It's good to see the UN offering such a nuanced perspective. Duane Oldfield's Religion and Politics class at Knox was helpful to me in this regard. Nothing makes the point clearer than studying Buddhist terrorists. I mean, seriously. If they can't make all their adherents pacifist, you've got to start looking to human reasons before looking to the religion when bad stuff appears.
Which is not to say religion is entirely off the hook. But blaming Islam itself suggests there aren't any resources for a more egalitarian perspective within Islam. I don't believe that's true, and there are lots of moderate Muslims nowadays arguing that the requirement of the veil is an Arabic cultural demand, not a tenet of Islam.
Which is not to say religion is entirely off the hook. But blaming Islam itself suggests there aren't any resources for a more egalitarian perspective within Islam. I don't believe that's true, and there are lots of moderate Muslims nowadays arguing that the requirement of the veil is an Arabic cultural demand, not a tenet of Islam.
My experiences with Christians have shown me that what is the same religion in name may feel completely different and impact society completely differently as well, depending on who is doing the interpreting. I agree; I see no reason why Islam would be any different. There are both Christians and Muslims I wouldn't want next door, and there are Christians and Muslims that I wouldn't mind at all having next door.
I have to ask - Buddhist terrorists? I have to admit my complete ignorance on this, but I have to know more. What? Who? Where? When? Did they toss logic completely out the window and plan to bomb their way to nirvana? *confused*
They were the folks who release sarin gas in the Tokyo subways.
The text we read when talking about religious violence was Mark Juergensmeyer's Terror in the Mind of God. I found it really useful and still refer to it from time to time. (Also useful was God's Long Summer, which focuses on religious themes on both sides of the 1960s fight for civil rights.)
I think one problem with analyses in our secular time is that we tend to want to factor in religion in a very binary manner: either it is to blame or it isn't. In reality, if one looks at a heavily religious society, it becomes impossible to parse out religion and culture: the religion is a fundamental aspect of the culture. It's very easy to say that Islam is to blame for the problems in the middle east, and it's very PC to say that Islam is peaceful and is not really to blame, but neither of these is even a logical possibility.
As logodaedaly also points out, although not in these exact words, even the word "Islam" is ambiguous, as it is not clear whether one means the tenets of the religion or the manner in which the religion is practiced. An "Arabic cultural demand" may not be required by the Koran, but if it is part of how the Muslims practice their religion, it is certainly not divorced from Islam.
Comments 5
Which is not to say religion is entirely off the hook. But blaming Islam itself suggests there aren't any resources for a more egalitarian perspective within Islam. I don't believe that's true, and there are lots of moderate Muslims nowadays arguing that the requirement of the veil is an Arabic cultural demand, not a tenet of Islam.
Reply
My experiences with Christians have shown me that what is the same religion in name may feel completely different and impact society completely differently as well, depending on who is doing the interpreting. I agree; I see no reason why Islam would be any different. There are both Christians and Muslims I wouldn't want next door, and there are Christians and Muslims that I wouldn't mind at all having next door.
I have to ask - Buddhist terrorists? I have to admit my complete ignorance on this, but I have to know more. What? Who? Where? When? Did they toss logic completely out the window and plan to bomb their way to nirvana? *confused*
Reply
They were the folks who release sarin gas in the Tokyo subways.
The text we read when talking about religious violence was Mark Juergensmeyer's Terror in the Mind of God. I found it really useful and still refer to it from time to time. (Also useful was God's Long Summer, which focuses on religious themes on both sides of the 1960s fight for civil rights.)
Reply
As logodaedaly also points out, although not in these exact words, even the word "Islam" is ambiguous, as it is not clear whether one means the tenets of the religion or the manner in which the religion is practiced. An "Arabic cultural demand" may not be required by the Koran, but if it is part of how the Muslims practice their religion, it is certainly not divorced from Islam.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment