n I agree with Stephanie Baldwin’s characterization (“Tired of ‘ignorant tirades,'” Jan. 24, p. 7) of Andrew Steiner’s perspective (“My God, what in Lord’s name was I thinking?” Jan. 23, p. 7) as being devoted to the “denigration of a religion.”

However, I don’t much like the pious clucking that followed Steiner’s rant as readers leapt to the defense of Catholicism under attack.

Those writers were quick to point out Steiner’s missteps – easy to do, there were many – but had no constructive advice as to how we should structure our discussion of religion. Glaringly, they made no allowance for the possibility that we can talk about such things without being either inflammatory or dogmatic.

Let us imagine that our collective campus enterprise of knowledge-gathering is intended to prepare us to be productive and humane civic participants. With this goal in mind, each of us should choose to be conversationally intolerant of incendiary needle men.

Having excluded the demagogues and the dogmatists, does all conversation end? Are we unable to talk about the nature, worth and rightness of religion if we silence all the eager axe-grinders, sneering apostates and derisive defenders of the faith?

I should hope not. Sociological, moral, economic and anthropological investigations of religion should be applauded and encouraged by the same students writing in to decry Steiner’s abuse of his pen.

On that point, where was his editor? It is possible, I think, to preserve the free expression of opinion and at the same time intervene somehow before bad writing and sloppy thought make it to the page. The Daily Free Press must enforce its standards and prove its merit.

Let us not recoil from the academic study of religion; let it not be kept safe from inquiry like a relic in a crystal case. There are few better opportunities to demonstrate the virtue of a university education than when we are called upon to reject prejudicial discourse in favor of rigorous debate.

Zachary Bos

Administrative Coordinator,

College of Arts and Sciences CoreCurriculum

The author is making this submission as a private citizen and member of the campus community.