Dear Editor,
I was thoroughly disturbed by the column, "Religious roots run deep," printed Nov. 7.ÿThe entire premise, that America is solely a Christian nation, is elitist and bigoted. When Haun speaks of "our commonly shared values" or "our faith", it is obvious that he speaks about Christians and no one else, despite the author's reluctance in plainly saying so. ÿThe author never speaks of what our "commonly shared values" are. Perhaps that is with merit, because an attempt to include people of other faiths in his article would most likely prove fruitless and disingenuous.
The first sentence, "America was founded on the Jesuit Christian faith," is not backed up by any support. Jamestown's European settlers were not very religious and most of the other early European settlers were Puritans. The author leaves his reader guessing what he meant by his opening sentence, and at his own detriment.
What does Haun mean by, "Too much time is spent 'questioning theanswers' rather than understanding the answers?" ÿWhat answers is Haun talking about and since when is America about blindly following "answers?"ÿIt seems to me that questioning authority is a civic responsibility and a very American act. This nation was created because our founding fathers questioned authority when they revolted against the British crown.
Haun says that "the America we live in has been disillusioned by revisionist history, but it's faith and Christian heritage are incontrovertible," which completely disregards the other side of his "argument," further alienating his readers.
Content aside, it was the poor quality of the writing that really made me embarrassed that this column was published in a newspaper that represents American University.ÿHaun continually uses quotes without attribution, as if all of his readers should know the quotes' origin. The examples of this lazy, careless journalism are too numerous to name and undermine any validity that these quotes might give to his argument.
Haun claims that "God is mentioned in all documents leading up to our Constitution," but never says what these documents are or what they say about God. He then follows by speaking about Connecticut, and seemingly quotes the entire state of Connecticut. He also claims that, "we see God everywhere in our society." Yet he only gives two minute examples, currency and the use of the Ten Commandments on the Supreme Court building, which is pretty far from everywhere.
Haun is unnecessarily verbose in the article as well, such as when he says, "This was the explicit intent of our founding fathers, what they wanted to prevent was a governmental authority trying to remove the values of our founding out of the public arena." In addition, the quote that precedes this says more about the founding fathers' belief in self-government than their belief in God.
As a student at AU, it saddens me that writing of such low quality is published in The Eagle.
Rachel Harlich SPA, 2009
