Letters

Sunday, July 13, 2003
    • Should Christians Convert Muslims?

    "What ever happened to embracing diversity? Intolerance, not love of God, is what drives Christian missionaries to convert Muslims."
    VIVIAN MYERS-MAROWITZ
    Concord, Mass.

    I appreciate your effort to paint a fair picture of Christian missionary activities in the Muslim world [RELIGION, June 30]. Christian groups have been at the forefront of providing humanitarian aid and health care to poor Muslims. Those who object to the missionaries ought to ask the Muslims who have been aided, spiritually or otherwise, to comment on the effect Christian missionaries have had on their lives. Freedom of religion does not exist in many nations within the Muslim world. Something is truly amiss when the U.S. is accused of religious imperialism while other countries export tyrannical Islam.
    JUSTIN M. STEVENS
    Palatine, Ill.


    LATEST COVER STORY
    Mind & Body Happiness
    Jan. 17, 2004
     

    SPECIAL REPORTS
     Coolest Video Games 2004
     Coolest Inventions
     Wireless Society
     Cool Tech 2004

    PHOTOS AND GRAPHICS
     At The Epicenter
     Paths to Pleasure
     Quotes of the Week
     This Week's Gadget
     Cartoons of the Week

    MORE STORIES
    Advisor: Rove Warrior
    The Bushes: Family Dynasty
    Klein: Benneton Ad Presidency

    CNN.com: Latest News

    What substantially sets Islam apart from Christianity is that Muslims do not accept the divinity of Jesus. That aside, Islam and Christianity are more similar than they are different. The push to convert millions of Muslims is distressing to me as a Muslim. Why can't people live together without worrying about one another's religious preferences?
    HESHAM A. HASSABALLA
    Glendale Heights, Ill.

    As Christians, we are told to bear witness to our religious convictions so that others may experience the forgiveness and salvation of Jesus Christ. If people die without a personal relationship with Jesus, they will spend eternity in hell. I believe saving someone from eternal damnation is worth the risk and inconvenience that missionaries face in the Middle East.
    DARREN THIELGES
    LaMoure, N.D.

    If Islamic or Hindu missionaries came to the U.S. with the intention of converting impoverished Christians, the reaction of Americans would be similar to that of people in Islamic and Hindu countries. Missionaries who aim to convert Muslims only provide more reasons to dislike America. The proselytizers add fuel to the idea that America is against Islam or any religion other than Christianity. If the U.S. wants to end terrorism, it must make friends, not enemies. Not only does the attempt to convert weaken America's relations with other countries, but it is wrong. Conversion ends diversity, something beautiful that ought to be embraced.
    CHARU GUPTA
    Naperville, Ill.

    Let Muslims, Christians or any other religionists freely preach their doctrine, and let each person make a free choice. Isn't the open debate of ideas a foundation of democracy?
    BRET ROLAN
    Mesopotamia, Ohio

    So-called Christians who seek to convert Muslims are only promoting the idea of a superior faith. I cannot change the mind of those who are determined to proselytize and lecture. I can only pray that the recipients of this condescending treatment do not base their opinion of all Christians on this misguided minority.
    JULIA BURKE
    Clarence, N.Y.

    There is no need to fear or purge Islam. Rather, we should recognize and separate the extreme elements found in each faith. If Christians can reject Ku Klux Klan ideology as a usurpation of biblical teaching, why can't Muslims similarly reject al-Qaeda and its usurpation of the teachings of the Koran? The problem has never been faith. It has always been the interpretation and application of that faith.
    MRIDUL RAHMAN
    Austin, Texas

    The Chief Justice's Legacy

    I was interested in the article on U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist and his court's effect on America's freedoms, which in my view has been detrimental [NATION, June 30]. There's no doubt that Rehnquist will be remembered alongside another, similar Chief Justice — Roger Taney — whose contributions to U.S. civil liberties include the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision, which held that slaves and even the free descendants of slaves were not citizens and therefore could not sue in federal courts. Rehnquist fancies himself a champion of states' rights and judicial federalism, yet after the 2000 election he pulled together a bare majority of Justices who in a 54 ruling usurped Florida's voting laws and handed the presidency to George W. Bush. The doctrine of states' rights apparently ends where Rehnquist's personal political philosophy begins.
    SEAN ARMAGH
    Columbus, Ohio

    Supreme Court Justices are not the open-minded men and women seeking the truth we expect them to be. They are opinionated people who have the power to change society, for better or for worse, by interpreting laws to suit their preconceived notions. That the Justices are eloquent and can refer to more than 200 years of opinions to support their preconceptions is the only argumentative advantage the Justices have over beer-drinking middle Americans who likewise don't change their mind easily. The Rehnquist court makes me yearn for an activist government willing to amend and tighten the Constitution, more clearly spelling out the right to privacy and other crucial issues.
    TIMOTHY LEE DAVIS
    Columbus, Ohio

    2. Previous Page
    3. 1
    4. 2