Dean Early's column pertaining to the front-page photo on the January 22 issue of the Alligator is rife with contradiction, both in theology and logic.
The opinion presented is that the Alligator prints hateful journalism about Christianity that specifically villainizes the religion and those who practice it. He goes on to say that he tries to "avoid the Alligator as much as possible." How can one form an accurate opinion of the content of a periodical when that person does not even read it?
Early is later quoted saying that J.K. has the "freedom to preach about the ills and abomination and immorality of homosexual behavior." He is correct in that J.K. has the right to speak his mind, but this is a two-way street. Scott Paterson is entitled to the same rights as J.K., including the right to express himself, which is exactly what he did. If Early and the throng of angered citizens he seems to think are behind him want an apology from Paterson, are we not entitled to one from J.K. and Early for expressing their opinions? Do I now have to apologize for even writing this?
I also must have missed the memo circulating around campus about the conspiracy to overthrow the Christians, because I have not seen or heard anything about this sinister scheme.
Apparently Early thinks UF professors view Christians as "mindless robots that can't think for themselves." He goes on to speak for them, claiming they believe "the Bible is inaccurate, unreliable, bigoted, hate-filled and outdated."
As far as I have been able to comprehend, his entire argument is littered with inaccurate information, bigoted, close-minded thought and hate-filled rhetoric.
The Bible is dragged into his fallacious article numerous times, as a bulwark to hide behind and avoid the piercing gaze of truth. I was under the impression we were supposed to love our fellow man, not condemn them or threaten them with violence. Early seems to be of the opinion that if someone disagrees with his viewpoint, violence and diatribes about the superiority of Christian thought are the answer.
Does he really believe Tim Tebow, whom he seems to hold in high regard, would resort to such tactics? How dare he try to lump an outstanding person like Tebow in with himself.
For someone who claims to have strong religious fiber, the anger and hate which permeate throughout Early's column are staggering. He could easily turn the other cheek as Christianity teaches if he truly believed in his faith. Why is it that when someone makes incredulous claims we are able to shrug them off and even laugh about them, but when there is at least a grain of truth, we become angered and defensive?
Perhaps we should be the ones consoling this man, for it seems he is the one who has lost his way, not from faith, but reality.
