Zach LarkinsRELIGION
My friend Jim Stillman recently wrote an article entitled "Why Comparative Religion Should Be Taught In Our Schools". It is a fine piece and well worth reading. As always, Jim gives some rather startling news, in this case about how much we don't understand the ‘other' guy. It ties in neatly with his previous article about just how much ‘common knowledge' we've lost over the years.
Not being a scholar on the subject of religion, I do know the basics of most of the world's more popular faiths. Jim's main point is that religion need not be forced upon anyone, especially students, but an understanding of the main tenets of any faith should be taught in order to understand and respect the beliefs of someone else's object of devotion.
We in the west have based our countries and the laws that govern us on Judeo-Christian beliefs. While we have a separation of church and state, that does not mean we can't teach our children about someone else's faith. We don't study just the geography or history of our own countries, we teach a smattering of each about countries around the world. We're certainly not indoctrinating our children to embrace the history of Japan nor the geography of southern Borneo. So why can't we develop programs that would do the same with religion?
Some would say the conservatives would not have us do this. That is nonsense. As with any political wing, you will have the hard liners and those who are a tad more reasonable. Displaying the Ten Commandments in our courthouses or public buildings should not offend anyone. Number one: you have the right, in our free society to ignore them if you so wish. Number two: they are a reminder of the principles upon which or nations were built. Number three: one of the greatest freedoms you have in our society is to leave it you are so offended by our rules, regulations, traditions and customs.
Some would say the liberal mind set is now so politically correct that we dare not offend anyone. As we try to embrace multiculturalism, we can see that it is making us more divisive rather than bringing us closer together. SL Bradish writes about Muslim cab drivers who refuse to take fares who even smell of alcohol because it offends them. They are refusing to take fares who happen to have a dog with them, even if that dog is a guide dog, because it offends them. We are encouraged to say ‘Happy Holidays' rather than ‘Merry Christmas' because it offends them. The list goes on and there seems to be a groundswell of people who are fed up with this. Why? Because we don't understand Islam.
But why, on the other hand, should we have to go out of our way to try to understand their beliefs and traditions when it seems they make no effort to understand us? Stillman's article points to the basic fact that to understand an enemy, you have to know him. Not all Muslims are our enemies. The fanatical fundamentalists are. And you find them in almost any religion. 9/11 taught us to view the world in a different light and we responded quickly and admirably. Border crossings were made more secure and people started to become more aware of their surroundings.
Stillman says that George W. Bush said ‘Islamic extremists have hijacked the principles of Islam for their own ends.' And this may well be true. It is nice to think, as some would have us believe, that Islam is a faith of love and respect for one another. Our Bible, in the Old Testament, gave us the famous ‘eye for an eye' ideology which was replaced in the New Testament with ‘turn the other cheek'. The Qu'ran on the other hand teaches forgiveness in its early books and then goes on to say it is quite alright to kill an infidel who will not believe as a Muslim does. As in Christianity, the words of our Holy books can be twisted to mean whatever the messenger wants them to mean. If I am to ask ‘forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us', does that not mean I would wish the death sentence visited on me if I supported visiting it on someone else?
There are those who support the idea of a peaceful, loving Islam. That theory is partially blown out of the water by the fact that bomb murderers don't care who they kill, without any type of warning, women, children, the elderly, just as long as they can get to their 72 virgins. Further proof is found in the fact that terrorist cells are being uncovered almost daily around the world and despite the protestations of the local Imam that all these people are innocent and the subject of racial discrimination, a lot of them are pleading guilty to all charges of conspiring to blow up subways, planes and trains.
There are those who profess that Islam is a respectful religion, especially of its women. Blowing innocent people to kingdom come is not respectful in anyone's eyes. As for the respect shown to women, maybe we just don't get it here in the west. Forced to wear burkhas, unable to go out in public unless accompanied by a male relative, beatings and forced marriages are rather strange ways, to our way of thinking, of showing respect. Teaching your child that he would bring great honour to the family by being a bomb murderer is a strange way to show respect. When natural catastrophes occur around the world and Christian and Jewish people pitch in to help the afflicted, the Muslims are conspicuous by their absence. Where is the respect for one's fellow man? I suppose if you can't respect yourself or your own life, it is too much to ask for respect for someone else's. It would be nice to be enlightened on this.
Muslims who claim racial discrimination can also come to the forefront and explain just when Islam became a race. As with all religions, the adherents come in all sizes, shapes, colours, nationalities and races. I won't say there is no religious discrimination, but again, a big part of that is not knowing about that religion. I may not agree with a Jew's point of view, but I can ignore it as it really doesn't affect me. That is not discrimination. I may not like Jehovah's Witnesses, but again, I can ignore them and that too is not discrimination. Pick any religion you want, one of the rights I enjoy is to leave them to themselves and not make a big deal about being offended. When I start painting hate messages on a synagogue or mosque, that is discrimination. Not when I say ‘Merry Christmas' or put up a Nativity scene.
Stillman is right, we do need to learn more about each other. But that is a two way street. When one side does all the giving and the other can't take enough, expect a backlash. The PC crowd will probably think this article is discriminatory. I don't care. I never have been, nor will I ever be, a pacifist. I'm more than willing to sit down and talk, but if you strike out at me, expect the same in return.
Not being a scholar on the subject of religion, I do know the basics of most of the world's more popular faiths. Jim's main point is that religion need not be forced upon anyone, especially students, but an understanding of the main tenets of any faith should be taught in order to understand and respect the beliefs of someone else's object of devotion.
We in the west have based our countries and the laws that govern us on Judeo-Christian beliefs. While we have a separation of church and state, that does not mean we can't teach our children about someone else's faith. We don't study just the geography or history of our own countries, we teach a smattering of each about countries around the world. We're certainly not indoctrinating our children to embrace the history of Japan nor the geography of southern Borneo. So why can't we develop programs that would do the same with religion?
Some would say the conservatives would not have us do this. That is nonsense. As with any political wing, you will have the hard liners and those who are a tad more reasonable. Displaying the Ten Commandments in our courthouses or public buildings should not offend anyone. Number one: you have the right, in our free society to ignore them if you so wish. Number two: they are a reminder of the principles upon which or nations were built. Number three: one of the greatest freedoms you have in our society is to leave it you are so offended by our rules, regulations, traditions and customs.
Some would say the liberal mind set is now so politically correct that we dare not offend anyone. As we try to embrace multiculturalism, we can see that it is making us more divisive rather than bringing us closer together. SL Bradish writes about Muslim cab drivers who refuse to take fares who even smell of alcohol because it offends them. They are refusing to take fares who happen to have a dog with them, even if that dog is a guide dog, because it offends them. We are encouraged to say ‘Happy Holidays' rather than ‘Merry Christmas' because it offends them. The list goes on and there seems to be a groundswell of people who are fed up with this. Why? Because we don't understand Islam.
But why, on the other hand, should we have to go out of our way to try to understand their beliefs and traditions when it seems they make no effort to understand us? Stillman's article points to the basic fact that to understand an enemy, you have to know him. Not all Muslims are our enemies. The fanatical fundamentalists are. And you find them in almost any religion. 9/11 taught us to view the world in a different light and we responded quickly and admirably. Border crossings were made more secure and people started to become more aware of their surroundings.
Stillman says that George W. Bush said ‘Islamic extremists have hijacked the principles of Islam for their own ends.' And this may well be true. It is nice to think, as some would have us believe, that Islam is a faith of love and respect for one another. Our Bible, in the Old Testament, gave us the famous ‘eye for an eye' ideology which was replaced in the New Testament with ‘turn the other cheek'. The Qu'ran on the other hand teaches forgiveness in its early books and then goes on to say it is quite alright to kill an infidel who will not believe as a Muslim does. As in Christianity, the words of our Holy books can be twisted to mean whatever the messenger wants them to mean. If I am to ask ‘forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us', does that not mean I would wish the death sentence visited on me if I supported visiting it on someone else?
There are those who support the idea of a peaceful, loving Islam. That theory is partially blown out of the water by the fact that bomb murderers don't care who they kill, without any type of warning, women, children, the elderly, just as long as they can get to their 72 virgins. Further proof is found in the fact that terrorist cells are being uncovered almost daily around the world and despite the protestations of the local Imam that all these people are innocent and the subject of racial discrimination, a lot of them are pleading guilty to all charges of conspiring to blow up subways, planes and trains.
There are those who profess that Islam is a respectful religion, especially of its women. Blowing innocent people to kingdom come is not respectful in anyone's eyes. As for the respect shown to women, maybe we just don't get it here in the west. Forced to wear burkhas, unable to go out in public unless accompanied by a male relative, beatings and forced marriages are rather strange ways, to our way of thinking, of showing respect. Teaching your child that he would bring great honour to the family by being a bomb murderer is a strange way to show respect. When natural catastrophes occur around the world and Christian and Jewish people pitch in to help the afflicted, the Muslims are conspicuous by their absence. Where is the respect for one's fellow man? I suppose if you can't respect yourself or your own life, it is too much to ask for respect for someone else's. It would be nice to be enlightened on this.
Muslims who claim racial discrimination can also come to the forefront and explain just when Islam became a race. As with all religions, the adherents come in all sizes, shapes, colours, nationalities and races. I won't say there is no religious discrimination, but again, a big part of that is not knowing about that religion. I may not agree with a Jew's point of view, but I can ignore it as it really doesn't affect me. That is not discrimination. I may not like Jehovah's Witnesses, but again, I can ignore them and that too is not discrimination. Pick any religion you want, one of the rights I enjoy is to leave them to themselves and not make a big deal about being offended. When I start painting hate messages on a synagogue or mosque, that is discrimination. Not when I say ‘Merry Christmas' or put up a Nativity scene.
Stillman is right, we do need to learn more about each other. But that is a two way street. When one side does all the giving and the other can't take enough, expect a backlash. The PC crowd will probably think this article is discriminatory. I don't care. I never have been, nor will I ever be, a pacifist. I'm more than willing to sit down and talk, but if you strike out at me, expect the same in return.
