So then how do you have the discussion with a person who follows their faith, maybe in a lapsed way, but still maintains social and familial contacts that are heavily steeped in the religion and NOT alienate them by saying something like, "Your faith condones rape and violence and a bunch of foolish antiquated beliefs?" The religion may very well be flawed, but if you have a person who adheres to its principles - without themselves being violent - and that person does not want to be disowned or cause a bunch of turmoil within their family, how do you hope to have a discussion without making some kind of distinction between the religion they want to keep following and the flawed doctrines that are causing violence? I'm interested in actually fixing a problem, not trying to prove how illogical and incorrect religion is. I think the discussion has to be framed in a way that says, "Your faith and culture are great things, but [these] parts of it really need to change to fit into a free and safe society." If you frame it to someone by saying, "Your religion is full of terrorists and child rapists," I think you'll see less success.
I would converse with them like they’re a normal human being, and if their religion came up, I would listen to what they say. If they rebuked the rape and violence of the text, it would likely be a short conversation. If they thought apostates should be killed, I would disagree vehemently, explain why they are wrong and feel zero shame for saying so as an outsider. Just like I would if I talked with a Mormon who agreed with forced polygamy. I’ve actually had the former conversation, more or less, with a practicing Muslim co-worker. Religion never came up until he brought up how much he loves South Park and agrees with everything they’ve said about Islam and the prophet. We did not get into child rape or women-stoning because we were laughing too hard reciting our favourite lines. You’re trying so hard to paint my argument as saying every single Muslim is a terrorist or rapist, or trying to prove how illogical and incorrect their religion is, when all I’m saying is that the women and minorities who live in societies where Islam dominates the culture, or Sharia is followed, need our help. And pretending that the Islamic component of their culture plays no role in their subjugation, or saying that Westerners should stay silent about it, only helps the subjugators.
Unfortunately I don't think you can separate the two. The Western World lost a lot of lives, and spent a lot of time, winning this fight against Christianity, and it doesn't look like the Islamic World is going to have any easier a time of it.
In the same way that I have discussions with immediate family members who believe in God and other bullshit... I don't talk about it. If they try and steer things towards it, I'm blunt and say, "I don't want to talk about that". I had an aunt that really, REALLY wanted to talk around the whole "How can you be a moral person without God?" thing... I just flat out didn't engage, and told her I wouldn't. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking that only one or two religions have bad shit in them... the way Christianity "deals with" paedophilia and women is fucking horrible, for instance. Doesn't mean that I don't converse with people who are Christians... I just choose to ignore that part, as do they. You have to judge individuals on their commitment to the crazy in their religion... if you ask some Muslims if they'd go all jihad on your ass if they were told to by their religious leaders, most would say "no" (in my limited experience), even though their religion calls for it.
This mentality is what bothers me the most. Their entire life they think there's been someone watching and judging them so they can't really put themselves in the shoes of someone who doesn't believe. I haven't seen much of any consistency between faith and morality in the people I've known throughout my life. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and since no one adheres to the old testament anyway, they just rationalize the bad things they do in the same way they rationalize what parts of the book they have to follow. Most of them wouldn't be suicide bombers themselves, but depending on where you go many support it. It's kind of like the killing of apostates. If you put the knife in their hands most of them probably wouldn't do it, but they still believe it's a just act when committed in their faith.
And that is what I meant by "level of commitment to crazy". A number of Christians think abortion is wrong, and don't immediately condemn criminal acts that are perpetrated against those that facilitate or engage in those actions in the name of their religion, but they wouldn't do that stuff themselves.
I tend to agree with what Steven Weinberg said: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
I may be missing exactly what you mean, but I think I disagree in that I think separating the illogical parts from how a society is ran is the only solution. Meaning that a big part of the solution to religion-specific problems is making it personal, not public (as in government policy). You wanna believe that cracker is Jesus’ flesh or Mohammed rode a flying horse? Alrighty, you just don’t get to use any single book to dictate what others do. That’s a tall fucking order in many Muslim societies, I realize, and there are Islam-specific things that make it tougher, but that’s the goal line. We take for granted how genius that insight was in the U.S. constitution. Despite how I may come across, I’m actually optimistic that this won’t take so long, for a couple reasons. One is technology – no matter how repressed a country is, the young people will find ways to see the rest of the world online, and the lure of free thought and expression can even overcome indoctrination. The other is women’s education and birth control – it’s a noble cause on its own, but for some reason it’s rarely described by what it does practically: cure abject poverty (shh, don’t tell Mother Theresa). Between the Obamas, Gates, Carters and Clintons, there is a huge push and a lot of dollars being directed at that cause worldwide, and in most cases it doesn’t take more than two generations to lift the floor dramatically. Along with young dudes getting laid without having to raise a kid before they’re ready, less poverty means they’re less susceptible to brainwashing mullahs.
Christians, God bless 'em...and I mean every one of them-- need to flat out admit they hand-pick the parts of their faith they like and fuck the rest that they don't care for. They sleep around. They get divorced. They are gay. They let women wear pants. Punishment for disobeying those orders isn't exactly a slap in the wrist, either. It's brimstone. Every day progressive Christians try and creep further and further away from the hatefiscience fictiony-shit like the Virgin Birth or the loaves and fishes. But they're still there, in the Bible. God's word. You cant tell somebody you're morally superior to them because you get your influence from a book that says kill all the gays. What a paradox: if you really wanted to be a "good Christian" these days you would have to ignore the bible. Like the Pope.
This is not something religion will allow you to do until and unless you fundamentally break that religion's back. Christianity was broken in exactly this way, and it was a long, arduous process that cost mountains of treasure and seas of blood. Islam has not yet been broken in the parts of the world where it holds sway, and it won't go with any less of a fight.
I think that can be said for every major religion. It is a book full of parables, no different than reading old Greek/Roman mythology. There is one major religion out there that a large portion of their adherents still take their sky wizard's book as literally how they should live their life.....the others are trying to back away from it as best they can but for some people that is hard, they were heavily indoctrinated in it from a young age but each successive generation becomes less and less crazy it seems.
I agree. I tend to think that it will take time for that religion to mature and come to the realization that it has to change, just like Christianity did. It will take education and time, and I think that's part of why limiting education is such a mandate for some of their old-school leaders... they understand that an educated flock tends to wander away.
I heard this on a podcast the other day and thought it would go nicely here with this topic because he raises some good points.
You are incorrect. Religion and Culture are distinct things, and while the lines may blur as they are not completely insulated from one another, and in fact, influence each other, they are by and large separate things. Do Muslims speak Arabic because the Koran says they have to? Nope. While written in Arabic, their culture dictates they speak a certain language. Women not allowed to drive or vote? This is a tricky one, because people will say 'religion' when it's really culture. There is no prohibition of driving in the Koran, nor voting. It's culture - though dressed up as religion. While I agree the government and religion can be one and the same in these countries, they have a separate culture, as does everywhere, that while infused with religion, just like us, sets forth mores (pronounced 'more a's') and societal norms that become a culture. What is good art? What's good food? What's a good sport? What's a good looking woman? All of these questions are answered by culture, and while it may be infused with religion, it is different.
In Chicago this weekend, the CPD cancelled all days off and bulked up security around Wrigley. The good news is it was safe around the ballpark, however, the rest of the city turned into a shit show. (The weekend totals from heyjackass.com ) Final Stupidity Tally: 17 killed, 44 wounded 2015 weekend tally: 3 killed, 28 wounded 2014 weekend tally: 4 killed, 15 wounded As of 10/31/16, 09:43 CDT the numbers for the year are: Shot & Killed: 579 Shot & Wounded: 3087 Total Shot: 3656 Total Homicides: 647 That's closing in on a total number shot that is equivalent to the population of my childhood hometown with the whole high school murdered.
So the lines blur, they aren’t insulated (separated) from and in fact influence each other…but they are separate. Got it. No Quranic prohibition of women driving cars, hey? Thanks captain obvious. But do you think that there might be some connection between the book’s blatant subjugation of women and how women within that culture are allowed to operate technology that didn’t exist when it was written? Maybe? Do you think cultures, purely of their own volition, want to stone adulterers and rape nine year olds, and the book is just a handy excuse? Or pray five times per day, en masse? Punishment for blasphemy/apostasy is explicitly a religious edict, by the way, and the populous is sometimes more harsh than the government in handing it out. But cultures that aren’t dominated by religion don’t tend to mete out religious punishments. Picture a Venn diagram. The big circle is ‘culture’. Within it are many circles of different sizes depending on what and where the culture is. They all include things like food, sport, art, politics, economics and religion. In some cultures the religion circle is tiny. In others it’s large. In theocracies it nearly envelops the entire culture circle.
I guess it wasn't obvious enough, because you are still defending a factually incorrect idea. Religion and Culture are separate things. Always have been, always will be. What you seem to be missing is that religion has its own culture as well. Was the Catholic Church required by dogma to overlook rapes of children? No. It was not part of the religion, but it certainly was a part of the culture. Same thing in theocracies. There's dogma, based on texts and analysis and there's culture, based on a whole host of things. I really don't get what your endgame here is. You are arguing something that is definitionally and factually incorrect. Why?
Couldn't agree more, and I'm at a complete loss as to why people seem to understand this about Christianity, but don't understand it about Islam, which is also spread across the globe.
I think a large part of the ignorance about Islam is just that, ignorance. We're not exposed to it very much, at least my generation wasn't. Maybe it's different now. I certainly didn't have any friends that were Muslims growing up. While I did meet several as I got older, I never got the feeling that it was the only thing about that person. I never said 'oh, that's my muslim friend or even thought it. I'm not religious, but being a political scientist, obviously I had to learn about all major religions as they have all impacted history and politics over the centuries. I guess I never really viewed Islam, Judiasm, and Christianity as all that different. I will say I have the following bias: I have always felt that the more time you spend trying to impress an imaginary friend, the less time I have for you. Not a very nice sentiment on my part, I know, and one that has lessened as I've gotten older, but I know it's still there, so I figured I should be up front about my bias.
Well gee, I was trying to be polite with the Venn diagram, but since you asked… Do you think religion counts as ‘beliefs’ and ‘customs’ in these definitions of culture? How about these ones, that include religion explicitly? My favourite part is that you wrote that without actually checking the definition. Too easy. So I guess my only question is, like, what's your endgame here? You're arguing something that is defintionally and factually incorrect. Why? Besides this lack of separation, we actually agree on religion in general. History shows that they've all had their turn up to bat, and right now the two most followed religions are causing more problems than the rest, in a whole bunch of ways. Unfortunately, only Christianity has been, for the most part, defanged (no theocracies, at least). One more to go.