The members of the Purdue Board of Trustees are being sued by a group of Allen County residents and state lawmakers for a play being performed at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne.

The play, Corpus Christi, tells the story of a man, Joshua, living in Texas. Joshua's life is thought to parallel the life of Christ and the play itself contains many gay themes.

So what’s all the fuss about?

Well many people — for some reason — feel that by associating religion and homosexuality you are somehow attacking specific religious beliefs. Does this mean homosexuality is wrong?

It's doubtful that even this group would openly admit homosexuality is wrong even if they believed it.

Of course the plaintiffs have found a way around being labeled prejudice. For their suit, the plaintiffs are citing the Lemon v. Kurtzman Supreme Court decision involving the state of Pennsylvania and its subsidiaries given to private schools to assist in teacher salaries. The court ruled this was unconstitutional because it violated the Freedom of Religion provided by the First Amendment. The government, therefore, cannot in any way support one religion while not supporting any others. Conversely the government cannot single out one particular religion and defame it.

Many theater critics have criticized the play not for having religious and gay themes, but for being nothing but an assault on Christianity.

The play would, therefore, be unconstitutional if the play is solely being put on at Fort Wayne only to attack Christianity. Whether it really is or not remains to be seen. But if the play's director, Jonathan Gilbert, is putting it on solely because it is thought provoking then they have no case. When it comes to the accusations in this case, it does not matter why it was written in 1998, but why it was staged in 2001 at Purdue's regional campus in Fort Wayne.

The angry group of citizens and lawmakers has every right to dislike the content of the play. They have every right to protest its production and to boycott its performances. But, the same right they have to protest also protects the right one has to put the play on.

Some of the argument is that since the play is being put on by an individual, who happens to be a Purdue student and is doing this as a part of the Purdue theater, the play's content reflects the beliefs of the institution. That couldn't be more wrong. This production is the brainchild of an individual and should be seen as only one viewpoint of one person.

This person just happens to have a belief that differs with a large group of lawmakers. Mess with a religion and trouble is sure to find you. However, there are some in this country — a land that accepts hundreds of different religions — who consider Satanism to be a religion. But, it's hard to believe that this kind of debate would take place if this play's protagonist paralleled Satan as a homosexual.

Whether or not Corpus Christi is offensive is up to the individual who watches its performance. This is a case of whether people like or dislike the play. Viewers don't have to approve or accept the play's themes. The courts should not be involved. It's simple: If you don't like it, don't go see it.

Editorial Board: Keith Thomas, Kurt Esposito, Jamie Teibel, Kyle Boggs, Morgan Conklin