In response to a letter in the edition of two weeks ago that was written by an individual who felt hurt after our conversation: While feeling rather awkward apologizing for a personal conversation in a public forum, I will utilize any medium you chose in order to right a wrong. Indeed, I humbly submit my apology to you, it was never my intention to hurt you as an individual, nor attack you personally or your belief system . I must admit that I thought our discourse to be pleasant and mutually interesting, and any offense you took was not offered as such. It is never my intention to offend. Along those lines, I always avoid the topic of religion and philosophy altogether unless the subject is broached by others, under the assumption that others will not suggest a discomforting topic. As an apology is a defense, permit me to forward two understandings of mine (and forgive any details forgotten, as the conversation in question occurred months ago). It was mentioned that I inquired as to why you were sitting at the MSA desk and you seemed to feel this was aggressive, I am sorry you felt such, as that was not the intent my question was spurred by simply curiosity, whether you were a member of the group or just sitting there, as I myself sit at the Filipino club’s desk, despite my distinct lack of membership. Secondly, you wrote of bible-bashing. Yet, as your account revealed, the conversation was of the Qu’ran and it’s words. This fits with what I recall, that we spoke of the instructions of Mohammad and the dictates of Islam, not of the bible. The only mention of the Bible was that it too (firstly the Qu’ran) stated that the God of the Christians is not the God of the Muslims. While this fact I will not retract, offend though it may, I once again would like to apologize for any perceived hurt, it was not offered and I deeply regret that you feel grieved.