Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The "This isn't a war about religion" line.
aruanan | October 8, 2001 | aruanan

Posted on 10/08/2001 5:14:52 AM PDT by aruanan

The assumption that 'religion' can't be at the heart of things in the present conflict is itself an unexamined article of faith. It comes from the tradition of naturalism which had defined religion as something dealing with the unreal, the merely believed, beyond the grave, pie in the sky by and by, and had defined politics as the manner of dealing with real things in this present physical universe.

Two main attitudes flow from this worldview:

1. The harder leftist view: Since there's no reality behind any religious view (defined as a belief in the "supernatural" or a god or spirits), then anyone claiming to be doing anything for religious reasons is

a) ignorant, in which case he should be enlightened,

b) a fool and impervious to enlightenment, in which case he should either be eliminated or marginalized so as not to impede the real work in making this a fit world for humanity,

c) merely using religious imagery to promote some non-religious goal, in which case he should be stopped unless he happens to be weakening overall religious belief by what he's doing and so indirectly fulfilling the goal of a).

2. The softer, friendlier-sounding, Western political liberal view (the demythologized hard-left view--kindergarten communism) : Since we know that there is no reality behind any religious view, but since we know that such views can give comfort to those who believe in them and that misunderstanding about these views can cause conflict, then

a) people should be allowed to freely believe in (emphasis on 'believe' as opposed to 'act on the basis of') whatever they choose to believe in because diversity can enrich our society (for instance, Johnny here likes plaid shirts and Petyr likes those charming European blouses and Kishandra likes the vibrant colors of African dashikis and Wan-soo, bless his hardworking little heart, likes the button down collars of the corporate world, but they're all just shirts and none is better than the others--the only thing different is who likes what and how much he/she likes it),

b) people should not question the religious views of anyone else (because ultimately they have no actual supernatural referent ANYWAY) and that's a PRIVATE, personal thing (see b above about marginalization), and to do so is not being respectful of their beliefs,

c) squabbling about things that are ultimately meaningless is just not a polite thing to do in our enlightened society because then we're not being respectful and getting along,

d) people who persist in acting as though their religion is true should be tolerated unless they do something annoying to other people in which case they should not only be tolerated but DEEPLY UNDERSTOOD and when they are deeply understood they will finally realize that what they believe in is just as true as (or no more true than) what everyone else believes in and will settle down and be happy with Johnny and Petyr and Kashindra (or is it Kishandra? Oh well, names are diverse, too!) and little Wan-soo in our big happy classroom of humanity so we can all lie down together on the nap rugs of international peace and harmony, and,

e) if people should do something REALLY bad, like kill someone else, for what they call their religion, then we know that they are really doing it for political and not truly religious purposes because any true religion wouldn't do such a thing, in which case we should be very careful about doing anything at all because it would just provoke them and cause other ignorant people to join their cause for the wrong (ie, religious) reasons. Besides, since no one would have done anything really bad for religious reasons, then it must have been for some other reason, so we should try to understand their grievances and see what it was that WE did to make them feel this way (since there's no other reality but this present world and since we are the only other people in it and they have a disagreement with us, then we must have caused them to do this terrible thing) and try to help them so that we can join Johnny and Petyr and Kishandra and little Wan-soo on the nap rugs of international peace and harmony and do the most important thing in life--just get along.

No matter what.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

1 posted on 10/08/2001 5:14:52 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aruanan
My God, have you ever nailed it on the head!!!
2 posted on 10/08/2001 5:21:37 AM PDT by McBuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
I agree with your assessment. However, I think there IS a political and military reason why our government does not acknowledge the religious element to the present conflict. Namely, if we openly agree with Bin Laden that this is a RELIGIOUS war, then all Muslims, regardless of their sympathies will be forced by Islamic law to come to the aid of their fellow believers. Such a wide scale conflict would surely stress our capabilities to the breaking point, as well as unleash too many terrorists acts within our own borders from Muslims who do not sympathize with Bin Laden. For this reason, I think it is best that President Bush keep up this humanistic/naturalistic approach. Don't you?
3 posted on 10/08/2001 5:39:59 AM PDT by wjeanw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McBuff
Thanks! A good friend of mine got dumped on because he dared to say that this war is indeed a war about religion (at least from Osama et al.'s point of view, ha ha ha, "point of view", the infection extends to the common language). I thought he needed some sarcasm to cheer him up.
4 posted on 10/08/2001 5:41:55 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wjeanw
I agree -- the pres' language should remain vague, but it should remain clear in OUR minds what this is about. Islam is the enemy. It's certainly the enemy of Western civilization.
5 posted on 10/08/2001 5:45:13 AM PDT by Temple Drake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
the bottom line is I trust GW Bush, and I believe what he and others in his administration are saying about this not being a war about religion, before I believe any (unknown) typing their thoughts and beliefs over the net. I look at the late King Hussein of Jordan, (just for example) and his lovely wife Queen Noor who are Muslim, among others that I have read about and I cannot believe all Muslims are fanatics. I just wonder why some people are continuing to perptetuate a falshood that our President GW Bush is denying. Guess who I will believe first ???
6 posted on 10/08/2001 5:47:07 AM PDT by DreamWeaver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wjeanw
I agree with your assessment. However, I think there IS a political and military reason why our government does not acknowledge the religious element to the present conflict. Namely, if we openly agree with Bin Laden that this is a RELIGIOUS war, then all Muslims, regardless of their sympathies will be forced by Islamic law to come to the aid of their fellow believers. Such a wide scale conflict would surely stress our capabilities to the breaking point, as well as unleash too many terrorists acts within our own borders from Muslims who do not sympathize with Bin Laden. For this reason, I think it is best that President Bush keep up this humanistic/naturalistic approach. Don't you?

Yes. An important consideration that many appear to miss is that while one side can declare a war for purely religious reasons (as Usama already has), the one against whom they have declared it can resist and counter-attack for reasons having to do with personal security not directly related to their own religion at all. Both sides don't have to be doing things for the same reason for the war to have been one caused for religious reasons. For instance, when you are robbed at gunpoint and resist by icing the gunman before he can ice you, you're not engaging in the same action for the same reason. You both want your money, but the robber doesn't have a legitimate right to it or to your life or to threaten your life. His attempt to take it for "selfish", criminal reasons, doesn't make your defense of your money and life equally "selfish" and criminal.
7 posted on 10/08/2001 5:52:04 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: McBuff
Taking the emotion out of it,I'm quite sure that most, if not all, muslims are happy about the 9/11 attack. It seems to be their 'teachings' that any anti-muslim beliefs are evil, and should be destroyed. Just as we (Americans) believe that communists are evil. The biggest problem I have with them is (aside from their joy of seeing 6000 innocent people murdered) none of them have the COURAGE to stand up and proclaim their hatred for us! I would have so much more respect for their whole religion if one of them would just stand up and shout what they believe in! Don't worry, we'll find you anyway. You may as well be on the record once in your lives. I can't believe that their god teaches them to deny their beliefs in the face of danger. Or to run and hide and blame others. Or to lie, murder, and steal from their own people. Or to prostitute themselves to their enemies, selling out their people and 'beliefs' for a handfull of dollars. Very brave and noble teachings! No wonder why they hide behind towels and veils....
8 posted on 10/08/2001 6:12:54 AM PDT by progrockscott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VOA, TomB
bump for continued visibility
9 posted on 10/08/2001 6:28:08 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
BTTT
10 posted on 10/08/2001 6:41:00 AM PDT by varon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: varon
Gracias, hombre!
11 posted on 10/08/2001 6:48:04 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
This is the best way to handle it. The alternative that this editorial seems to advocate would be to declare war on Islam. Is that really what we want to do?

Yes, our leaders should understand what the real stakes are. But that doesn't mean that they have to say publicly and officially what they really think and fear. It's hardly in our national interest to make this into a "religious war" or even to admit that, in Huntington's words, it is a "clash of cultures."

12 posted on 10/08/2001 7:02:42 AM PDT by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
This is the best way to handle it. The alternative that this editorial[?] seems to advocate would be to declare war on Islam. Is that really what we want to do?

No, we don't declare a war on Islam just because some Muslims declare a war on us and say that they are doing it for religious reasons. We declare a war on them because of the actual things they've done and still threaten to do to us regardless of the reason that they use to justify their actions to themselves. However, it nevertheless is true that bin Ladin et al., are describing their actions as a holy war of Islam against the infidels. It does NO ONE any good at all to say that this isn't true and that they aren't really doing what they do for the reasons they themselves offer.

All we have to do is tell the rest of the world's Muslims (and everyone else)

1. that how we treat them, or anyone else, won't be based on what they believe but on how they act on the basis of that belief,
2. that they can practice their Islam to their heart's contentment as long as they don't attack us,
3. that the best way they can keep themselves safe (from us) is to disavow the actions of bin Ladin and associates and to help us help them shuffle off these mortal coils and
4. if they do choose to attack us for religious or other reasons, we will be crawling down their throats strictly from a practical standpoint.
13 posted on 10/08/2001 8:05:34 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Also see #7.
14 posted on 10/08/2001 8:06:31 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Temple Drake
What is your recommendation? We declare on the entire Islamic world from Indonesia to Morocco? Just wondering.
15 posted on 10/08/2001 8:10:28 AM PDT by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: diotima; Mercuria; Pray4USA; Luis Gonzalez; Mr. Bungle; Manny Festo; RnMomof7
FYI.
16 posted on 10/09/2001 6:37:26 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
Thanks for the flag..excellent assessment..may I post it else where?
17 posted on 10/09/2001 6:46:19 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
I am not only book-marking this, I am printing it out and making copies.

Mind if I send it to one of the English language Japanese newspapers?

18 posted on 10/09/2001 6:58:46 PM PDT by Ronin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
I'll give a recommendation. We start taking out all the radical mullahs who foment this hatred against us. Worldwide.
19 posted on 10/09/2001 7:06:11 PM PDT by atafak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
No matter how much I learn about Muslim extremism, "bin Ladenism" or whatever names we have learned to attach to this movement, I keep coming back to the same conclusion, and it's a conclusion that is perhaps historically without precedent: that there is a very considerable mass of people occupying our planet who have simply reached the absolute dead-end of their historical moment. We'd better have a strong stomach because this is going to be a bloodbath of historical proportions, and now is there no turning back, and they want it that way. They seem to truly want and expect to be exterminated, and they believe that even if all of them are killed in the process of trying to defeat the West and re-establish their brand of Islam as a dominant force on the world stage, then new generations will follow them and successfully complete the struggle. Of course they are fatuously aligning themselves with the Palestinian struggle and the Palestinians are just desperate enough to cheer him on, without ever asking themselves what bin Laden would do for them if he ever "took over" the world. This is a dead end for Islamic fundamentalism, the stakes are as high as they've ever been raised, and, one way or another, they are about to exit the world stage.
20 posted on 10/09/2001 7:27:03 PM PDT by willyboyishere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson