Tuesday, March 27, 2007

The Trouble with Dr. Mike Adams

One of the things that I do occasionally is to stroll by the conservative website of townhall.com. Made up of many articles by the countries leading conservative thinkers and radio personalities, it is a bastion of pragmatism. One of the writers I follow is a satirist named Mike Adams, who is a professor of criminal law at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington. Adams (and I hope he will forgive me for referring to him by using his last name) discusses topics that would often get overlooked by mainstream media, thus my attraction to his writings. He often points out hypocrisy on predominantly liberal college campuses, in politics and society, and is extremely intelligent.

He has an ongoing struggle with the campus administration, whose hand he often bites, with scathing wit, to put it mildly. Here is a link to his archives: http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MikeSAdams .

As I was reading his latest column today, something troubled me in the back of my mind. It was like an itch I could not scratch. So I began pondering, much as Winnie the Pooh is want to do. I pondered and pondered. (Winnie the Pooh is a bit thinner than I, so I take longer to figure things out.) To summarize, the column was about Adams’ employer making an official statement about Adams’ writings, and his counter claims. The university basically stated that Dr. Adams writings were deplorable and did not express the official view of the university. One would think that given the number of times Adams has lampooned his employer, this statement was to be expected, liberal enclave or not.

Adams was having none of it, though, and picked up the phone to take up his argument with the administration. He was surprised when the person he was speaking with questioned his Christianity. (Perhaps it would have been better phrased, “I question the Christianity of your writings.”) Adams asked the administrator to give him an example, and she could not.

Here is where I step in. Dr. Adams, your writings are not reflective of a walk in Christ for several reasons. The primary one is this: you are always right. You are never, ever wrong. Ever! Pride is a sin. Humility is a virtue. Even Neal Boortz, as annoying as he is, will admit to sometimes being wrong and has even apologized (not satirically) on occasion. Try examining yourself with that rapier wit of yours, and making the results public. Use the words you have used against others on yourself. The results would not be pretty, I would think. “In as much as you have done it to the least of these, you have done it unto me.” I am as guilty of this as you are, Dr. Adams, for I have criticized Michael Vick in a very unfavorable light, in a public forum (my blog). Does he deserve criticism? Yes, but not the way I wrote it, at least some of the things I wrote.

In retrospect, Dr. Adam’s writings remind me somewhat of the young, hurt, angry intellectual who has been let loose to write about the schoolyard bully, or anyone else he happens to disagree with. He simply does not stop. He does not know where to draw the line and say, enough is enough. The put downs, the accusations, the thinly-veiled cutting remarks are not what I would consider to be Christian writing.

Adams’ article continues by stating that the university has complained to him about the time it has to spend answering complaints about his free speech rights. (I am guessing this has to do with what he says in his columns.) Dr. Adams, you would be correct to say that freedom of speech for liberals on many college campuses today is protected, while freedom of speech for conservatives is not. You would be incorrect to say that you are protected by the consequences of your free speech rights; namely, an angry employer.

PS. After searching for other relevant information on the web, I found that CollegeJay expressed my views much better than I. Here is the link to his article:

No comments: