I wrote a letter to this newspaper last Monday in hopes of getting it published. The letter was a series of questions for both Silber and his critics. I ask now that you reconsider publishing this letter. I am by no means on an ego trip. This is not the first time a letter of mine had been rejected and I was not surprised to have this one rejected. I simply feel that the letter gives a very different way of approaching the current Silber situation. I also feel that it would force the Chancellor to talk directly to the student body, which he would most likely do via the Daly Free Press. I hope you reconsider the letter for publication. I would also like to ask that if you do publish the letter would you please point out that the letter was sent last Monday so that it is not seen as a direct response to the law school petition or Silber’s response. I have attached the original letter to the bottom of this one. Thank you.
Tim Hartnett CAS 03
I would like to address both Chancellor Silber and his critics. Please note that I intend all questions for the critics to be rhetorical but not those for Chancellor Silber.
Chancellor Silber, what was the basis for your decision to close the BU Academy’s GSA? Was it based on you personal opinion of homosexuality? Was it based on specific actions taken by this specific GSA? If so, what specific actions led you to believe that this GSA needed to be eliminated? How did you learn of such action? Where their complaints by individuals within the Academy?
Critics, why is it that you have assumed the answers to all these questions? While I agree that your assumptions are logically based on Silber’s passed actions, they are nonetheless assumptions. Just because Silber has not given specific reasons does not mean that they do not exist?
Chancellor Silber, why have you yet to address these questions seeing as your reputation is under attack? By not answering these obvious questions you continue to allow students, alumni, faculty and others to assume that you based you decision to close the GSA solely on your personal convictions. Chancellor Silber, why did you choose bring up your controversial opinion on the topic of homosexuality during your seminar last week at UNI, an action which you did or should have known would only lead to more criticism.
Critics, why have you failed to question Silber’s actions specifically? Why have you assumed that the BU Academy’s GSA is the same as every GSA? Why did you assume that it was impossible for a group of high school students to cross the line on what is a proper? Assuming that teenagers can never act improperly when dealing with the topic of homosexuality is just as illogical as assuming that they will always act improperly? Silber does not, or should not, have the power to end programs because he disagrees or dislikes them. He must show that they have violated some sort of established rules. Why is it that you have assumed the BU Academy’s GSA was completely innocent? Why have you not asked for the specific reasons for which Silber felt it was necessary to eliminate this GSA? Silber’s feelings towards homosexuality are only relevant if he used his position as chancellor to promote his personal ideology. Chancellor Silber, You have now been directly asked several important questions. You have also been reminded that your failure to address these questions has led to many assumptions. But now, unlike before, you are being asked to answer your critics directly. If you fail to do so, you leave no option except further assumptions. If you are unable to communicate with the students, alumni, and faculty of this university, then please add my name to the list of those calling for your resignation. Tim Hartnett CAS 03