Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Giving Up Religious Supremacism

Winds of Change is discussing a post by Ali Eteraz. His thesis is that we need to give up partisanship. That no political philosophy is better than another. Split the differences.

Ali says:

I cannot in clean conscience engage against religious supremacism and exclusion if I engage in ideological supremacism and exclusion.
Sure you can.

For the most part it is impossible to tell whether belief in God A or God B or God Ba has more merit.

However, one can measure the results of one ideology over another. Capitalism vs. Communism for instance. Or Self Government vs. Despotism.

Modern man has advanced through differentiation. You know reason. Occam's Razor and all that. We have rules for judging differences. In size. In weight. Even in opinion.

I'd hate to give all that up just so you can feel good about giving up religious supremacism.

Cross Posted at Classical Values and at The Astute Bloggers

6 comments:

The Gentle Cricket said...

I'm a big fan of partisanship. I think "polarization" and even heated debate are signs of a healthy democracy. Our system of government was founded upon - and remains strong due to - competing principles. It attenuates extreme positions, sets a forum for compromise, and is a template for discussion issues to find a suitable solution.

allen said...

Posted earlier at the Belmont

Several evenings ago, I went to a barbeque at a friend’s home. He is retired military and many of his quests were either retired or active duty military. As you can well imagine, the war was on everyone’s mind. During the course of conversation, a retired Chief asked,

“Since you (Jews) and the Muslims worship one god, why the animosity?”

In responding, I drew attention to a salient detail, generally overlooked: two people worshipping one god is not the same thing as two people worshipping the same god.

A day ago, or so, I saw a young, burka clad woman interviewed by the BBC. She proclaimed her pride in the burka, a sign of her devotion to Islam. Furthermore, she informed the reporter that the opinions of non-Muslims concerned her little, because this life is a test – an ordeal to be endured until death released her from sin into paradise.

It is my understanding of Jewish tradition that this life is an ongoing sacrament, and G-d’s gifts are to be enjoyed with thanksgiving. It was the G-d of the Hebrews who exclaimed in delight that His creation was not merely good, but “very” good. Moreover, this G-d is infinitely and ever creating: look to the heavens, all around the universe is birthing. It is our purpose to emulate our Creator in this life, the only one in which we can be certain of exercising that profoundly divine attribute of creative freedom.

“The world to come is not only a hereafter but also a herenow. This is the meaning of existence: to reconcile liberty with service, the passing with the lasting, to weave the threads of temporality into the fabric of eternity.”
___Rabbi Abraham Heschel

So, the young Muslim woman rejects the present in order to earn the future, while this Jew embraces the present as the future. That which informs us is not at all the same.

Mickey Rat

***

M. Simon said...

allen,

Most excellent!

linearthinker said...

Simon--deftly put, nice post.

cricket--also a worthy comment..

Allen--I'd have expected more from a retired chief, but who am I to judge, being just an army vet...your reply was eloquent.

Anonymous said...

We will have every Hizbollah women fucked by dogs.
We will send Phallus of ours into ass of All priests muslims.
We will have Khamenei and Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad and Khatami and Akbar Ganji fucked by a great penis Of donkey and whale .
We will fuck all foreign government that help mullah.
کیر سگ تو کس ننه سید اولاد پیغمبر و کس ننه خود پیامبر اسلام.
کیر خوک تو کس ننه امام حسین.
کیر خر تو کس ننه شیعیان.
صلوات: الله و کیر خر تو کس ننه محمد و آل محمد.
This is a beautiful cultural message for you.

M. Simon said...

Anon. Thursday, May 31, 2007 1:57:00 PM UTC,

Appears to have issues with the current government of Iran. Or as I prefer Persia.

I would not state it in quite such language, however I am in general agreement.