Gilbert Meilaender

I don't know why Michael Perry posted (without comment) on MoJ the vituperative and, to my mind, grossly unfair attack on Gilbert Meilaender that appears as a letter to the editor in Commonweal.  I do know this, though:  Gil is one of the finest, most honorable people I've ever known.  I suspect that others in the MoJ family who know him feel the same way.  His support for military action to remove Saddam Hussein and his sadistic sons and other associates from power in Iraq, was not rooted in "militarism."  Whether one agrees or disagrees with his view, no one can justly accuse him of holding it mindlessly or of having bad motivations.  On this issue, and on all issues, Gil was and is open to argument and willing to engage in thoughtful and civil debate.  He does not deserve to be smeared with the suggestion that he is, in fact, "interested . . . in selling a cheap edition of conscience and authority."  The letter Michael posted does not report, much less engage, the arguments Gil advanced for his position, or his counterarguments in response to those who opposed military action to remove the Hussein tyranny.  It simply hurls scurrilous allegations, such as the defamatory claim that "Meilaender is not too keen on protecting life from the clutches of militarism."  Anyone who knows Gilbert Meilaender, or who has actually read his work, knows how utterly false this is.  One needn't share Gil's views about the rights and wrongs of the war in Iraq to acknowledge that he deeply cares about human lives---be they the lives of unborn babies, disabled persons, the elderly, American combat troops, Iraqi civilians, Marsh Arabs, or Kurds.