« BACK TO FORUM
Moderators:
AminaYasmine, Liamjod, mnopq
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Phillip
Joined: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 7
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
|
[Poll] Thank you Rayovac
August 10, 2004 - 04:10 AM
|
|
The first documented Catholic office of inquisition was established in the 13th century and the Inquisition didn't officially end until 1834. Extremist Jews and Moslems are killing each other in Israel, Catholics and Protestants have too frequently done the same in Norhern Ireland. Religious extremism has produced conflict between Hindus and Moslems in India, and Moslems and Christians in Indonesia. More and more I am distressed to see the Religious Right in the U.S. deamonizing Moslems as a religious group and pressuring citizens to consider U.S. military undertakings as a form of crusade. Religion, I always believed, was intended to offer us a path to peace ... not a path to salvation that is stained with the blood of needless conflict and persecution. But now I find it necessary to challenge that thinking.
Are religions really one of the primary barriers to peace? I think they are. What do you think?
After you answer you might visit http://www.iei.net/~pwagner/brazilhome.htm and visit three galleries ... the one for web-films, the one about the risk of doing nothing and the one about considering a new approach.
Is religion a primary barrier to peace?
Yes
(1 votes for 50%)
Yes and no
(0 votes for 0%)
No
(1 votes for 50%)
Only the extremists
(0 votes for 0%)
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 9
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
Re: Thank you Rayovac
August 10, 2004 - 06:59 AM
|
|
Originally posted by pwagner
More and more I am distressed to see the Religious Right in the U.S. deamonizing Moslems as a religious group and pressuring citizens to consider U.S. military undertakings as a form of crusade.
Where the heck do you get this from?
How has the "Religious Right" done anything other than to build bridges between Christianity and other religions? What about all of the interfaith groups established and participated in by American Christian organizations?
Further, where is there one single shred of evidence that a *SINGLE* US military action has remotely been related to a "crusade" to convert or suppress *ANY* other religion????
The fact, thank God, is that Muslims have more freedom of religion and speech in the US than ANYWHERE else in the world. Period.
Go look at France and see how they treat Muslims...Muslims in public institutions (like schools) cannot are forbidden under law by pain of jail or fines or both from wearing *clothing* required by their faith (like head scarves by women)...Muslim French *citizens* (not legal aliens seeking citizenship, but legal citizens) can legally be summarily deported without a trial nor judicial review.
Check this out as well:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3837591.stm
Of course with France it is not *just* Muslims:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/10/france.cemetery.ap/index.html
nor do they keep it in their country:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1092021256783&p=1008596975996
(of course none of this should come as a surprise to anyone who has traveled and met French tourists)
...and the *US* is "demonizing" Muslims?
Ask *ANY* Muslim who has come to the US from a nation where Islam is a non - majority religion if the US "demonizes" Muslims...ask them how the US treats Muslims (by law and by social behavior of citizens) relative to where they came from. Even ask many Muslims who have come to the US from nations with Islam as the dominant religion.
These comments are dead wrong...there is no demonizing of Muslims by *ANY* mainstream American Christian group (nor anything close...go to this link to see what *MY* church has done for two boys who, according to *YOU*, we are also trying to "demonize" :
http://www.takingitglobal.org/discuss/showthread.html?s=&threadid=8880
...nor is there a motive, hidden or otherwise, that suggests that promoting the liberation of Iraq was related to some type of religous "crusade"...which makes me ask: Which religion would it be for? There are soldiers fighting and supports of this action by members of almost every major religion in the US *INCLUDING MUSLIMS*.
These comments are utterly irresponsible.
By the way...I *do* agree with your comments thoughts about religion contributing to problems in the world today. I even believe that totally peaceful people can create unpeaceful consequences without wanting to by not thinking through remarks or teachings (see the Islam thread for this). However, your examples of the US are remarkably wrong...I am shocked that someone in the same hemisphere would even suggest such nonsense.
God Bless!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Phillip
Joined: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 7
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: Brazil
|
I stand by my remarks
August 10, 2004 - 07:13 AM
|
|
I'm not going to argue with you. Have your perspective, but don't imagine you'll sway me with your anger. Are you seriously going to say you never heard the president use the word "crusade"? Are you really going to suggest you've never heard Pat Robertson rail against the Moslem Koran? I watch as much television, read as much of the Wall Street Journal, listen as much to Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, etc. as anyone. I stand by my remarks.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Sephora
Joined: Feb 26, 2004
Posts:
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 26
Country: Nigeria
Province/State: Lagos
City: Lagos
|
Re: Thank you Rayovac
August 10, 2004 - 08:33 AM
|
|
I strongly beleive and have seen for myself that religion is a strong deterrant to peace the world over. I could specifically relate my country's experiences to you guys. Over the years, there has been series of conflicts, fightings and killings between the muslims and christians residing in the north. It surpasses ethnicity no it goes way beyond that in this country. The most recent of these religious wars being a month ago. Sometimes it seems as if there will never be a lasting solution to this particular problem. When a statement is made publicly, they (muslims) take offence and the result is another fight outbreak between them and the residing christians in their community. Take for instance the conflict that resulted over the MISS WORLD publicity issue when a statement was made in a National Dailies that even Mohammed would find a wife amongst the contestants. That particular event (Miss World 2002 Abuja) was then withdrawn from Nigeria.
Religion is definitely preventing peace in this part of the world.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Phillip
Joined: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 7
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: Brazil
|
Thank you Sephora
August 10, 2004 - 08:36 AM
|
|
I appreciate your contribution.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 9
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
I stand by my remarks
August 10, 2004 - 11:54 AM
|
|
Originally posted by pwagner
I'm not going to argue with you. Have your perspective, but don't imagine you'll sway me with your anger. Are you seriously going to say you never heard the president use the word "crusade"? Are you really going to suggest you've never heard Pat Robertson rail against the Moslem Koran? I watch as much television, read as much of the Wall Street Journal, listen as much to Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, etc. as anyone. I stand by my remarks.
Philip:
I don't wish to argue with you either (although I would hope that the facts would do the work for me), I also hope that (although strong - "utterly irresponsible" - words, they were not meant to show personal disrespect) my commentary is not viewed to be directed at you personally...I'm really trying to just make a point about the position. As I said, I do agree with your main premise.
Still, Bush used the word "Crusade" *once* on September 16, 2001. This was just days after the events of 9/11 and, as you will recall, Islamic terrorists had not yet even been publicly confirmed as the criminals who did it. As you know, the term "crusade" is hardly only religious in context. So, given the fact that this was said only once...at a time when there was no firm connection made to Islamic terrorists....and the statement was made about "terrorists" without specific groups or motives (the Oklahoma City bombers were also referred by Bush as terrorists)....and there was no mention of Christianity nor Islam nor any religion for that matter....and the choice of words was probably not top of mind for anyone at this date so close to the event....and the comments were about the war on terrorism "taking a while" (a crusade is something that is long - term for a cause as opposed to something with specific tactical objectives) and probably drove the use of the word (specifically, he said "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile."....and the White House almost immediately apologized for the use of the word...and Bush is not known for being articulate in his choice of any words suggests that this was probably not the start of any type of religious war. Further, actions taken by America and the members of many leading Christian groups to embrace Islam and remind the world about the peaceful nature of the religion (how many times has Bush reminded the American people that the terrorists who use Islam as the excuse for their actions do not represent the true nature of Islam?) should seriously bring in to question any type of religious intent in the military response to the worst single terrorist act in world history.
As far as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are concerned, I am not familiar with any of their remarks as I neither watch them nor support them. I can say that I am familiar with the attitudes of a number of Christian Americans and have read and observed quite a bit of discussion since 9/11 from them and Christian leaders (mostly Catholic) about Islam and have observed just the opposite. I would find it very difficult to believe that even weirdos like Falwell would demonize the Muslims (the people...which was your word) as opposed to the actual teachings of the Koran (which is what you just said) which would be criticizing the document. Still, if this *has* happened...I assume that it, too, has been rare as you know the media would be all over it.
In either case, Bush using the word "crusade" in an entirely different context *once* and possibly a couple of guys (Fallwell or Robertson) condemning passages from the Koran (as opposed to the 99.99% of Christians who do not feel this way) are purely anecdotes and provide no basis for suggesting some type of "trend".
Further, to compare this in the same breath to the mountains of daily anti - Christian and Jewish rhetoric that comes from Islamic extremists calling for killing and torturing of others is, in just my own opinion, a slap in the face.
Given the position taken by the extremists and the dominant response by most Christians (which is one of love and peace and a call for harmony with Muslims in such difficult times), I think that religious Americans have shown an amazing level of restraint. I would say, in fact, that they should be commended...not grouped in with those few extremists who are after blood. I can't imagine what *more* American Christians could do in light of the situation...can you?
Still, this entire discussion goes to the heart of your original question: Religion *can* prevent peace. It has, and will likely continue to until it is either completely removed from the face of the Earth or (at least) it changes into a practice that ceases to be prescriptive of followers and more descriptive (i.e. - "This is what the Bible (Koran, etc) literally says, each of you go out and figure out what it means for you." as opposed to "This is what the Bible says, this is what it means you should do.". I personally favor organized "learning" but individual interpretation...especially related to matters of personal action. This way, one's conscience can be the guide as opposed to that of a religous leader.
So, I am angry with your *point* but not you personally...I think that it is unfair and untrue by very large measure (in fact, I think that there is a great deal more evidence to the contrary) especially when compared to what is being done and said of Christians.
In addition, I agree with the point that religion (as it stands today) can impede peace...although it is more due to the way that it is practiced and not the actual system of person beliefs in a greater being.
Lastly, I'll respect your desire to not debate further on this topic. If you wish to respond (to get the last word), I'll resist the urge to counter your response further. Therefore, this will be my last word on the subject.
I will ask this...if you choose to not respond to the above (based on your desire to not debate), then we can just leave this question as "rhetorical":
Can you provide an example of a group (religious or otherwise) which was led by someone who held similar beliefs (such as Bush with Christians) in a similar situation to 9/11 and the war on terrorism that serves as a better example for how to respond in terms of tolerance, restraint, and communications to more clearly show a front against unified action (the "crusade"?
Or, put more simply: What could American Christians and George Bush have done better do show that there is no desire to either institute a religious war or demonize Islam than they have already done? Further, show how this *should* have been handled by example of where it was done better in similar circumstances.
Again, I'll leave my comments at that.
God Bless!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Phillip
Joined: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 7
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: Brazil
|
Thank you Rayovac
August 11, 2004 - 11:01 AM
|
|
I much appreciate this more recent, and I feel, less vitriolic reply. It is easy to forget that communicating tone is a great challenge without hearing the voice, so perhaps I misread you.
I appreciate many of the things you say. But in this very polarized environment it is more clear than ever that there are "two sides to the fence". Although I don't seem to have enough time to fully banter back and forth about this with you ... judging only by the length of your posts ... I'll offer a few thoughts.
Conservative writer William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard told Jim Wallis of Sojourners Magazine that "Europe was now unfit to lead because it was corrupted by secularism, as was the developing world, which was corrupted by poverty". Kristol is a high profile conservative who is recognized to be an effective spokesperson for the political and religious right in the U.S. He is an eloquent and articulate spokesman.
Willis, of Soujorners, reported that "Close friends (of Bush) say that after 9/11 Bush found his mission in life." The word "mission" here was intentional. Willis added that "Former Bush speechwriter David Frum says of the president, War had made him…a crusader after all." This was some time after the "crusdade" fopah and the remark comes from one of the president's speech writers, not a member of the opposition.
Willis went onto say that "Bush has made numerous references to his belief that he could not be president if he did not believe in a divine plan that supersedes all human plans", and I remember reading in a fairly recent Newsweek story that Bush, when asked if he turned to his father - a former U.S. president - for advice, responded to the effect that the father he turned to for advice was the one in heaven. That, for me, is a little scary. Why? Because there can be no doubt that the father in heaven he refers to is the Christian version of god. In the context of other feedback from close Bush associates (examples noted above are just that - examples - if I had the time I would compile a longer list) many, myself included, see clear evidence that the president's foreign policy strategies combine national and religious priorities.
Following 9/11 Time Magazine quoted the president as saying he believed he'd been chosen by the grace of god to lead at that moment.
You indicate you don't follow Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell, but I think it's important to be familiar with what they're saying to appreciate the atmosphere that is being created relative to the way Christians view Moslems and the Moslem faith. Why? Because the Christain right played such a crucial role in the last election. They marshalled the most disciplined voter base and - I believe - probably tipped the balance in what has become a very controversial historical event. As less than 50% of eligible voters voted and Bush got less than half of those, he was elected by less than 25% of eligible voters. So when you (thoughtfully and legitimately) ask "What could American Christians and George Bush have done better do show that there is no desire to either institute a religious war or demonize Islam than they have already done?" my first answer will be to counter the vitriole of the high profile tele-evangelists beacuse their impact on public opinion is so significant.
On Saturday July 10th I received the following very frightening text in an email from a "Christian" who has clearly been influenced by the atmosphere I refer to ...
BEGINNING OF EMAIL TEXT
How ironic is this??!! They don't even believe in Christ and they're getting their own Christmas stamp, but don't dream of posting the ten commandments on federal property?
USPS New Stamp
This one is impossible to believe. Scroll down for the text. If there is only one thing you forward today.....let it be this!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of PanAm Flight 103!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the military barracks in sudi Arabia!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the American Embassies in Africa!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the USS COLE!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack on the Twin Towers on 09/11/2001!
REMEMBER all the AMERICAN lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!
Now the United States Postal Service REMEMBERS and HONORS the EID MUSLIM holiday season with a commemorative first class holiday postage stamp. REMEMBER to adamantly and vocally BOYCOTT this stamp when purchasing your stamps at the post office. To use this stamp would be a slap in the face to all those AMERICANS who died at the hands of those whom this stamp honors.
REMEMBER to pass this along to every patriotic AMERICAN you know.
ENDING OF EMAIL TEXT
Scary, don't you think?
The second thing I think could have been done would have been for the president to keep his religious commitment (and interpretations) to himself. By wearing his religion on his sleeve to close advisors and others he's allowed - through inevitable leaks - the world to get a clear impression that he really is leading what he believes to be a crusade, whether its true or not ... creating the kind of atmosphere (further fueled by tele-evangelists) which encourages the kind of scary communications I received in July.
Honestly, Rayovac, I will not be able to invest so much time responding to one individual in the future ... so I may not respond further to you in particular. But I welcome any future posts you may decide to contribute and I certainly appreciate that your perspective may be different from my own. I thank you for writing.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Phillip
Joined: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 7
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Country: Brazil
|
Is religion a barrier to peace - continued
August 11, 2004 - 12:36 PM
|
|
I'm also curious to know how any of you believe this will affect the presidential election in the U.S.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
« BACK TO FORUM
|
Forum Jump:
|
All times are GMT-05:00
|
» Check that you are logged in!
You cannot create new threads in this forum
You cannot post replies in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot edit/delete your posts in this forum
|
|
Administrators:
chengzhao1993, Liamjod
Moderators:
AminaYasmine, Liamjod, mnopq
|
|
Home
Community
