Is Bloomington diverse after all?

Recently, Chaz Bono delivered a lecture at IU about his transition from woman to man. A question-and-answer  session followed.

A young, Christian gentleman was asked to leave during the question and answer after challenging Bono’s transition, citing the Bible and displeasing the apparently liberal audience with his conservative views.

The crowd was against him the second the word “Bible” escaped him.
An audible, disgruntled reaction rippled across the room.

The young man’s views were evidently unpopular with the supportive audience, but his religious approach should not have earned him the spiteful feedback he received.

In response to the sweeping negativity, he was quick to point out that he thought Bloomington promoted a diverse campus, accepting of multiple perspectives and cultures.

He’s right. What’s up with that, Bloomington?

Diverse does not mean overwhelmingly liberal. It suggests the existence of both liberals and conservatives in the same setting.

The setting needs to be more civil on both ends.

Both religious and anti-religious opinions can stir discomfort and outrage in discussion settings such as the Chaz Bono lecture. It’s the nature of the thing.

But both opinions, if not asserted discourteously, should be respected.

The young man with the Bible verse was not discourteous. After being brutally rebuffed, he thanked Bono for coming as he departed.

The people that followed him in the question-and- answer admired Bono and the audience for the way in which “that Bible guy” was handled.

“That Bible guy” was not “handled” well.

He, a seemingly rare cell of conservatism in Bloomington’s liberal sea, was silenced and prevented from sharing his viewpoint in an accepting environment.

The audience cheered as Bono asserted himself as “an ultimate expression of diversity” but discouraged diversity by rallying against the minority in the room.

If Bloomington is to be celebrated and revered for its diversity, its tolerance and acceptance of all groups, then we need to ease up on the “us versus them” mentality that has been sneaking its way into lectures like this.

If a dialogue is going to be opened between “us” and “them,” both parties need to be adequately represented and respected.

After “that Bible guy” was escorted from the auditorium, a rabbi approached the microphone and thanked Bono for furthering his understanding about this
community.

He admitted that his son was gay and that is was certainly possible to accept and embrace his son despite the rabbi’s religious beliefs.

That is the ultimate expression of diversity.

That is the kind of acceptance worth promoting in a town sincerely interested in fostering a diverse community.

­— ambhendr@indiana.edu