Friends,
We live in quite intolerant times . . .
With the exception of good-natured far-left Democrats like my associate (On-Line) Chad Lupkes, by and large, the enemies of Religious Freedom (liberal and moderate . . .) are quite prevalent.
France as a nation state has seen (in vivid display . . .) what a denial of Religious Freedom does! When I was teaching World Religions for Axia College (University of Phoenix umbrella . . .), I was shocked to learn from the textbook how the French passed an 'anti-religion' law a few years ago that denied the religious communities of France (Jewish, Islamic) from outward displays of religious garments. A completely 'secularized' society is what France insisted upon. The end result? Well, when opportunities are denied based upon things like skin color, one's religion, etc., it led to the riots in Paris!
BUT, what about the U.S.?
In SOME cases, religious accommodation is quite prevalent. Whether it is the U.S. Army or U.S. Higher Education, provision is made for attending Religious Holidays, dietary restrictions (kosher laws) and even the wearing of religious clothing. To do otherwise would be un-Constitutional since the First Amendment protects Freedom of Religion (while not establishing a 'State Church' like Anglicanism obviously . . .).
BUT, and this is quite important, whether it is the 'corporate boardroom' or whether it is making hiring decisions, one's right to religious practice (an intrinsic, inalienable Natural Right rooted in the fact that we are all created in God's Image . . .) is increasingly being attacked.
FRIENDS, this is NOT a "Christian issue" even.
Whether one is Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or Buddhist, the right (a Natural Right) to practice religion freely, and without compulsion, is under attack!
Will you not STAND WITH ME?
All the best,
Professor Rob J. King (St. Petersburg College)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
We all should have the right to practice our religious observances. We shouldn't have the right to extend those observances into a means of persecuting others.
One interesting thing I heard last night on the radio is that the newest nation in Europe, Kosovo, is declaring independence because of the persecution that they have faced based on their religion. And the United States, along with several other countries, immediately recognized their right to self organize and declare independence. The Serbs responded with violent frustration. Why?
Because the religion of the people who just demanded their freedom is Islam. Kosovo, if it is able to sustain the call to form their own nation, will likely be the first Islamic state in Europe. The Serbian people, predominantly Orthodox Christian, are trying to prevent that.
Oh, the tangled webs we weave.
Oh, and one last note on this. It's curious that the US Administration would leap to recognize Kosovo, but refuses to be willing to recognize an independent Kurdistan. That's one of the reasons why the Serbs are going crazy on our Embassies and Diplomatic staff. Why are we recognizing a breakaway region in the former Yugoslavia, where we worked with NATO forces to quell Slobodan Milošević's attempt at suppressing the Kurds, while at the same time our military occupies the country of Iraq and won't allow the Kurds to formally declare independence from the second most failed state in the world.
Consistency is not a strong suit of George W. Bush...
CHAD:
I agree completely . . .
As someone who is influenced by ORTHODOXY (I have Russian Orthodox icons in my bedroom and living room even, and I am much appreciative of Romanian Orthodox Systematic Theologian, Dumitru Staniloae http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumitru_Staniloae), I ALSO am appalled at the reaction of the Serbs . . .
Kosovo is 90% Islamic, and therefore not Serbian!
To be Serbian is to be nationalistic, which is FINE, but not when the people whom you are trying to contain are part of NEITHER your own ethnic nor religious group!
By contrast, Turkey is a secular Islamicized Nation State that (sadly) destroys archaeological Christian sites (please see William Dalrymple's EXCELLENT Journalistic account FROM THE HOLY MOUNTAIN which chronicles such abuse of religious freedom on the part of Islamic Turkey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_Holy_Mountain).
I think that we are agreed that Religious Freedom, whether it is in Serbia/Kosovo OR whether it is in Turkey, Iraq or the U.S.A. MUST be defended!
Thank you Chad.
All the best, Rob
Hello, I am sorry I haven't given you my opinion on your past postings but I have been extremly busy. I AM BACK!
Many people tend to believe that the U.S.A was a place that started based on Christianity. I totally disagree with that teaching, believe or opinion. This beautiful country was based on toleration of RELIGION and not on a single religion (Granted, most of those religions were Christians).
I don't think any Christian would want their government to push anyone to be a Christian and I KNOW God does not want His children to be pushed to believe in Him if they refuse to. So, yes tolerance of religion is good, but be aware of those that chose againts Christ, they will pay the price at judgement day.
I completely agree that the United States was not "started based on Christianity". However, I don't quite agree that the US "was based on toleration of RELIGION"...
If you read the history, we had various factions in various places in the original colonies, many of whom wanted certain things from the government that the others were very uncomfortable with. It is my belief based on my reading of history that economic considerations trumped the religious diversity, and forced the 13 colonies to put religion aside and focus on the economic merger in order to defend against an economic war that Britain was waging against it's own colonies.
And we all believe in G-d. Just because some see him in different ways and different forms doesn't mean that we don't believe. What we disagree about is whether how we see divinity should be the deciding factor in how we treat each other or how we work together to fulfill the mission that G-d has given us. I believe that mission is to be stewards of the Earth and reach for our potential as individuals and as a society.
Sure, we know that the Colonies had to put religion aside and unite in order to defend themselves from England because religion was not going to win their independence. Most people left England in order to be able to worship, as they felt free to do so. By establishing a new form of life, certain things needed develop such as economics and industries.
My God is the God of Christianity and my God is not the same god of Muslims or Buddhist or anyone that denies the actuality of Christ. Is not that we disagree on the divinity or how we see the divinity, the Muslim divinity, the Buddhist divinity is not the same as my God’s Divinity. You are comparing apples and oranges.
Chad and Pastor J:
I am in agreement with both of you! TRUTH is truth and this truth is ascertainable BOTH from revelation (Holy Scripture of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament) AND also ascertainable in the Natural Order!
That being said, yes, I tend to agree with Chad Lupkes' characterization of the multitudinous composition of the Founding of the U.S. In fact, I just covered this issue in class (Ethics class with a chapter on "Religious Ethics"). I utilized a recent article by American Religious Historian, Mark Noll (Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame). Noll argues, in this essay, that the "First Founding" of the U.S. was comprised of mainly New England Puritan groups that were largely 'theocratic,' but with other, more 'secularizing' voices such as Thomas Jefferson. Noll, very astutely, goes on to argue that the "Second Religious and Governmental 'Founding' of the U.S.A." happened immediately after the Civil War with the reincorporation of the 'confederate states' that were 'conquered' in many ways by the Union. Noll describes American Religiosity in the later, post-bellum 1800's as "voluntaristic" which basically is the form of 'free association' Church membership that we have today (i.e. complete freedom to either join a congregation or to not join one with no particular governmental stance given one way or the other).
Having said all of this, the idea that "GOD" is anything other than Father, Son and Holy Spirit with Jesus Christ as God Incarnate is obviously not the Christian view. Various forms of heresy "within" Christianity have happened due to mistakes on this point (for example, the 'Arian' view that GOD is 'above' Jesus Christ and that Jesus is only 'semi-divine' or the new Pentecostal Oneness view that denounces the Trinity by collapsing all three persons of the GODhead into Jesus' Name . . .).
Concerning Buddhism, well, they are non-theistic, not really believing in 'divinity' at all. Islam is essentially a non-Judaic monotheism that similarly denigrates the PERSON of Jesus Christ as being 'only a prophet' and even saying that Jesus did not really die on the cross (the "Islamic 'VERSION' of Jesus Christ" is obviously quite different and at odds with ANY Christian understanding of Christ).
So, having said this, thank you Chad for your subtle and nuanced political thought! Thank you also Pastor J for your tenacious DEFENSE of Orthodox Christian Belief (the same view of Christ and the Trinity currently preached and believed by 2 billion plus Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants . . . and also the same view preached and believed since the New Testament era and for almost 2,000 years!!! :-)
Love and blessings in Christ Jesus,
Rob
I consider myself to be a "Fundamentalist Agnostic" in many ways. I don't know the nature of G-d, and I don't believe that anyone else knows the nature of G-d.
I don't see a fundamental difference between Yahweh and Allah. Both incarnations of G-d come from a nomadic people. Both advocate defense of community, and through the words of their priests demand adherence to certain laws.
I also don't see a fundamental difference between the story of Jesus and the myths of Dionysus. Both converted water into wine for community gatherings, and both are considered incarnations of the cycle of birth, death and rebirth.
I choose not to put limits on G-d, because any limits I place on the divine translate into limits that I place on myself. If we worship "the one true G-d", then we must be able to recognize all forms of that G-d.
CHAD,
OY VEY . . . I can call you a "Unitarian-Universalist MYSTIC . . ." I guess some things I'll have to keep working on with you . . . ;-)
Try praying the rosary sometime. IT WORKS! Love in Christ Jesus, Rob
Post a Comment