An Open Letter to Kenneth Roth (Let’s Talk About It)
If you could write a letter to a human rights worker, what would you say? Would you thank them for their hard work, write words of encouragement, maybe even offer them funds to continue their efforts?
What if this letter was addressed to Kenneth Roth, head of Human Rights Watch, known as one of the largest U.S. defenders of human liberties? Mr. Roth is one of many international organization leaders who has unofficially and officially provided political and social support to Islamist parties, many of whom are responsible for the gross gender inequality with which their countries exist.
Though Roth’s name is currently being attacked, why is it that in general, we are afraid of pointing a finger towards political Islam? I agree with Roth’s point of view in that Islamic parties are not necessarily worse than many “autocratic regimes that the West props up;” however, this does not mean it is okay. I in no way mean to attack Islam, nor Christianity, Judaism, or any religion in general; the freedom to practice your religion should always be. However, a human rights organization that downplays violence against any group of people simply for fear of being politically incorrect is no human rights organization. An Islamist state that discriminates against women should not be accepted; a Christian state (that I occasionally fear the U.S. is to become) that does the same should not be accepted either. A separate church and state existed once; this does not merely mean the fact that you believe in god or not is no matter of the state, but also that a persons right to safety and happiness should not be dictated by the states’ religion.
So here is my letter to you, Mr. Roth: it’s okay to point fingers sometimes, and accuse people when they are attacking someone’s basic liberties to health and happiness. If you are not capable of taking a stand against something that is so wrong, then why the hell are you working in human rights? Clearly you are in the wrong field. Please, strap on a pair, because this is weak on your part, and we are not proud.