by his government last month for professing Christian beliefs.

Byrom then states that Bice is reflective of a liberal bias that uses profane treatment of Christianity. However, I think that standing up to a certain group or individual's misuse of faith to advance its own agenda (whether it is Warren and Dobson, the mullahs of Iran or Tom Cruise spouting off some of his nonsense under the guise of Scientology) is among the most conservative of values.

Edward Dougherty
1989 graduate