Peter David's tedious response to letter about his Muslim character

Comic Book Resources has an article where they presented several reader responses to his work on the latest series of X-Factor as part of a Q&A topic. But I really don't see much to be impressed about regarding his reply to one related to his issue that was an insult to opponents of the mosque at Ground Zero. Let's see what we have here:

Jamal had some thoughts he wanted to share about Monet and wanted to run them by you.

First, I love how you brought up Monet's Muslim identity in an organic way in the last issue. With Rahne (and now Monet), it seems like you are one of the few X-writers who can deal with a character's religious identity in a way that is natural, believable, and does not resort to one-dimensional characterizations.

This makes me really wish that Soraya was on X-Factor, since it feels like other writers have difficulty in figuring out what to do with her. They seem to treat her like Rahne was treated in the past -- a religious caricature or a background character. I doubt you would add Soraya to the team, but can I hope that X-Factor might get a case that involves the handful of Muslim characters in the Marvelverse?

The thing is, Jamal, I'd be concerned that it would come across like "And now, in a Very Special Issue of X-Factor..." Let's take it out of the Muslim context: years ago, I established that Leonard Samson was Jewish. No big shock there. He's a doctor with an Old Testament surname, and how many Leonards can you name who aren't Jewish?

After I wrote that, though, I didn't immediately feel a compulsion to have Leonard invite Sabra to a sedar or team them up on a story involving West Bank settlements. This isn't to say that I won't have Monet and Dust meet up at some point and discuss their, uhm, different approaches to their faith, if it's a meeting that seems reasonable and organic rather than simply manufactured because, hey -- two Muslim characters.

What could I say in reply to this? Let's see:

1] Even if he didn't intend any insult when he says "west bank settlements" instead of Judean/Samarian villages", I still find it a big dismay he'd use such a PC description. Years ago, David seemed respectable enough of Israel. However, his stance on the Iraq war was negative merely out of his dislike for Dubya, which never sounded like it was for good reasons. Why then wouldn't I be surprised if any respect he's got for Israel might've deteriorated since, and he's got a much weaker take on the issue now?

2] We should ponder that, if all sects of Islam - from the [seemingly] simplest forms of Sufism to the most vicious of Salfism - stem from the writings of same child-molesting, anti-semitic mass murderer who decreed that Jews are the offspring "of monkeys and pigs" (Suras 2:52-65; 5:59-60: 7:166), that being Muhammed and his rag the Koran, of course, and if, as Tayyip Erdogan says, there's only Islam and that's it, then it makes little difference whether Monet doesn't dress in a niqab like Dust does, her characterization as a Muslim is no more acceptable than if she were to be characterized as a communist, a socialist, or a marxist (the same could even be said about Rima Fakih, whose election in last year's Miss USA pageant may have been rigged). Most important question is whether anyone who sees nothing wrong with a man who would espouse such views as Muhammed does needs to get their head examined, because his behavior was abominable.

And what's this about "organic"? Nothing is organic if they don't present a clear picture about the various challenging issues surrounding the Religion of Peace. As for one dimension, what about the protestors opposed to the mosque-strosity at Ground Zero? Why are they being presented so otherwise one-dimensionally, or just plain negatively?

3] Using female Muslim characters as a propaganda weapon, as stories like these do, is de facto painting a false picture of what Muhammed decreed about women's status.

4] Another something this whole subject reminded me of is that, mutant or not, the Islamic religion and the Koran/Hadith would not view Kitty Pryde as legitimate in any genuine sense, since she's one of the Chosen, and it makes little difference whether her default sect of Judaism is Reform, as the following site wonders. Nor would Muhammed and the Koran consider Leonard Samson or minor character Sabra, mentioned in this earlier post, legit. I don't know if there'll ever be a meeting between Monet and Dust, but I don't expect Kitty Pryde to challenge either of the 2 about the POV their religion maintains on her race. The Marvel editorial, such as it stands now, would never allow that. (Nor would they even allow a discussion on what taqqiya is.)

If David really must feature a character of a Muslim background though, the least he could do is present an apostate too. But it's not likely to happen.

On top of all that, it's a shame that David's succumbed that badly to PC-ness, and how interesting that he would rather intro a character with emphasis on religion than one on races like Armenians, who've never really had a representative similar to how TV's had Mannix in the past. I guess they simply don't want to take up the challenging subject of Turkey's massacre of 1.5 million Armenians during WW1. I certainly do think it's sad that Chris Claremont, when he was writing the New Mutants in the 1980s, never thought to introduce a cast member of such a background, nor even one who's Bulgarian. Sometimes in retrospect, they really were taking much too easy a path.