Although Michelle Kann was merely doing her job by submitting her anti-Christian drivel to the Daily Tuesday, her comments raise some serious concerns for those who fear religious discrimination.

In the United States, antagonism toward Christianity is rapidly increasing; Kann serves as a prime example. She didn’t even blink an eye while discriminating against Darrell Scott, simply because he was a Christian. She tried to deceive the public by acting as if her primary beef with Scott was because he was generating money for the foundation he created by continuing the legacy of his deceased daughter, Rachel. However, in an article that she wrote March 30, 2000, Kann cast a positive light on the coming visit of Judy Shepard, who generates money for the foundation she created by continuing the legacy of her deceased son, Matthew.

It is puzzling why Christians are often regarded as intolerant, while the proponents of “tolerance” are so radically intolerant of Christianity and so dogmatic about dogmatism. It is perplexing why artist Andres Serrano’s exhibit of a crucifix in a jar of urine was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, yet to display a homosexual symbol in a jar of urine would be deemed a hate crime.

Why can the City Hall of Jersey City, New Jersey, officially recognize Ramadan and the Hindu New Year, but cannot display a manger scene at Christmas? Why can the city of San Jose erect a $500,000 statue of the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl, while in San Francisco a 103-foot cross was determined to be unconstitutional? Such antagonism toward Christianity is befuddling.

Kann, unless you learn to be a little more tolerant of Christians, the ACLU just may be backing us up one day.

Kent Schmidgall

Junior

Management information systems and finance