Synapse: Current Issue

The anonymous opinion article in support of Proposition 8 that Synapse published in our last issue has generated a tremendous amount of controversy. Many found the article misguided and painful to read. Some found the decision of the author to remain anonymous cowardly. Still others were angry that such a thing was published at all.

I too was disheartened by this opinion piece. As an opponent of Proposition 8, I was saddened on November 5th when the polling results were finally announced, and this piece was indeed a reflection of the cause of that sadness. But I felt a wholly other disappointment in the combative language the author used to describe his or her alienation from the community here at UCSF. He or she took the stance that “traditional values” are scorned at our university, and those who espouse such values are pushed apart from our community, left to fend for themselves while “liberals” write policy and dictate terms. He or she urged “tolerance” in a perverse way; by remaining separate – “letting the opposite side live in peace” – somehow the goal of communion could be established to this anonymous writer.

It is indeed easier to let the other side be. We are, on the whole, a liberal population here at UCSF. I have had professors in the weeks before the election proclaim their trust that Obama will rescue the States from the misdirection of Bush. I have had professors speak of McCain in disdain or even disgust. I have seen my peers’ and educators’ tears the day after the election, when the majority of Californian voters denied them the ability to marry.

It is far too easy for the liberal community we have established to get too comfortable. Many of us agree on core principles. We believe in health care for all, peace at all costs, and the recognition of the love of a man for a man or a woman for a woman. But, at least in California, there are many, many people who do not share some or all of these values. It is easy to scorn these people, push them aside, decry them as bigots. It is comfortable. But it changes nothing; the “traditional” people in the minority here at UCSF are not challenged – instead they are pushed even further to the fringe of the society we have created. It instead serves to strengthen the very ideal the anonymous writer so yearns for: that, in lieu of real community and conversation, we remain in our separate camps, hurling insults at each other and refraining from crossing that line in the sand that slowly becomes a crevice impossible to traverse.

We are intellectuals, each of us. By virtue of the sheer enormity of our education, we have been exposed to ideas from different cultures, people with vastly different belief systems and empires of old. It is now up to us to put this education to use. We must, indeed, recognize the multifaceted community we have at UCSF. We must protect the rights of the minority – and realize that at times the minority is indeed the majority anywhere else in the country. And we must engage in dialogue with those whose ideas are so terribly different from our own.

The writer of the anonymous opinion piece referenced a community forum that was called in response to a provocative Christian speaker with controversial views on homosexuality. The author claimed that the forum was called to scapegoat traditionalists. But indeed it was just the opposite. If the author had attended, he or she would have seen something truly astounding. There were heated arguments back and forth between those who had invited the speaker and those who were outraged at that decision. But as the meeting went on, everyone who wanted to say something did. Nuanced opinions surfaced on either side. Anger gave way to a far more important question – how do we mend a divided community? Of the many suggestions that were outlined, an LGBT leader delivered an incredible one: rather than censor a Christian speaker who does not embrace homosexuality, invite him to speak with a gay Christian speaker. Invite also the entire UCSF community. Instead of censoring thought, populate our marketplace of ideas with a plethora of thought.

The brilliance of this suggestion is that it builds a bridge over that deepening crevice we’ve allowed to burrow deep into UCSF. It is this – community building, open discussion, dialogue – that will change minds and hearts. I don’t know all the reasons why President-elect Obama chose Rick Warren as his inauguration speaker, but I’m sure that bridge building is part of it. We embark on a historic presidential term in a tumultuous time in America with a spirit of hope – let us use that hope to speak to those with whom we would otherwise never speak, find at least some common ground and challenge each other while forging a strong new community.

Arul Thangavel is a second-year medical student.

Synapse is part of the Office of Student Life and Student Academic Affairs.
The University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143. Copyright 2008, The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.