Burka anyone?

By Harry Young

Recently, an article written by Dinesh D’Souza was published on line in the Christian Science Monitor (Commentary > Opinion from the January 25, 2007 edition). The title of the article, “War on terror's other front: cleaning up US pop culture”, claimed that the problem the US is having with the Muslim world is based on “distorted projections of US policy and culture across the globe”.

His solution to counteracting the “distorted projections” is as follows:

“In the United Nations, for example, America should work with Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and others to block the efforts of leftist groups around the world who promote radical feminism, homosexuality, prostitution, and pornography as "rights" under international law. Instead, the US should align itself with social decency and traditional family values.”

This approach, he suggested, would assure the Muslim world that we on their side and not a threat to them in any way. With respect, his position is froth with “distorted projections’ itself and in no way represents reality.

First, the US foreign policy does not promote a “liberal agenda” by any means. On the contrary, the policy is decisively conservative on any number of issues including drugs, prostitution, homosexuality, abortion, condom use, and pornography. For example, in the fight against HIV/AIDS, funding for prevention efforts is tied an abstinence only messages and rejection of condom use. This lead to Brazil (an overwhelmingly Catholic nation) stating publicly that if funding was constricted it would not accept any.

On those social issues raised, domestically the US is far more conservative then Europe generally. In Holland, marijuana use is legal. In ultra Catholic Spain, same sex unions are recognized. Prostitution is legal in Germany (among others). One issue we are more “liberal” with is the availability of fire arms with the irony being that crimes involving fire arms are pervasive in US, but rare in Europe. If these were truly the issues causing the friction, then Europe would be the “Great Satan”. The difference between Europe and the US is that they do not lead invasions of other nations (sure Prime Minister Tony Blair joined President Bush in this Iraq quagmire and look what that has done for his career, reputation and legacy) under false pretencies. Mr. D’Souza stated,

“A major reason why some Muslims focus their anger on the United States is because it is American culture – not Swedish culture or French culture – that is finding its way into every nook and cranny of Islamic society”.

Maybe that is true because they refrain from disrespecting the leadership, people, culture of others and not invading countries under false pretenses. When was the last time you heard a Sweedish or French leader call another leader "evil"?

Mr. D’Souza referred to “traditional family’ values as if this is a constant or unchanging concept. I challenge him to provide a clear and relevant definition of what this means. Old Testament family values included men having multiple wives. Up until the 1950’s, teen girls (and I mean 13, 14, 15 year olds) routinely married in the US. Today, more than half of US households are lead by women ALONE. Should we marginalize them because they are not married?



The strength of the US is that we are constantly evaluating and redefining our rights and responsibilities. This internal dialogue has many economic, social and cultural benefits and keeps the nation dynamic. This what is admired and should be exported. It lead, for example, to the expansion of voting rights to all white men (not just the landed white male gentry as it was in 1776), then all white women (universal adult suffrage, though restricted to whites only), and then to all people of color (part of the civil rights movement). It has promoted workers rights, minority rights, women rights, animal rights, and redefined the responsibilities of government (at all levels), individuals, cooperation, centers of education, the military, civic organizations, to name a few. Mr. D’Sousa reference to what is “traditional” is a mirage wrapped in a façade. His position (and it had its advocates then) applied in 1776 would have stifled all the advances outlined herein. Just imagine, no Oprah!

I suggest Mr. D’Souza try life in a burka.