Moral conclusions allowed

I don’t expect to change the mind of Mike Volmer and his kin, but I do want to comment on a statement in his letter of Oct. 26. He said, “Statements such as ‘Homosexuality is Immoral’ . . . further highlight the very real prejudice and homophobia which live on our campus.”

Isn’t it barely possible that statements such as “Homosexuality is Immoral” stem from the belief that homosexuality is immoral?

While this might be, as Volmer calls it, an “unauthorized” response to so-called “Coming Out Day,” it need not be the result of prejudice or fear. It could just be a moral conclusion. Can only Volmer and his friends express their moral conclusions, or should the rest of us be allowed to join in as well?

You really can’t “encourage rational discussion and education” if your approach is trying to make some moral conclusions – the ones you don’t like – inadmissible in the debate. That, in fact, is a very effective way to “stop or silence” both discussion and further education.

All of this makes me wonder: who really are the narrow-minded people in this discussion?

Speaking only for myself here, I am

Harold Orndorff

Campus Minister

Christian Student Fellowship at NKU