Poor Bridget Kerrigan '91. All those insensitive people being so mean to her. All those insensitive people saying nasty things about slavery and racism and hate. All those insensitive people asking her to take her "beautiful" flag out of her Kirkland House window.

Last Wednesday, this regionally oppressed resident of northern Virginia lashed out at all those insensitive people. People like President Derek C. Bok, Kirkland Master Donald Pfister and me. Our crime? We had the gall to criticize Kerrigan's actions. We had the nerve to point out the flaws in her disingenuous arguments. We made her feel marginalized.

"I resent that you people think you have the right to judge my personal conduct," Kerrigan said. "I think that's despicable."

This nonsense begs a response. OK, maybe three responses.

1. Hanging a Confederate battle flag indoors is private conduct. Hanging a Confederate battle flag out a window is public conduct. Offensive public conduct, I happen to think. Insensitive public conduct. "Despicable" public conduct.

2. This is a free country. In a free country, Kerrigan can hang a Confederate flag out her window. And in a free country, the rest of us can criticize her reprehensible behavior. Bok and Pfister shouldn't claim to speak for the entire Harvard community, or the entire Kirkland community, but they can and should tell her what they think. They think she should take her flag down. So do I.

3. It is very interesting that Bridget Kerrigan would question our right to judge her personal conduct. In the March 1990 issue of Peninsula, Kerrigan wrote a parody (I know it was a parody because it began, "The following is a parody") titled "Love and Let Love" satirizing people who--you guessed it--deny others the right to judge their moral conduct.

* * *

Rolling Out The Red Carpet: In case you haven't heard, the ubiquitous zealots from the Association Against Learning in the Absence of Religion and Morality (AALARM) are broadening their horizons. AALARM will now function as an umbrella organization for four, count 'em, four separate committees: Life, Faith, Family and Policy. You can join one, or join. 'em all.

"There are a lot of AALARM members who aren't 100 percent with us," explained co-founder E. Adam Webb '93. "This is just a way to make sure nobody's uncomfortable in AALARM because of the views we hold."

Nobody? Not even, well, you know, one of...them? Can gays really join AALARM?

"I think that would be fine," Webb said. "I'd encourage that."

My, my. Can a pro-life, pro-faith or pro-family gay find a niche in an organization that regularly attacks homosexuality as repugnant, repulsive and basically filthy? Isn't it possible that gays might feel "uncomfortable" in AALARM?

"I hope not," Webb said.

Wow. AALARM welcomes gays. Encourages them to join, no less. Pretty radical stuff. Does Webb really think that these four committees can remain separate enough for gays to feel comfortable in one of them?