Open Letter

I wasn't planning on writing on my blog today, but something happened: I saw a tweet that got me started. This is the tweet:

I found it sad that someone who calls himself a "reader" can't tell the difference between these two events. To anyone reading my post, claiming to be a "reader" and struggling with recognizing the differences between these two events, like the author of the tweet, may I suggest reading How to Read a Book by Mortimer J. Adler?

The rest of this post is an open letter to the author of this tweet, who later in his thread insults people whose views don't agree with his:

A guy's innocent joke about answering a question upset you so much you blocked him, but another can't feel rage when their religion is “not so innocently” attacked? What happened to the freedom of expression you were defending with your tweet?

Feel free to block me, or better yet call me the names a “real man” calls a woman when she points out his nonsense.

What happened to the professor is a tragedy. It's sick. It should have never happened. Provoking people by ridiculing their belief system isn't “teaching,” though. If it is, please feel free to answer the following questions: What exactly did he teach? Is every individual's opinion on things now considered history?

There is a reason politics and religion are never to be discussed in a classroom. History, and religion, can be taught with respect. Even a professor's personal opinion can be expressed without disrespect.

I've taught for over thirty years. My students have asked me so many times about my religious beliefs in general. They've also asked me specifically if I was a Buddhist, a Muslim, a Christian, or if I even believed in God. I've always answered truthfully and respectfully.

My students are well familiar with my sense of humor, and there are jokes to be made about every single religion, cult, and belief. But just because I have a “right” to express myself doesn't mean I should use it in such a negative way.

And what happened to the rights of the person who was recently jailed for saying that the professor “deserved” what he got? Did that person not have said freedom of expression?

It's not easy to be fair, is it? When people view things from the perspective that only serves them, they will think, say, and do stupid things -- yes, “stupid” as in the title of your book.

Professors and teachers have power in a classroom, and with power comes responsibility. There is so much that can be taught in a classroom. It's unfortunate that some choose their freedom of expression and their power to divide people in one way or another.

Did that particular professor deserve what happened to him? Absolutely not! Should the murderer be punished? Absolutely! But making this about Muslims is just as ignorant as killing someone for making fun of a religion. Doing just that serves a group of people right now, though, and there are always sheep that follow, so...

About the question initially tweeted... 

How come?

Because the professor was killed by a citizen and Floyd was killed by someone who is supposed to “protect” and “serve.” And even though “to protect and to serve” is used as a phrase without a subject or object, its implied or inferred object definitely isn't the police's or deputies' “own asses” but “the people.”

Everything that happened after the murder of Floyd happened because people finally decided to do something about the corruption of police and sheriff deputies.

In January 2016, a bunch of corrupt sheriff deputies attacked me in my own place of residence, planted fabricated evidence, and accused me of a crime I hadn't committed. Why? Because I'd spoken up when I'd witnessed their corruption and their criminal activity months before. They used an opportunity to publicly discredit me to protect their own asses. I was arrested... and released a few days later because the handwriting in the planted correspondence was analyzed, and, big surprise, it didn't match mine.

At the time, no one wanted to “get involved”... Why?

Those who knew me personally knew I would never have done what they accused me of, but they were afraid to do anything about it because those deputies were “dangerous” and they were right, and I never blamed them. Those who didn't know me “chose” to believe the lies they heard and read because it went in the same direction as their beliefs. It provided the right justification for their need to be right about their unfounded fears and beliefs. And then there were those who knew me and were secretly happy because it satisfied some of their own personal insecurities: inferiority complex, jealousy, etc.

The same people who didn't “get involved” then are now fighting for the values they now think are being attacked. Are they hypocrites? Maybe... From my perspective? Probably. That group of criminals who attacked me in my home and threatened to kill my three dogs if I took action against them and tried to eliminate me afterwards (by the way, it's called attempted murder in legal terms) got away with their crimes... but, at least, people are doing something about the existing corruption now... years later, in another state.

People simply woke up (FINALLY!) and decided something needed to be done about this corruption. The fact that people all over the world stood with this is because everyone understands how corruption works, meaning the problem is global.

You mentioned someone's lack of empathy in your tweet thread. Let's discuss that for a minute... because you're absolutely right: Empathy is a significant aspect of humanity. Have you watched the video of the murder committed by the a-holes in uniform? And can you honestly say you found empathy in that professor's caricature?

That professor is not forgotten. It's just that deep down most people understand empathy, and they can see where it's lacking. The person who committed that crime was a murderer and is being punished for his crime. Also, everyone knows how they might react when provoked. Some people destroy other people verbally; some do it physically. Both actions are wrong and should be considered crimes.

This global movement is about righting a wrong that has been going on forever. The catalyst may have been a criminal. Nobody's claiming Floyd was a saint. The focus is not on Floyd. It's on the people wearing a uniform; it's about legalized murder; it's about the ongoing murders without consequences.

To (you and) the idiots who go around destroying and murdering people who don't agree with their views, religions, and ideologies, whether they are individuals or governments, I say:

If you haven't yet understood that we are all connected, you haven't understood your own religion. At the very least, we are all connected by one golden rule, the one anyone with half a brain should have gotten by now, the one all religions have in common, the one that tells you not to do to anyone what you don't want done to you.

And now that I've upset a bunch of people, I'll go do what I was planning to do with my day: continue my proofreading assignment. Thank you for reading.