Something strange and unfamiliar happened this week. I found myself in a position I thought for sure I’d never be. For a brief moment, I agreed with a decision made by John Silber.

You see, Silber recently joined more than 300 college presidents in pledging his support for pro-Israel students. He signed a statement, initiated by former Dartmouth College President James Freedman and circulated by the American Jewish Committee, which calls on colleges to “sustain an intimidation-free campus” and condemns “death threats and threats of violence” against Jewish students and supporters of Israel.

Freedman initiated the campaign after an incident at San Francisco State University last spring where pro-Israeli students were taunted by pro-Palestinian protesters.

Silber joined the presidents of Wellesley College, Amherst University, Bowdoin College, Brandeis University, Clark University, the University of Massachusetts at Boston, and Brown University in pledging support for me and my fellow Jewish students.

Thanks for the support, Dr. Silber, but you seem to have forgotten about some of my friends. In signing this statement, you’ve protected one group of students, while alienating many others, especially those for whom you’ve denied support in the past.

Boston University should maintain a campus where all students feel safe voicing their opinions and beliefs. Open debate is an important part of the college experience, but in pledging support for only one group, BU has stated an inappropriate preference for a certain set of beliefs.

As reported Sunday by the Associated Press, the AJC’s statement has been catching controversy in recent weeks because it only mentions intimidation against Jewish students and supporters of Israel. While hundreds of college presidents have signed the statement, many others, including the presidents of Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Tufts University and Boston College have withheld their support because they feel the statement focuses too narrowly on threats against Jewish students.

Pro-Palestinian students are as prone to threats and intimidation as their pro-Israeli counterparts and should be guaranteed the same rights and protections of all students on campus. Perhaps Silber would sign a similar petition protecting the rights of Arab students if it was presented to him, but his history of refusals to support minority student groups leads me to believe otherwise.

I would not object to Silber’s support of this statement if Boston University had a tradition of voicing support for all students. At most universities, I imagine that the school’s policies ensure for the protection of all individuals. Unfortunately, at Boston University this is not the case.

In recent years BU students and staff have repeatedly asked the administration to amend the university’s non-discrimination policy to include protections for homosexual members of the BU community. The policy currently prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin, religion, sex, age and physical disability, but provides no support in the event that a gay student or staff member were to be discriminated against.

Silber has stated that such an amendment is unnecessary because the Commonwealth of Massachusetts already has a non-discrimination policy that includes sexual orientation. Of course, the state policy also includes all of the other categories (race, color, religion, etc.), but BU apparently felt it was necessary to protect these communities with its own policy. While the state policy may provide sufficient legal support in the event of a discrimination case, the university’s own policy does more than simply provide a basis for lawsuits against the school. The policy welcomes people from all backgrounds and beliefs to study, work and thrive in the BU community. By refusing to include sexual orientation in this statement, the administration effectively sends a message to homosexuals that they are not welcome at Boston University.

So why, as the university continues to turn a cold shoulder toward homosexuals, is it reaching out to protect Jews and supporters of Israel?

As a heterosexual Jewish student, I could be quite content to sit back, assured that my rights here at BU are protected. But I didn’t come to this university looking to observe only one set of beliefs and I’m not content to sit idly by while the rights of other student groups are ignored.

Homosexuals, Arabs, Muslims and even Yankees fans deserve the same protections that are guaranteed to Jews and all other members of the BU community. Silber and the administration have an obligation to protect the rights of all students, but by voicing support for certain groups while ignoring others, they imply that some members of the BU community deserve more protection than others.

If the university administration feels that Massachusetts’ non-discrimination policy provides sufficient protection for all members of Boston University then they should abandon their own policy and refrain from endorsing efforts to support specific causes and groups. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with supporting Jewish students, I’m embarrassed to be a part of a university that supports my beliefs while rejecting the views of others.

Silber speaks on behalf of the entire university, and when he signs his name to a petition it impacts the way each and every one of us is perceived. It’s important, therefore, that he makes decisions which support an environment in which everyone’s beliefs can be heard.

Thank you for protecting my rights, Dr. Silber. Now please do the same for everyone else at BU.