Diverse Ideals

I might have suspected Jack Hunter’s August 8 article to somewhat skewer the ideal of diversity. (“Pride in Prejudice”) His very pen-name, “The Southern Avenger,” already seems to misunderstand the topic, as it assumes his conservatism to be in some way naturally southern. Reading one of his articles, you can almost see him struggling to classify the groups in his discussion like a child who scratches his head trying to figure out which blocks fit into which boxes.

It is therefore no surprise that he should fundamentally misunderstand so “progressive” and “liberal” a value as diversity, because it represents, above all, a resistance to generalization. It is founded upon the assumption that people — all people — are far too complex to be understood merely as parts of any one category, and therefore embraces a more direct and personal method for understanding.

That is also why it is inappropriate, as Hunter does, to view diversity as an opposite extreme to religious fanatics — a liberal’s “quasi-religion” as he puts it.

By nature, the ideal of diversity is more discerning. I suspect that many Christians, even conservative Christians, would resent the prejudiced way Hunter sets diversity and their faith on opposite ends of the spectrum, seeing as how many Christians adamantly embrace diversity as a fundamental article of their faith.

Though he is perhaps correct in noting that the most diverse cultures tend to experience the most conflict, I think it is important not to evaluate an ideal based on the imperfection it is meant to treat. Ideals are intended to be directions for tomorrow —visions of the world we would like to one day inhabit. And once you have such a vision, the only thing to do is push forward with it.

I would be interested to hear Hunter’s alternative to the cultivation of a diverse and egalitarian society. I suspect that even he is afraid to admit the implication of his own argument, which is an overwhelmingly bigoted advocacy of the segregation that we, in the South, have struggled so hard to leave behind.

Nick Kimbro


Where’s Your ID

I generally look forward to reading and listening to “The Southern Avenger,” Jack Hunter. Not because I agree with him, but because his reasoning is rational and well thought out, even if wrong. However, he misses the point in his discussion of Intelligent Design. (“Pride in Prejudice,” Aug. 8)

Mr. Hunter asserts that being anti-ID is to be anti-Christian. I disagree. ID advocates themselves assert that it is not religious and wish to teach it in school.

They clearly seek to terminate science, our government, and our very way of life and replace them with what? An earth less than 10,000 years old? The power of prayer to cure all illness? Another inquisition? A president who is the leader of which Sunday TV series?

The latest iteration of the ID movement is “teach the controversy.” The argument seems to be that if science cannot explain something, then there must have been an intelligent designer who is — wink wink — not God.

The courts thus far have determined that ID is simply creationism by another name and have prohibited it in schools. It is my opinion that we must continue to be vigilant and insist that science, as we know it, is taught in our schools and that ID is forbidden in schools.

Frank Butler

North Charleston

Geez Please

To read Will Moredock’s column (“Muffle the Damn Thing: Motorcycles have become a nuisance in Charleston,” Aug. 13), one might think motorcycle gangs were running amuck in downtown Charleston, breaking beer bottles, and poorly constructed seating apparatuses over each others heads, all the while grab-assing all the local women. Granted there are a small minority of motorcyclists who in the sporadic displays of an amateur, throttle their bikes wildly on King Street in desperate attempts for attention. (They’re commonly referred to as “throttle jockeys.”)

Having said that, let’s take a more realistic approach. Most folks on motorcycles are decent motorists who have respect for those around them. They are working class people who spend their hard-earned dollars in our beloved city. To suggest we just start “banning” everything is just ridiculous. Sounds like someone’s got a severe case of the geezers.

Steve Strapec