Religion and Political Controversy in the U.S.

Islamic Flexibility

2009-12-18T11:38:00.001-08:00

In his book, Acts of Faith, Eboo Patel demonstrates his return to giving Islam a continuing important role in his life which fuels his attempts to promote understanding and unity across religions through his Interfaith Youth Core. Reaching the point in having the confidence in his religion within the US was an often difficult process. After the terrorist events of September 11th, 2001, Muslims have had a difficult time finding a place in American society. Yet it is clear that they desire a place and make concerted efforts to do so. Mr. Patel is making great strides not only because he chooses to work for religious understanding between the many religions, but mostly and self-servingly, to promote an understanding and accepting of his own faith of Islam in America.

There is an obvious anti-Muslim section of our society. After 9/11, fear fuelled these sentiments from a lack of understanding as to what actual Islamic beliefs are like. The media was partially to blame but Christian Conservative leaders led a tremendous backlash against Islam. Their prejudices were passed onto many who follow them. People make decisions about how they feel about Muslims based on how Muslims have been presented or what people have been told about them (Wuthnow 68). Unfortunately, this has often been negative mainly because being Muslim has such a connotation with being “foreign” and as such, being an outsider.

Although Islamic practices are rigid, it appears that because of the pluralistic nature of American culture, they are changing to better fit in with the values of our culture. Women are included in leading roles, prayers are translated and presented in English, and the unbendable rules are being gently bent to accommodate those Muslims now accustomed to more flexibility in the US. Muslims often come to the United States to study and learn about our culture. For the most part, this demonstrates the open-mindedness involved in assimilating into American society and the temporary putting aside of certain values to accomplish this.

Churches dealing with the diversity of faiths in the US often tend to simply avoid the issue and rarely talk about how to relate to their neighbors (Wuthnow 244). Eboo Patel is attempting to create and search for common ground between religious communities. By speaking with religious leaders and finding ways for youths of various faiths to come together and discuss the values they have in common, he is promoting a future understanding that will lead to religions acknowledging each other and the important role each has in our society. More importantly, he is allowing others to explore his own faith. He is also continuing to search for a place in American culture and his success is as much for himself and other Muslims as for America itself. With hard work by people such as Mr. Patel supporting the understanding of religion and diversity, our culture will be more ready to tackle the moments in the future when there will be other difficulties to overcome.

Works Consulted

Patel, Eboo. Acts of Faith The Story of an American Muslim, the Struggle for the Soul of a Generation. New York: Beacon, 2008. Print.

Wuthnow, Robert. America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2005. Print.

Catholic Church and Diversity

2009-12-18T09:07:00.000-08:00

The Catholic Church is having a problem with diversity in its higher ranking positions. Although there may be a diverse following, there is not a lot of diversity among the Bishops. In the past twenty years Catholic services or Masses had only been in English in America. There are some churches where the language is the one that the followers speak, like Polish or Portuguese. However, those churches are few and far between. Many churches have changed in the past twenty years to incorporate Spanish speaking Masses. There are still many churches that need more diversity and broad ranged of different ethnicites. An article by Frank Ponce for the New Catholic World written in 1980 addressed this problem and set out several solutions to fix it. He points out that while many parishes are diverse the people in power are not. “The conclusion: few dioceses have – or are willing to involve – Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Asian Americans, or other minorities in responsible, diocesan decision-making positions” (Mathisen, 756). He recognized the need for the Catholic Church to be more diverse and give credit to its followers.

Ethnicity is not the only thing that the Catholic Church needs to look at to be more diverse. Women have almost no high ranking positions in the Church's infrastructure. Women can never be priests, they can only be nuns. In Chile, women are taking on roles where they have more power and can do more for the Church. “They are doing many of those tasks traditionally reserved to priests: conducting paraliturgical ceremonies, Catechetics for adults and children, the formation of Mother Catechists, home visiting, the development of primary communities, parochial administration, and even a limited participation in the administration of the Sacraments” (Gillfeather, 39). Women are beginning to find a bigger roles within the church, but they are still not allowed to become priests. Vatican II made a lot of differences in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. “Vatican II itself revealed a degree of pluralism withing the institutional Church that hitherto had not been seen publicly” (D'Antonio,382). This helped the church to modernize some of its old policies and make the Church a friendlier and more accessible venue. “That is, the traditional leaders of the Vatican, with their opposition to just about everything Vatican II stood were confronted by a Pope (John XXIII) who insisted on opening Church windows to let in some fresh air, and by bishops from around the world , eager for a chance to modify at least some aspects of life in the Roman Catholic church” (D'Antonio,382). The Catholic Church has come a long way in terms of being more accepting and welcoming of diversity, however, the Church still has a long way to go to be more accepting of gender and sexuality.

D'Antonio, William V. "Autonomy and democracy in an autocratic organization: The case of the Roman Catholic Church." Sociology of Religion 55.4 (1994): 379-396. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 18 Dec. 2009.

Gilfeather, Katherine "The Changing Role of Women in the Catholic Church in Chile." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 16.1 (1977): 39. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 18 Dec. 2009.

Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

Religious Freedom

2009-12-10T13:30:00.000-08:00

(Old post on the Separation of Church and State)

The endless debate of the Separation between Church and State has always been insignificant to me. After reading Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists, this debate was still insignificant to me. Why was this separation so important when it didn't change anything? The Prop Eight results were infuriating; if this separation ignited so much freedom, then why is it that non-Christians are still the minority here in America? Shouldn't there be equality between the religious and the non-religious?

Then I realized what life would really be like without the separation between Church and State. All non-Christians would be in the minority, not just homosexuals. American culture would be drastically different. Without the separation of Church and State, America might not be the melting-pot it is now. All the cultures that are able to thrive so well here wouldn't exist in America. The Jewish community I belong to wouldn't exist, and the Hebrew classes that have brought me closer to my culture probably wouldn't be offered in the state school system.

The facts that intelligent design can still be taught in schools and that homosexuals still don't have equal rights make it seem like true separation between Church and State is far from complete. Yet, to have religious freedom means that all religions have equal rights. If Prop Eight had had different results, it would've meant that there wasn't a separation between Church and State--because there is a Christian majority here in the United States.

Greenberg, Paul. "Praise the Lord: Church and State are still Separate." Los Angeles Times Syndicate. July 3, 1992.

Religion as a Cure for Suffering

2009-12-10T12:06:00.000-08:00

(Old post on Weber)

A major component of religion that Max Weber examines in "The Social Psychology of the World Religions" is suffering. The masses wonder about why they suffer, why other people suffer, and why some people don't suffer at all. To explain this phenomenon, Weber examines the time line of suffering. The first sufferers were thought to be possessed by a demon--or otherwise afflicted by the wrath of a god. Because of this thought process, the sufferer would be cast out of society in order to save others in the society from the same fate. The lone sufferer would then seek the removal of his supposed evil, to ease his suffering. In need of a spiritual adviser, he goes to see a magician. The magician grants the sufferer good will, and in turn the sufferer--who is no longer suffering--brings a patronage to the magician.

Later, the explanation of suffering is updated from a god's wrath to the natural human disposition to sin. Because we sin, we deserve to suffer. According to this logic--if we are saved from our sins, we are saved from suffering. Thus, if we have a savior, we have a 'cure of the soul.' If we believe in a savior, yet still suffer, then we are given hope that we will be free from suffering in the afterlife. The idea of a savior ties into Weber's theme of social strata. The savior is typically not a figure from a depressed class, but is a figure from the ruling strata. These saviors are ethical divinities--they punish bad behavior and award the good. To deserve awards, a follower must pray, pay penances, and abstain from certain activities. If a follower doesn't do such things, he is punished by suffering. Hell is reserved for those who don't work for their repentance. But the loyal sufferers, those who prayed, paid penances, and abstained, will be rewarded in Heaven.

This idea of salvation continued to develop, eventually leading to 'rebirth' and 'redemption.' The more the masses needed an explanation for suffering, the more rituals and ideas the religion created to satisfy its followers. Because societies continue to expand and develop, religions will keep expanding and developing to accommodate their followers. This is easily seen in many modern sects of religion, such as reform movements.

The Ever Changing America

2009-12-09T23:25:00.000-08:00

Pluralism in America makes for a very unique society to be a part of. Not only does it allow a number of cultures to coexist, but it allows people to practice both American traditions as well as traditions from other cultures they identify with. By having this unique mixture of traditions America has become a place with an ever changing identity.
“In the United States the climate of tolerance and engagement of pluralism emerge not from an authoritarian central regime, but from a democratic experiment as an immigrant nation, a nation in which, at our best, we our motivated by ideals and principles” (Eck, 335). Because America has a constant inflow of immigrants the culture of America is in constant transformation. By sheer virtue that America in known as an “immigrant nation” it has a level of pluralism unlike much of the world. With a nation built by immigrants the United States has come to be a nation of change. One cannot simply say being an American means that you eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for lunch or on a higher note that to be American one has to be Christian. In fact, being American is now something in which people eat food from a variety of ethnic backgrounds and where two religions build their facilities next door to one another.
In the chapter “Bridge Building: A New Multireligious America, author Diane Eck, suggests that religious institutions are a place in which many immigrants gain insight into American culture. For example, Eck refers to Dr. Havanapola Ratanasara, a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk, who encouraged Buddhist immigrants to embrace the American culture by observing the popular holidays. “Americans as a people celebrate several major religious holidays regardless of their own personal beliefs” (340). By encouraging immigrants to take part in religious holidays other than their own, Dr. Havanapola Ratanasara models the level of tolerance Americans have or should have for one another.
As we can see, for many immigrants religious institutions become a place that not only allows them to preserve cultural traditions from their original culture, but also help them to assimilate into the American culture. This can also work the other way around; in many cases religions in America have to be willing to make accommodations or changes to attract immigrants. According to Cecilia Menjivar, “to reach out to new comers, churches also incorporate popular religious practices that are culturally essential for the immigrants” (25). This idea of incorporating different practices is a clear example of American pluralism. As suggested by Eck this willingness to bend from both the receiving society as well as the immigrants “means to be American is constantly being expressed in new ways as the fabric of America’s peoples change” (338).
Because of American pluralism the culture of America is always changing some way or another. It is one of the great qualities of American culture, in which we are not only able to interact with in such a diverse society, but also have the “freedom to grow” and become a model for the rest of the world.

Eck, Diane L. A New Religious America. San Francisco: Harper, 1997.

Menjivar, Cecilia. "Religion and Immigration in Comparative Perspective: Catholic and Evangelical Salvadorans in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Phoenix." Sociology of Religion, 64.1 (2003): 21-45.

Religion and Pluralism

2009-12-09T22:24:00.000-08:00

The belief in Pluralism involves the cooperation and respect from religions and their beliefs that differ from your own. Great controversy arose after the September 11 events in the United States. In the holy book of Islam, Muslims are taught pluralistic ideals. Many people cannot understand how a religion that promotes peace and acceptance amongst diverse, religious communities. Without Pluralism you have Nations that “experience conflict as a result of one religious, ethnic, or tribal groups being unable to respect and value the essential equality and humanity of groups different from itself”. The dispute between the terrorist attackers of 9-11 and the American west, is associated to the lack of pluralism. The holy book of Islam, the Quran, teaches respect and tolerance of all diverse human beings.

The Quran acknowledges the importance of tolerance amongst diverse communities and their beliefs. The Quran accepts that there are different people that hold their own truths. Judgment and salvation can come to anyone that has a true belief in their own God. The true meaning of any ancient text is hard to decipher, since translation and interpretation can often be subject to biased views. Due to some political interpretation the term Jihad now represents has a negative connotation associated with violence as “a general military offensive against nonbelievers and as a means of legitimizing political dominion” (Asani 46). To those that study the Quran and seek to understand its true meaning believe that a Jihad is instead, a moral struggle, in response aggression against them.

The Pluralist beliefs must be shared by the two opposing nations, such as Islam and the United States, in order to promote true peace and equality, and remain in a neutral state. Yet Pluralist debates to not simply happen amongst nations, conflicting beliefs on the subject of pluralism can be witnessed amid people of the same nation that hold different religious and political values. In the article, “Religious Diversity and Democratic Institutional Pluralism”, author Viet Bader argues that institutions and laws that govern the separation of church and state, and uphold the theories of pluralism have not been properly dealt with in the United States. He believes that a plan should be created and implemented to promote a “pluralized prospective on public reason for mutual understanding, decision making and democratic legitimacy” ( Bader 266).

The Issues that have been presented in the understanding of Pluralism will continue to occur if people to not reach a general understanding. Different cultural experiences will generate different cultural beliefs and values, yet the core of most religions is to find a deeper understanding of the world in which we cannot easily interpret and understand.

Asani, Ali S. “So That You May Know One Another”: A Muslim American Reflects on

Pluralism and Islam”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 588, Islam: Enduring Myths. Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.

in association with the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Web.

JSTOR. 3 December 2009.

Bader, Viet. “Religious Diversity and Democratic Institutional Pluralism”. Political

Theory, Vol. 31, No. 2 (Apr., 2003), pp. 265-294.Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. Web. JSTOR. 3 December 2009.

Moving Mountains: John Dewey

2009-12-09T20:50:00.000-08:00

Humanism does not worship the power of a superhuman; it requires faith in human power. John Dewey, an American philosopher, knew the direction the world needed to go. Dewey was one of the original signers on the 1933 humanist manifesto, and was involved in several other humanist projects during the thirties and forties.

John Dewey was born in Vermont in late 1859, just prior to the Civil War. Dewey was one of four children born to Archibald Dewey, a merchant and participant in the Union Army in Virginia, and Lucina Artemisia. Dewey’s mother was a strong believer in Calvinism, and influenced him through her belief of strong moral behavior and good acts. Dewey learned about various cultures through near by settlers in Burlington, such as the Irish and French-Canadian. He developed his formal education at through the University of Virginia, where he excelled in the sciences. “Dewey became aware of the world of ideas during his senior year. Courses on psychology (the science of mind and behavior), religion, ethics (the study of moral values), and logic (the science of reasoning) interested him more than his earlier training in languages and science.” [Encyclopedia of World Biography. John Dewey] Dewey graduated and tried to go in to teaching, but soon returned to school at the University of Michigan to receive his Doctorate at the age of twenty-five. He began teaching at the University and started following a thought pattern similar to the one his mother had raised him with, which was to think in constructive ways that would lead to progressive change and problem solving.

Dewey and his wife moved to New York for teaching opportunities, which opened the door to a diverse concentration of American cultural influence during the 1920’s. Here Dewey made connections, which resulted in the development of the League for Independent Political Action, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the American Association of University Professors. Dewey was widely criticized for his forthright opinions in philosophical interventions, however he had traveled the world and developed his ideas based on what he saw happening around him.

In his travels he had viewed human actions, which had been taken to extremes due to their overwhelming power, such as Adolph Hitler’s. Dewey wanted to create a universal education, which promoted the people to think creatively about their world, and develop ideas together. Dewey used his own teaching in the University in order to inspire his own thoughts and express his new ideas. In 1931 Dewey had a series of writings published in the New Republic, about creating a third political party. He involved himself with groups that would listen to what he had to say, and stuck his foot in the door with groups who would publish his ideas. By directing himself toward a left winged group his views were heard. He worked at gaining participation from political figures who would help him develop a third party to build a controlled system that could benefit all people. For Dewey, the change he wanted to see could not be accomplished by the either of the two parties, and he felt a deep need to get support in this third party idea. After retiring from teaching in the 1930’s Dewey joined the American Humanist Association who created the first Manifesto. The group wanted to create a standard set of ethics, which the world could agree upon and still hold religious beliefs. Dewey passed away in June 1952, before the second manifesto was produced.

Finnegan, Cara A. Elastic, Agnostic Publics: John Dewey’s Call for A Third Party. EbscoHost Access 8 Dec 2009 http://search.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=9318869&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live

Encyclopedia of World Biography John Dewey . Access 9 Dec 2009

http://www.notablebiographies.com/De-Du/Dewey-John.html

World Wide Community

2009-12-08T18:10:00.000-08:00

Cosmopolitanism speaks much more to a person’s character and willingness to see the world with an open mind. Religion seems to be so close-minded to the world around us. Christianity for example puts its theology and its scriptures above all other religions. Worshipping anything other than Christianity’s version of the “True God” is viewed as “idolatry, itself an offense against divine law…” (Appiah 10). But who decides what is true? Cosmopolitanism goes way beyond just religions. It serves to set a model of world wide community that looks beyond race or religion to see everyone as human beings.
Appiah brings the question of truth to light in chapter one of his book. He uses the example of the Catholic and Muslim religions. Each has its own practices, rituals, each believes their form of religion is “True”, and each believes the other is wrong. In contrast cosmopolitans are people who stand back and allow each group to pratice what they believe is true. There are two basic strands associated with cosmopolitism; first they have a high regard for art and literature from many different places. They also are very interested in the lives of the people who created the art and literature. Second they recognize that “…human beings are different and that we can learn from each other’s differences” (Appaih 4). Yet cosmopolitans do not have to agree or even approve with practices of other religions or cultures. Engaging with different religions or cultures has nothing do with approval; it has everything to do with respecting the group’s customs and beliefs. Without the beliefs the acts of a certain group have no meaning.
The main focus of cosmopolitism has to do with culture and how culture changes
over time. In Samuel Scheffler’s essay Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism he discusses the way people influence cultures around the world. He believes that cultures are in constant flux, constantly modifying, updating, and altering. He see this as a, “normal condition of living cultures” (Scheffler 256). This change is needed so the human race can progress. In his view there is no difference between Christians and Muslims or white and black. We are all citizens of the world and such we have an obligation to the world wide community of human beings to except and embrace our differences.
It is important to state that cosmopolitism does not believe that everyone has the right to do as they please just because they believe it is right. Shared values are needed to protect the world from anarchy. The key is to understand each others cultures. This makes for a more cultured society and one that can learn from each other.

Scheffler, Samuel "Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism." Utilitas 11.3 (1999): 255. Religion and Philosophy Collection. EBSCO. Web. 8 Dec. 2009.

Appiah and Pluralism

2009-12-08T00:27:00.000-08:00

I found Appiah’s views of cosmopolitanism to be very intriguing. His views remind me of religious pluralism, where people are willing and able to accept one another despite religious differences. He makes some very good points about how Muslims and Christians have very different views about who should be worshiped, and what is important in religion, whether it be going to Mecca or going to mass. The real issue is if we as a human race can learn to let people believe whatever they feel works for them, without judging them and forcing our beliefs, whatever they may be, upon someone else. This is what I understood Cosmopolitanism to be.

Appiah states in his first chapter that human beings are different, and we should learn from one another. I agree with him whole-heartedly. If we, as a humans, could learn to break down the barriers of religion and learn to accept each other on a human level and see that we all have something in common, then we would not have all of the problems we have today. Appiah also says that real disagreements often arise from religion, which supports the reason why religious pluralism is a good concept to embrace.

According to Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad in her essay, Claiming Muslim Space in America’s Pluralism, she says, “The mission for Muslims in the world is to combat un-Islamic orders and not to compromise with them.” This puts the idea of religious pluralism in a tough and awkward position. According to this quote, religious pluralism and the act of accepting other people and cultures that believe anything other than the Muslim faith is against the Muslim religion. How do we embrace religious pluralism when it can force a particular group of people to go against what they believe?

This is what makes this topic such a difficult one for us to figure out here is America where people have religious freedom. People have the right to believe whatever they want, and it is unconstitutional for us to force people to be pluralistic. In my opinion, the best way to go about this is to educate the masses about acceptance and tolerance. We do not have to force people around us to agree with what we believe, but we can teach people about tolerance.

Works Cited:

Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck. "Claiming Muslim Space in America's Pluralism." Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2001. 785-795. Print.

Cosmopolitanism and Responsibility

2009-12-07T18:57:00.000-08:00

Appiah begins Chapter Two by discussing the responsibility of cosmopolitans. He explains that the nature of a cosmopolitan is to feel responsible for the well-being of other cultures. That, because of the universal morality cosmopolitans experience, cosmopolitans consequently feel the need to help those that suffer. Appiah also discusses the anthropologists' aversion to such intervention. The anthropologist encourages us "to leave well enough alone" (Appiah, p 14). Much of this aversion is because of what anthropologists have seen throughout history. Even the best of intentions, as proven from witnessed history, can destroy cultures that could have otherwise survived.

The article I read, by Eduard Jordaan, explores world poverty and the lack of cosmopolitan support. Jordaan begins the article by arguing that if cosmopolitans did have the morality they claimed to, then they would be aiding those in poverty. Consequently, the lack of financial aid proves a lack of morality. This is a complex issue. Firstly, I don't agree that helping others is proof of morality. I think that the anthropologist thought of conserving other cultures shows more of their morality than trying to save other cultures would. To "save" a culture is very subjective. This subjectivity seems very counter intuitive to the cosmopolitan's thought process. How does a cosmopolitan know when to help a culture in need? When a culture doesn't have adequate food or clothing? Or when a culture is starving? Prevention of death from starvation seems like a good place to start. But wouldn't such help eventually infringe upon the culture of the society in need? Also, to financially aid those in need is not always a possibility, as Jordaan discusses.

As politics function today, there will always be poverty, and death by starvation. So what should an altruistic cosmopolitan do? They could take advice from the anthropologist, and conserve other cultures just as they are. They could drain their own finances trying to help a small portion of those who are starving to death, thus reducing their own quality of life without helping many others. They could intervene on a larger scale and risk destroying cultures in need. Or, they could realize that they can't change the world and give off the air of passivity that caused Jordaan to write his article in the first place.

It appears that Jordaan is displacing his ill feelings by blaming cosmopolitans for their seeming passivity. Shouldn't Jordan write to an audience who doesn't care about such matters, and attempt to educate that audience about their need to give financial aid? Instead he takes cosmopolitans, who feel morally responsible already, and basically tells them that they should be doing more. There really isn't much one can do besides giving time and money, which on a personal scale doesn't change much. A cosmopolitan could get into politics, and try to change things that way. But our country alone is in too much debt to save the world from starvation. Convincing those to do more than what is possible is like beating a dead horse. So many people do so much to help those in need, and it just isn't enough.

Kwame, Appiah. Cosmopolitanism, Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: Norton & Co, 2006. Web

Jordaan, Eduard. Cosmopolitanism, Freedom, and Indifference: A Levinasian View. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political. Jan-Mar 2009, Vol. 34 Issue 1, p83-106, 24p.

Caste and Class in India

2009-12-07T18:40:00.000-08:00

When reading Patel's chapter, An American in India, I remembered past travels that I took to Bolivia as a teenager. The younger I was the more I hated going back to Bolivia every summer. I hated the smell of the dirty streets riddled with beggar's and the fact that I had to brush my teeth with bottled water and I especially hated the nonexistence of American food. It was not until my later teen years that I began to appreciate the culture and sympathizes with the poverty. Similar to Patel's experience, I saw the unjust treatment of people and the acceptance of that treatment and I saw the importance of a class system and wealth. Patel realizes his early resistance to his Indian culture was due to what he was subjected to in America. He pinpoints America as a nation that, "seduced me [him] into adopting its styles and its scorn, forced me [him] to sacrifice my [his] true heritage in a devil's bargain for acceptance, and then laughed viciously when it slowly dawned on me that I would never be anything but a second-class citizen there".

Patel's later visits to India opened his eyes to the inequality people suffered and the different values of his American culture to those of Indian culture. The different identities people had in Indian seemed unchangeable. His grandmothers servants had been in the family for over fifty years and were considered part of the family by Patel's grandmother but they would still be nothing more than servants. India has an easily distinguishable class system while Americans class system is much more fluid because of most of the population can be classified as middle class. The different values placed in America oppose those of many different cultures. Patel classifies those values as, "the dignity of labor, the fundamental equality of human beings, mobility based on drive and talent, the opportunity to create and contribute". The fundamental value of humans being equal is not one accepted by all in America let alone other countries that place high value on a class system.

The Harijans (better known as the "untouchables") are an example of how the Hindu caste system oppressed people based on their occupation. Before 1949, Harijans were subjected to discrimination and had social restrictions because they were viewed as the absolute bottom of the Hindu caste. They were seen as pollution to others. This type of discrimination has been seen in most parts of the world and is reminiscent of the different types of discrimination in America. In past years, Harijans have been given more rights. They have been granted the right to an education and to vocational opportunities but are still discriminated against. Although the government in India has given them more rights many people still view them as the bottom of the Hindu caste. Similar to figures that Patel draws insight and inspiration from (Douglass, Malcolm X, Gandhi) he sees the injustice in the creation of a caste system.

Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition; 10/1/2009, p1-1, 1p

Khare, R.S. The Untouchable as Himself. New York, NY. Cambridge University Press 1984.

Idealistic not realistic

2009-12-07T17:55:00.000-08:00

Cosmopolitanism is an idealistic way of perceiving how the world should and could be by means of creating a community that shares similar values. Although the idea of creating a global community that shares the same beliefs and values may sound ideal, there come many issues caused by contradictions. According to Appiah, intervening with another society and trying to influence it with one’s own culture is not seeing the similar values one may have, but instead, it is pushing another belief or value that the “outsider” may see as a cure or value that will make the society better. Outsiders of one society make look at a culture and see that something is wrong with it because it goes against their personal or religious views. In seeing this, there are people who feel the need to intervene and push forth their beliefs, or the right belief (in their mind), and attempt to create a global community with the same values and beliefs that they find are true. The problem with this is simply that many cultures and religious beliefs and values clash and so there is no way to create a global community with shared beliefs without disrupting and possibly destroying cultures and religions because a new and “shared” belief system would be ultimately forced onto people. Appiah gives examples of how different cultures have practices that many outsiders would find atrocious but the people within the culture see no wrong or harm in what they do. Appiah also describes what he calls Positivism which consists of beliefs and desires. “Beliefs are supposed to reflect how the world is. Desires reflect how we’d like it to be” (Appiah, p 18). According to an article by Bohman J. he states that “It is no longer possible to assume national or cultural sovereignty over publicity: the de facto principle of one culture, one public sphere' hardly holds true for any society around the world.” I believe that although this idea sounds great to some, it can be scary for others in the sense that many people will be pressured to follow the one view and belief system of one global community which can also create tension with people who may not agree. The mix of beliefs and desires seems to conflict with one another in that we see the world the way we want it to be and how we need to go about changing it in order to make it that way. Because there are so many different beliefs and values in this world there is no way that all of them will simply blend together without some disruption.

Kwame, Appiah. Cosmopolitanism, Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: Norton & Co, 2006. Web

BOHMAN J. Philosophy & social criticism.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998, vol. 24, no2-3, pp. 199-216.

Cosmopolitanism

2009-12-07T16:55:00.000-08:00

The ideology of cosmopolitanism is, the entire human race is connected together and creates one community, which has a shared morality. Someone who is cosmopolitan is described by many authors as, a person with a widely defined position of openness toward other people with origins that are not similar to their own. When individuals show cosmopolitan openness toward others, it is demonstrated in political, cultural, or aesthetic domains. This attitude is expressed by ethical and emotional dedication toward universalism, selflessness, worldliness and communitarianism. To be a cosmopolitanism is to have a perspective, or state of mind that involves particular modes of managing meanings, and varieties of mobilities.

The word cosmopolitan derives from the Greek word cosmos, which refers to the universe. People in a cosmopolitan society are connected across this universe, different states, nations, or continents, and they have a shared respect with each other based on morality, political structure, or a shared economic connection. Cosmopolitanism thinkers’ believer that all borders should be broken down and everyone should unite as one.

Cosmopolitanism recognizes that depending on location, economics, and culture, humans are different (in their beliefs, politics, morals, etc) and we can learn from the differences that we have. According to Richard Burton, a cosmopolitan openness to humankind across the world is entirely consistent with picking and choosing among the options you find in your exploration. No nation can be self sufficient, so all nations should work together to supply each other with what we need to make this world turn smoothly. It is the responsibility of every cosmopolitan to watch over and care for every other human being on the planet.

There is an ongoing debate whether cosmopolitanism literature has a class bias. Some authors think that cosmopolitanism is only for the privileged elites who have a higher education level, income, and capacity for mobility. This came from the late Victorian England era, when the cosmopolitanism belief was most common among the educated upper classes. Higher education, whether formal or informal, when examining cross ethnic lines without bias, expands a person’s cultural awareness. The same is true for the financial ability to travel globally, experiencing other societies (their religious, political, and cultural differences) first hand, can give a person an openness to humankind.

Works cited:

Kwame, Appiah. Cosmopolitanism, Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: Norton & Co, 2006. Web

Woodward, Ian. and Skrbis, Zlatko. "Strategic cosmopolitanism: Investigating the limits of cosmopolitan openness" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal Convention Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Aug 11, 2006

The meaning of finding the same language of values

2009-12-07T16:13:00.000-08:00

It is mentioned in the Cosmopolitanism by Appiah that the meanings of things are not in our heads, that we can talk about things that we don't even know what they are, and yet the reason that we can use those words and mean something by them is that people in our language community do have the relevant expertise (Appiah 28). It is quite interesting in that way that language was created, just as a means of communication; however, if an individual has no need of communicating to others around them, language doesn't even have to exist. The reason language became necessary is because there is a shared public need among a group of people to be able to share thoughts, ideas and as the matter of fact be able to come up with values. Values therefore are shaped out of interactions between human beings. It is thus imperative that the language of values is influential and discussable among human beings.

Toward the conclusion of his discussion, Appiah pointed out that relativism about ethics and morality gives reasons to fall silent more than encouraging conversations. That in fact goes against the original purpose of language, or language of values to be specific. Stories told through the language of values were to be convinced who ever the stories were told to to accept the values communicated or at least should be open for discussions in order to find shared values among people. Through examples of stories, it opens a certain concerned set of values that give people the opportunity to express their opinions toward the situation. To understand why different people think differently from you allows you to discuss your way of adjusting their thoughts to the current environment and vice versa. It is in the end the target of finding the middle ground where certain values of different people meet each other and can be tolerated so that the people are able to live together in the same place regardless of where they came from originally.

As values change from culture to culture, the share values is more essential when individuals start sharing the same environment through migration, globalization, etc. Yet, is is then important that not only a shared language of values is used to communicate, but also to find ways for a shared point of view of the same world that people are living in together. For if we all live in different world, have different world views, and never have to see each other, again, there will be no need for discussions using languages of any sort. As the matter of fact, the meaning of finding the same language of values has become crucial due to the development of economy, sociology during the time of globalization when human beings from everywhere in the world are trying to fit their language of values with each other in order to live in the same world.

Source: Appiah, "Cosmopolitanism"

The Complete Picture

2009-12-07T15:52:00.000-08:00

Can it really be said that identity is what we see in the mirror? How else, then, do others see other individuals? The problem with living in such a diverse society is that there is no guarantee of tolerance and acceptance; indeed, it is quite the opposite, in that the world has contradicting faiths that hold different belief systems. Appiah describes "belief" as the means to the end that is "desire" (Appiah 19). Despite these contradicting beliefs, Appiah argues that one aspect that humans can find common ground in is shared values that people of different faiths can agree on (Appiah 29).

The thing I find interesting about this argument is that those who promote civil religion in the United States can use this very same argument. For example, those who advocate the term "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance will point to the fact that they are not singling out Christianity; after all, Muslims, Jews, and other religions have a god or a deity. Also, advocates of American civil religion will argue that Christians, Muslims, Jews, and members of other religion all agree in the sanctity of marriage, the bonding importance of the family, and instilled patriotism. However, this does not really address, nor does it help strive for a truly accepting society of all religions and belief systems.

Jeff-Spinner-Halev calls true toleration "liberal" in the sense that it should not just be a recognition of religious diversity; true toleration is an acceptance and (to a degree) appreciation from individuals of others' beliefs (Spinner-Halev 32). A mere recognition of diversity from the state, while it is a very positive step, does not change the hearts and minds of those who are not willing to accept the beliefs of others.

As Appiah described faith as a "shattered mirror", one that shows individual truths all coming together to complete the mirror. The human race is a mystery, and all of those who belong to a religious faith want to see a better world. The problem is, they do not all agree on how to get there. Dialogue within faiths is the only way we can truly understand each other. Only then will we get the complete picture. Unfortunately, this is a goal that seems to far from a narrow-minded society.

Works Cited
Appiah, Kwame Anthony. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. Norton, W. W. & Company, Inc. New York, New York. 2006.

Halev-Spinner, Jeff . Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration. "Political Theory", Vol. 33, No. 1 , pp. 28-57. Sage Publications, Inc. February 2005

Pluralism and Islam

2009-12-03T10:56:00.000-08:00

Acts of Faith by Eboo Patel is filled with many hopes, thoughts, and stories, among them, the author’s comparisons between himself (or what he could have been) and the terrorists behind 9/11, the 2005 London bombing, and 1996 Olympics bombing. We know what happened to make Patel a different man from the others; he was loved and guided by the right people. The nineteen 9/11 terrorists, he believes, had extreme hate instilled in them and were made into puppets of intolerance and cruelty. Despite their extreme differences, both Patel and the 19 were Muslims, and yet they had very interpretations of the same religion. This is not an uncommon occurrence. Just as religious groups have fought against each other, they have also fought amongst themselves. A popular argument is that of pluralism. Patel and the 19 held very different views on pluralism, and each man got his reasoning from their shared religion of Islam.
In his article “‘So That You May Know One Another’: A Muslim American Reflects on Pluralism and Islam,” Harvard Professor Ali S. Asani claims, “The Holy Book of Islam teaches pluralism...” Asani also contends that “Muslims and non-Muslims frequently misuse the Quranic verses for political purposes....” (p. 41). Politics, along with religion, may have been the fundamental reason for the 19s’ actions. We can never know the exact reason why the 19 were anti-pluralism, but perhaps their actions on September 11th speak for themselves. We live in a democratic, pluralistic society. The freedoms that such a name brings inevitably lead to conflict. We anticipate that when a problem cannot be resolved by evidence, “liberty of belief” will result in judgment. Therefore it would appear that some amount of pluralism is an inherent product of democratic society. The 19, we know, were thoroughly against liberal freedoms, because they felt the Quran told them so.
Conversely, Patel feels quite the opposite. He grew up in a pluralistic society, immersed in a myriad of different of cultures. His parents encouraged diversity as well as religious pluralism. Even though he was not always particularly religious, he eventually fully accepted Islam, and his pro-pluralism stance did not waver. His upbringing had a large part in this, I am sure, but I think perhaps that confirmation of pluralism came in the form of a conversation with his grandmother. When he realized that she had been aiding helpless people (of different religions) for years, he asked why she risked her life for strangers. She replied, “I am a Muslim. This is what Muslims do” (Patel, 100). Those words cemented his belief. I feel that Patel would agree with Asani’s belief that, “The Quran reveals the beauty of human diversity....and promotes the idea of pluralism for cooperation, respect, and understanding among various communities” (p. 40).
Interestingly, scholars Alasdair Corckett, Daniel Olson, and David Voas claim that pluralism does not help or hinder religious participation of any kind. In their article, “Religious Pluralism and Participation: Why Previous Research Is Wrong,” the authors assert that the belief that pluralism has any effect on peoples’ involvement in any religion is completely false (p. 221).
I don’t know if I agree with this. On page 37, Patel writes, “I wanted to be good. It was in Islam that I found the clearest articulation of this inner struggle.” Though we find it hard to fathom, the 19 wanted to be good too, and they believed they were. It is, after all, the very reason for their actions. How sad to think that if they had only grown up with Patel and seen the beauty in pluralism--as the Quran says--they made have lead very different and peaceful lives.

Works Cited:

Asani, Ali S. “‘So That You May Know One Another’: A Muslim American Reflects on
Pluralism and Islam.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 588, pp. 40-51. 2003.

Crockett, Alasdair, and Olson, Daniel, and Voas, David. “Religious Pluralism and Participation: Why Previous Research Is Wrong.” American Sociological Review, Vol. 67, pp. 212-230. 2002.

Patel, Eboo. “Acts of Faith.” Beacon Press, Boston, MA. 2007.

Interfaith Youth Core

2009-12-02T23:18:00.000-08:00

Interfaith Youth Core

Patel had taken a family trip to India with his family while in high school and disliked everything about India. He disliked that there were no showers at his grandmothers and that they did not have Frosted Flakes cereal. Along with man y more things once he had arrived in India. But now six years later after he had matured and went to college he and his good friend Kevin were about to take a trip to India again so that he could learn to appreciate his culture. Once Patel and Kevin arrived in India one of the first things Patel wanted to do was go and buy Indian clothing. One thing that Patel had to get used to was the fact that many people in India that had some sort of money owned servants and this was a shock to him to and his friend. They didn’t understand why and felt that they could do the daily duties for themselves. But Patel learned to accept it because it was part of his culture. Patel had been struggling to learn language and had finally picked up enough to communicate with the people.

“The dream of India is the dream of pluralism, the idea of different communities retaining their uniqueness while relating in a way that recognizes they share universal values” (Patel,92). Over weeks of reading books Patel and Kevin got the chance to meet the Dalai Lama. They meet in a meeting room of his place; Kevin was the first to speak to the Dalai Lama and he identified Kevin as a Jew after her had spoken and commended Kevin for deeping his study of his religion. Now it was Patel’s turn and the Dalai Lama did not ask questions he just stated that Patel was a Muslim and suggested he visit the Tibetan Muslims and Patel replied. Patel then took the opportunity to explain the program he had developed called the Interfaith Youth Core. The Dalai Lama felt that the program was a very good project and asked if he was too old to join which left them all laughing and carrying on.

The interfaith Youth Core was started by Patel to “build mutual respect and pluralism among young people from different religious traditions by empowering them to work together to serve others” (IFYC). After Patel’s visit with the Dalai Lama he was more encourage and excited to return to the United States and progress in the development of the interfaith youth group. This group has brought together more people than could be imagined and all with different religious backgrounds and cultures. In June President Obama made a speech saying “Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews.…Around the world, we can turn dialogue into interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster” (Kirby& Patel). With this being said it has been proven thatdifferent religions and cultures can come together and had a mutual ground with some similarities.

Patel, Eboo, Kirby, Samantha, Tikkun. Hungry for Change: Interfaith Service in Action. Sep/Oct2009, Vol. EBSCOhost. 24, Issue 5. Web. 1 Dec. 2009

Patel, Eboo. Acts of Faith. Boston: Beacon Press, 2007.

"Interfaith Youth Core". IFYC. December 3, 2009. http://www.ifyc.org/about_movement.

Eboo Patel’s Acts of Faith and Pluralism

2009-12-02T22:02:00.001-08:00

The United States, being the most religiously diverse country in the world, gives way to pluralism. Due to the fact that so many religions have existed in the United States through a long period of time, has made it possible for there to exist different types of ethnicities. Religion can be considered an aspect of ethnicity and by being so religion plays a different role with each different type of ethnicity. There is the hidden ethnicity which is when people in America believe they have no ethnicity, situational ethnicity which is found mostly in second generation immigrants who retain an ethnic fluency with parents, but are also fluent in the new place they find themselves in. Also, there is symbolic identity, with targets fourth generation immigrants who can’t necessarily recall where their ancestors came from. With all of these different ethnicities and religions many times bring conflicts rise which is why the idea and act of disestablishment came to be.
In Acts of Faith, by Eboo Patel, Patel writes about his journey through life as a Muslim in America with the vision in creating an interfaith youth movement. According to Eck, “pluralism is when people of different backgrounds seek mutual understanding and positive cooperation with one another” (Hartman 26). It is pluralism that Patel is in search of throughout his journey. Patel speaks about the different relationships that he holds with different people in different periods of his life who come from many different religious backgrounds. He states that when he was young, his family was a devout Islam family who prayed as it was expected of them from the religion, but with time, his parents became more attained to their jobs and slowly let go of the ritualistic prayers. He remembers that the prayer told from his mom before going to bed was one that never disappeared.
Patel can probably fit in the situational ethnicity because as an immigrant who was raised in the United States, he retains the ethnic fluency with his parents, who constantly remind him that he is Muslim, but is also fluent with the new place that he finds himself in, the United States. In the beginning of the story he begins by introducing a suicide bombing that takes place in London and carefully compares himself with the young men that commit the bombing. Identity is a very significant theme in this story and also the way that identity revolves around religion.
In the article, Religious Pluralism Civil Society’s Hope in a Diverse community, the author Becca Hartman states that there is a division between “inner” and “faith. She states that there are places where people from diverse religious communities gather like public schools, shopping malls, ect, and that these places are considered spaces of “inner” (Hartman 26). The spaces of “faith” are those places where people from particular religious communities gather to speak about religion and these places are churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, and other such places (Hartman 26). With this she states that there are very few places where people from diverse religions come together to speak about matters of religion. This is what Patel encounters throughout his journey. He finds places like the Catholic Worker house and is involved in many projects, but cannot find the pluralism that he is searching for.
It is Patel’s vision to create an interface community where people of different faith can come together and make changes in society. He, along with a group of friends come together to organize Stone Soup, a place where activists and leaders can come together and make positive changes. Throughout Patel’s journey, he makes many positive changes as he learns about different people and their religious backgrounds, although he mentions to others that he really is not religious himself. Religious pluralism is a great challenge and Patel does not give up hope in creating an interfaith community in order to have pluralism. This shows how religion plays an important role in society because Patel is not satisfied with only having a diverse group of people speak about projects, he wants to involve religion as well. To have this, people of different ethnicities must come together which is something as Hartman states, “can only happen if “inner” and “faith” come together (Hartman 27).

Patel, Eboo "Act of Faith". Beacon Press, Boston, MA. (2007): 1-76. Print

Hartman, Becca. "Religious Pluralism Civil Society’s Hope in a Diverse Community" National Civic Review. (2009):25-30. Print

Patel's Search for Religious Pluralism

2009-12-02T15:06:00.000-08:00

In searching for one's identity, one must confront and explore their history to find where and how they fit in. Heritage, culture and traditions all reflect the experiences within an individual’s religious community. The personal story that Eboo Patel shares in "Acts of Faith”, gives way to the enormous possibilities that arise from surrounding yourself with progressive thinkers and active public servants. The light that shines on Patel's grassroots interfaith meetings arose from common ideals; the search for truth and compassion for humanity and diversity!

The interfaith programs placed value on religious harmony, sharing an open dialogue, which embraced religious pluralism. Patel's personal journey in finding his religious identity stems from his experiences in India. A subtle transformation became realized in his early adult years that getting angry and fighting the system were counterproductive. The America that shunned him could embrace him, but he just didn't know where he fit in yet. Writings of Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad played into his racial injustices and need to demonize American and it's dark past. Pluralistic writings and views of James Baldwin persuaded Patel's softer side..."saying that love between people of different identities was not only possible but necessary, and that we had to insist on it."(Patel, pg.89) As Elizabeth Plantz explains in her book “Bridging the Gap: Islam in America”, “…they may soon outnumber Jews, making them the second largest religious group in the United States.” (Plantz, pg. 1)

As leadership qualities and confidence build, scholarly readings opened Patel's eyes to a diverse religious fulfillment. Patel and his group of like-minded visionaries seek community support by human contact and connection. Patel learned of "ubuntu" while searching spiritual principles in South Africa, "people are people through other people." (Patel, 116) Throughout his travels to India, South Africa, meeting the Dalai Lama and his work in Chicago, Patel soon discovered the many layers he shared with his interfaith group/meetings and activist circles. As his friend Jeff explained to Eboo early on, "the most important thing you can learn is how to turn an idea into reality."(Patel, pg. 45)

The roots of the diverse interfaith movement act on life's injustices and bring a powerful and positive force globally. Enlightened religious groups make bridges to connect a pluralistic existence. Violence breeds violence, and if we don't change our outlooks on tolerance, democracy and religious pluralism; we will repeat the past over religious dominance and radicalism.

Patel's multi-ethnic friendships were a beneficial to his inner growth and self-realization. Mormon friends, Jewish friends, Christian friends alike found core beliefs to tap into and change the quality of life for others, a sacrifice which benefits everyone.

Patel, Eboo "Act of Faith". Beacon Press, Boston, MA.2007. pg. 77-180
Platz, Elizabeth, “Bridging the Gap: Islam in America”, www.islamfortoday.com/library.htm

Hindu Nationalism

2009-12-02T09:18:00.000-08:00

Much like Christian nationalism, which focuses on “restoring” America to its “Christian roots”, Hindu nationalism is seen as a doctrine concerned primarily with promoting unity within the nation among Hindus, but wherein the motivation is focused on discriminating minorities, specifically the Muslims (Swami, 12). The Hindu Nationalists are neither a religious sect nor a political party, though they have a party. They are not a single organization; rather, they are a network of fundamentalists, traditionalists, anti-modernists, and right-wing conservative whose members are strong believers of the representative democracy (Bhargava, 11). They run the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP), in hopes to capture state power, just like Christian dominionism. Despite the tendencies of the people to move independently, they are cemented through their belief of antiliberalism, disgust in socialism, belief of reinstating a strong Hindu nation, and antipathy to Muslims.

The origin of Hindu Nationalism started as a response to British colonialism. Uprooted from tradition, the Indians suffered because they had not defined their own identity. They had to compare themselves with others to come up with their own identity; thus, the birth of Hindu nationalism (Swami 11). Clearly, perverse comparison does not only play a major role in the Hindu-Muslim conflict; one can clearly see that perverse comparison also made possible the creation of religions, as dictated by Weber’s theory of religion. One figure important to the movement’s conception was K.B Hedgewar, who saw that the Hindus were disunited and physically weak compared to the strong, cohesive Muslims. He made a notion that if the Hindu were to unite and become strong, they would have gained political power, which was threatened by the growing numbers of Muslims and Christians. This led to the mindset of creating a pure culture focused on the “formation of a narrow, hardened, and belligerent identity-formation” (Bhargava 12).

As what I have learned from another class, the core values of Hinduism are eclecticism and diversity, yet “stigmatization and emulation” defined the strategy used by the nationalists to attain the goal of defining a national identity (Bhargava 14). An example would be the protection of the holy cow, the symbol of upper-caste Hindu identity. They had clearly defined themselves from the Muslims, the barbaric cow-slaughterers. They had missionaries to spread their dedication to “Mother India,” while mainly servicing people of upper-caste families. They put up schools, money-lending agencies, and youth associations, not for social service, but to spread the “conflictual, violent engagement with the ‘Other’” (Bhargava 14). Would the contradiction between the religion’s core and the strategies only nullify the belief and the system?

Extreme Hindu nationalism cannot survive without an enemy. Until today, perverse comparison propels extreme Hindu nationalism. Only 11 percent of the population is Muslim, British imperialism can only be found through the traces it left behind, and self identity has grown strong, yet the upper-case Hindus still dominate all political institutions. Hindu nationalism has only grown stronger since the 1980s, and the BJP has heavily influenced the elections (Bhargava 14). Why does the majority still feel and behave like a persecuted minority?

Bhargava, R. (2003). The cultural nationalism of the new Hindu. Politics Abroad. 11-17

Swami, A. (2003). Hindu nationalism: What’s religion got to do with it? Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. 1-17.

Striving for Pluralism

2009-12-01T16:11:00.000-08:00

In America today we maintain an incredibly diverse society, catering to people from all around the world. With this great diversity, it is inevitable that there will be a clashing of values and beliefs for those participating in our society. Our country is becoming increasingly more plural in its varying religious views that have been introduced into the social sphere over the years. Yet, to be a truly pluralistic society requires that those with varying beliefs must acknowledge and respect the belief systems that are different than theirs. “History shows us that in most societies, pluralism does not occur naturally; it must be deliberately and carefully nourished, for it evolves gradually. It must also be protected and never taken for granted, for we have plenty of examples of societies that were once pluralist becoming exclusivist and antipluralistic.” (Asani p.42)
Being a pluralistic society does not mean simply tolerating others beliefs that are different than yours; this creates ignorance for all beliefs that are different than the ones you hold and is not conducive to creating a productive society. This is largely the problem with the current social situation in America, we recognize that there are many people around us who come from varying cultures and backgrounds that differ from ours yet very few of us make a conscious effort to learn and understand these differences. We tend to stay in our own private social spheres and when encounter other beliefs that differ from ours “it is not so much a clash of civilizations as it is a clash of ignorances.” (Asani p.42)
By taking a step back and realizing that while the differences across our cultures may be vast at times, these different beliefs are extremely important to others and cannot be simply written off as “wrong”. By making a stronger effort to really understand the beliefs that differ from us we can help to achieve a society that is truly based on pluralism.

"So That You May Know One Another": A Muslim American Reflects on Pluralism and Islam
Ali S. Asani
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 588, Islam: Enduring Myths and Changing Realities (Jul., 2003), pp. 40-51
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. in association with the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1049853

The World of Religions

2009-12-01T11:50:00.001-08:00

A World of Religions
Due to the many accounts of terriorist attacks taking place around the world and their affiliation to the Muslim religion, it now has a very negative connotation to the name. Unlike the Christian religion who still has the over all positive connotation as still being holly, we often seem to forget the fact of this religion having a large part in the creation of slavery. No to say that Christianity is the only religion that can be tagged with a negative connotation, it is just an example of how all religions have their flaws, but why is it that the Muslim religion will forever be tagged as being ‘terrorist?’
In ‘Acts of Faith,’ by Eboo Patel, he brings the lives of the London bombers to our attention, making us realize how young and innocent they once were. Rather than the total blame being on themselves and their terrorist leader, he acknowledges the fact of how things could have been different if we were to have gotten to them first (Patel, 6). Although the terrorist of 9-11 may have not been as young or inexperienced, they too were making decisions based of the belief of the order coming from their god. In many ways such a practice could have a very positive and influential impact on ones mind, better yet on a child’s mind, so what went wrong?
Paul Harris, a religious scientist began a study on the lives of the London Bombers and in more detail of their childhood. They all came from families in which their religion was a very important priority, but it wasn’t until very much later in their lives did they come across their terrorist leader. “By implication, children’s trust in testimony does not simply amplify the range of empirical data to which they have access, it also leads them to believe in a set of far-reaching but ultimately nonempirical propositions (Harris, 2).” This meaning, as religion is often drilled into a child’s mind in hope that it will always allow them to make the right decisions, but in reality a mind is ever changing and even at a very young age are they capable of picking out the unreachable.
What if different religions from our own were not so shunned by all, would terrorist attacks like these never occur? The answer may not be ‘never,’ but attacks in relation to religion would be highly unlikely as it is taking place on the boundaries of inequalities. Like Patel says, it would also mean people escaping their little bubbles, racist slurs to children in schools, and presidents simply pronouncing a name of a country correctly, in order for such hate to end. It would also mean befor one to assume a negative connotation on another to first look at their own and realize if the same thing could be defined with their own.

Resources
Harris, Paul. Koeing, Melissa. “Trust in Testimony: How Children Learn About Science and Religion” Child Development, May/June 2006, Volume 77, Number 3, Pages 505 – 524

Patel, Eboo. “Acts of Faith.” Beacon Press. Boston, MA. 2007. pgs 1-76.

Feminism and Traditional Judaism

2009-12-01T02:19:00.000-08:00

The feminist movement changed the way many women viewed their roles in society; women were becoming less accepting of traditional male and female roles. Jewish women in particular experienced feelings of separation between their religion and their own self-worth. Blu Greenburg, describes in her essay, "On Women and Judaism: A View from Tradition", her female responsibilities as a young women and even as a young wife, in her Orthodox Jewish community. She remembers sitting in the women's section of the synagogue with her friends without any feelings of resentment for being separated from the males. On the contrary, she and along with the other women in her community were extremely content with the ways of the traditional Jewish women. The separation of males and females is a practice in Orthodox Judaism in which women sit behind a mehitzah. A mehitzah, as described by Dufour, is a divider in a synagogue, often times a curtain that is between men and women. In Greenburg's experience, reading Betty Friedan's, Feminist Mystique (1963), gave the feminist movement relevance in her own life. The feminist movement led to a sub-group known as inclusionist Jewish feminists, which believed that women should be considered equal to men in religious participation.

The traditional roles of men and women are no longer accepted by inclusionist Jewish feminist. In order for these women to accept Judaism, the religion must allow women to take on any role that a man can, as well as be allowed to participate in any religious activity that was once reserved for men only. Inclusionist Jewish women ask to be part of practices such as the Minyan, a daily prayer service including ten adult men, and even the Bat Mitzvah which is equivalent to a Bar Mitzvah: a party for young men entering their puberty.

Inclusionist women do not reject their religion or feel oppression because of their religion, despite the fact that they may not entirely agree with many of the practices. Like Greenburg, Inclusionist Jewish women find a way to include themselves in the religion by creating new roles for women. Greenburg believes that Jewish have been conditioned to maintain traditional values, yet this does not mean they cannot be challenged.

References

Greenburg, Blu. "On Women and Judaism: A View from Tradition". Jewish Publication

Society of American. 1981. Mathisen, Robert R. Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco Texas. Baylor University Press. 2005. Pg. 757-760.

Dufour,Lynn Resnick. "Sifting through Tradition: The Creation of Jewish Feminist Identities". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 39, No. 1 (Mar., 2000), pp. 90-106. JSTOR Web. 20 November 2009.

Pluralism and its Affects on Society

2009-11-30T18:26:00.001-08:00

Acts of Faith written by Eboo Patel tells us of how diversity within culture and religion can truly affect ones world. Patel says, “Only the smallest part of humanity wishes and acts upon the destruction of others. The pluralists are far larger. Those of us who believe in a world where we live together, we're far larger. The problem is we haven't made our case compelling across the world yet.”(1) This is the reason why here in America and all across the world we see problems when it comes to diversity and why people with different religions collide and look at each other in a negative way, because of this small part of humanity wishing and acting destructively to others. For example Muslims and Christians, both of these religions have many similarities yet the people that come from these religions differ in their culture and how they were raised, and because of the negative connotations of the opposite ethnicity continued to be taught in their “traditional culture” this is why many individuals today have a different (at times negative) image of other religions/cultures.

Yet as Eboo explains change can be most affected when it comes internally. Although he also explains that change comes socially as well. He explains how the pluralistic views can really help society if people shared these ideas. Fighting or calling people names because of differences should not happen it is not relevant because we all have different views but yet we are all still human. Patel says in an interview “what if the worlds 1 billion Catholics and 1.2 billion Muslims decided that their work together in the world was to be ending malaria that the energy currently spent on suspicion on ignorance and hatred was entirely devoted to that people devoted to prevent this disease that is where we should spend our energy the next five years.”(2) Patel’s message in this excerpt truly gives us the idea of how a pluralistic approach would benefit two different “societies/religions” and could possibly bring a cure to something that has been killing thousands of individuals. The animosity between the Catholics and Muslims throughout the years has done nothing but harm to one another and to the world. If they spent all of these years working together, the world would be a much better place.

The idea and message that Eboo is trying to explain is the concept of Religious Pluralism. His thought it that if Religions take a pluralistic approach at life and situations that occur in day to day activity people of different backgrounds would live in harmony with each other. M. Basye Holland-Shuey explains in perfect words, "Pluralism...holds to one's own faith, and at the same time, engages other faiths in learning about their path and how they want to be understood.... Pluralism and dialogue are the means for building bridges and relationships that create harmony and peace on our planet home."

Works Cited

(1)http://www.betterworldheroes.com/pages-p/patel-quotes.htm

(2)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znm71XGPsng&feature=related

(3)http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_plur1.htm

Nothing In Particular

2009-11-30T08:46:00.000-08:00

A little background: According to a recent Pew survey, more than one-quarter of American adults (28%) have left the faith in which they were raised in favor of another religion. 84% of Americans claim a religious affiliation, Christians topping the list and representing 78% of the religious pie, with Protestants gobbling up 51 % of that slice, trailed by Evangelical churches at 26%. The remainder of the slices and slivers are divided up as follows: Other religions 5%, with “Jewish religion” leading the way at 1.7%. Notables in category are Buddhism at 0.7%, and “New-age” at 0.4%. At the bottom of the ledger, the “unaffiliated are tallied, with the “Nothing in particulars” leading the way at 12%, followed by agnostics at 2.4%. Limping home last are the atheists, subsisting on a meager 1.6% slice of their slice of nothing. Pluralism and religion is messy business.

Eboo Patel, in the introduction to his book, Acts of Faith, writes: “Change happens internally before it takes place in the world.” Later in chapter one, Patel quotes James Baldwin: “One can only face in others what one can face in oneself. On this confrontation depends the measure of our wisdom and compassion.” I agree on both counts, if what is meant is that change occurs first within individuals. I am troubled though by a process, or sequence of processes that would allow for this change within. Can this change occur in the person alone, or does it occur, as Mr. Patel believes, in the act of pluralizing religion? Could it, on the other hand, be possible that this change is predicated on a larger complex of interactions, involving personal, behavioral, cultural and social systems (Wilber)?

With change first occurring internally and I so assume within the individual and religion being such a huge part of the American landscape, what role does religion play in affecting this change? Can religion alone, even when grouped and pluralized, put into motion a chain of events who’s outcome is this internal change, or does religion by its nature truncate the type of self-knowledge needed to manifest this change? Sri Aurobindo thinks that, “For the religious devotee it is a grave mistake to try to remake others instead of remaking himself,” and according to social scientist V.M. Rozin, Aurobindo also “has a low opinion of social movements, regarding them as subconscious and obscure” (Rozin, 2008). Where does this leave us?

Mr. Patel thinks that individual change can occur in the incubator of religious pluralism and with that hope in mind he runs an interfaith program, the goal being to get young participants to face, understand and know themselves, so that they can face, understand and know each other. Will this process lead to tolerance and acceptance all they way around? I hope so. While I’m hoping, I hope that this program also results in a tolerance and acceptance that transcends religion, allowing for kind acceptance in the greater world.

References

Patel, E. (2007) Acts of Faith. Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.
Rozin, V.M. (2008) Esoteric Ideas on the Transformation of Man and Society in
Comparison with Utopian and Social Projects.
Statistics on Religion in America Report: Pew Forum on Religion and Public life.
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports
Wilber, K (2007) Integral Spirituality. Integral Books. Boston & London.
　
　

Blurring the Lines

2009-11-29T13:02:00.000-08:00

When George W. Bush became President of the United States many conservative evangelists rejoiced. Bush opened up the door between the government and religious groups and eventually the line between church and state was blurred. He set up funding groups so that conservative christian religious charities and organizations could receive millions of dollars in grants, while . This angered many of the secular groups who were starting to feel the loss of the money that was usually sanctioned off for them. It also brought to the public's attention that although the Christian groups were being funded, many of the people who were counselors and in high positions were not qualified. This angered many people because they wanted to make sure that if these programs were being funded by the government that the people in charge were people who were qualified. However, in most cases the counselors were not qualified. “Religious drug treatment counselors wouldn't be forced to undergo training or to obtain regular state licenses.” (Goldberg, pg 114) The only training that they needed was the be a Christian and belong to a church. Religion is personal and should not be entered in the government's rules and regulations.
This kind of blurring of the lines between Church and State is something that should never had have happened. I was raised in a Catholic and extremely conservative home. This has made it difficult for me at first to understand why there was a nee for the separation of church and state. However, as I have seen firsthand, the government should not force religious views on the American public. Issues such as gay marriage are among the top of the list because no ones rights should be taken away, even if everyone does not agree with it. We are all created equal, and no one should have to ability to enforce religious views and morals upon the ones who are not of that religion.

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming The Rise of Christian Nationalism. New York: W. W. Norton, 2006. Print.

A Man’s Right to Die: Humanists View of Suicide Ethics

2009-11-25T17:01:00.000-08:00

Humanists in major contrast to religious people see death and dying from a completely different stand point. Pretty much every religion in the world offers a promise of an afterlife whether it be eternity in heaven or reincarnation. Humanists however regard promises of life after death as illusory and harmful, especially when one must live by certain rules to ensure that life after death. Though they do not deny any man’s right to believe in an afterlife, they see believing in promises of eternal salvation or eternal damnation as hindering mans ability to focus on present concerns, achieve self-actualization, and bettering the future of the earth itself. Given the fact that many humanists see believing in an after-life as counterproductive, the concern of a man’s right to suicide whether by euthanasia and assisted suicide has created much conflict between humanism and the religious sphere. What reasons do humanists have to believe that it is a humane value to let a person end his or her own life when they choose?
As part of an open democratic society in which every individual has the right to civil liberties, many Humanists believe that just as a man has a right to live he has a right to die. Chetwynd (2004) makes an interesting comparison about regarding human life the same way one would regard owning property. Not to imply that human life is like a piece of property, but many people do see their lives as their own and feel that they should have full control over how they want to live. Many Humanists would argue that to deprive an individual’s right to do what he or she wants with his or her life would go against a fully humanist democratic society. Also in the article Chetwynd discusses the case of a 42 year old woman living with a motor neuron disease, which brings up many cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide being centered on individuals living with chronically painful terminal illnesses. Humanists believe that every individual has a right to life, happiness, advancement, and freedom. If an individual’s ability to live happily and advance is hindered by illness a humanist might see this individual as fully having the right to decide whether they want to live on. And to deprive their right to make such a choice would be to deprive them of their freedom.
Another article by Colby (2009) discusses the complexity of the ethics behind an individual’s right to die and how this is largely dictated by society. Society passes laws that the majority of the people agree on. However Colby argues that the law should not have the ability to know what is right at the end of a person’s life. That society trying to tell someone what is the right choice at the end of his or her life is unconstitutional. The article also points that citizen polls reveal the majority in American society want to have access to assistance in dying. Whether anyone in the general American public can agree as to whether right to suicide is ethical or unethical, can they agree that it is unconstitutional from that individual’s perspective?
In the United States many cases of assisted suicide or individuals fighting for the right to assisted suicide have been brought to court. A few cases made it all the way to the Supreme Court but were quickly overruled (Colby, 2009). In the highly religious American political sphere, assisted suicide is viewed as a criminal act that devalues the sacredness of human life. This view of course is a reflection of Christian domination in American politics. Cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide have created conflict in the political sphere especially when supporters have fought just to bring to the Supreme Court. However the question still stands about the ethics of a person’s right to suicide especially when living with a terminal illness. Humanists have given fairly valid reasons for supporting an mans right to die, however whether freedom of that right is granted will depend on how the majority of society views it.

References
Chetwynd, S. B. (2004) Right to life right to die and assisted suicide. Journal of Applied
Philosophy, 21(2), 173-182. Retrieved November 25, 2009 from Religion and
Philosophy database.
Colby, B. (2009). Let’s talk about dying. The Humanist, 4-6. Retrieved November 25, 2009 from
Religion and Philosophy database.

Zen For Life

2009-11-24T12:10:00.000-08:00

For some, Zen Buddhism is not just a religion, it’s a way of life; however, the center of this religion is, in fact, the way that one lives their lives through what is considered the three essentials: body, speech, and mind. Living through these things leads to an inner peace on multiple levels that can seem to be lacking in other religions at times. Why?

Because Zen Buddhism focuses on the things that we use most in our lives—body, speech, and mind—it could be considered as taking our most basic of natures and applying them to a visible sphere of thought and action. Often times, I think that the way humans work is that they act on impulse, not thinking through their actions and what consequences they will cause—be it good or bad. In everyday life, humans can become stressed or sick with a variety or ailments, causing them to lose the balance that is supposed to be kept between the three essentials.

“A simple message of the teaching is that much of the pain, suffering, confusion, and contradiction you encounter in your own life is simply caused by not paying attention to what you have closest to you from the beginning and using it well: speech, body, and mind.” (Snyder) In this passage, we can see that this simple message is very focused on the fact that body, speech, and mind are the roads to keeping the base of your life. It is an essential of what the Zen Buddhism is about, but it is not a belief that what will save you from pain and suffering is that which comes from a higher power. “…adherents are drawn to this 2,500 year old “new” religion because it offers a way to deal with suffering…” (Finney)

Where it does begin is with the individual themselves. The individual must decide whether or not they want their suffering to end, and if they do, then they can apply the knowledge learned from Zen Buddhism to this. While religion often gives people an inner peace of mind where they are taught to accept suffering as a test of their strength of will, it does not eliminate pain, suffering, and confusion altogether. Again, this is where Zen Buddhism comes in and allows the adherent to attain levels of peace in all areas through unity of mind, body, and speech.

If the key elements of Zen Buddhism were even applied to other religions, I believe there would be more peace attained by the adherent.

Finney, Henry. “American Zen's ‘Japan Connection’: A Critical Case Study of Zen Buddhism's Diffusion to the West”. Sociological Analysis, Vol. 52, No. 4, Religious Movements and Social Movements (Winter, 1991), pp. 379-396

Snyder, Gary. “Zen Buddhism in America (1976)”. The Real Work: Interviews & Talks, 1964-1979. New Directions Publishing Corp.

Reaching Religious Pluralism in America

2009-11-23T17:51:00.000-08:00

As Diane Eck explains in “A New Religious America”, what America needs is “…to create a positive pluralism that builds upon our differences rather than ignores them” (Eck, 337). Although as a nation we are close, unfortunately, as of now, this is not the case. As of now, a small, loud, and persistent minority of religions don’t just ignore other religious groups, they condemn them.

The majority of Americans are more than accepting of religions other than their own or lack of one. Eck notes that, “What it means to be American is constantly being expressed in new ways as the fabric of America’s people changes” (Eck, 338). It’s part of being an American. Chicago hosted the Parliament of the World’s Religions, which was part of the 1893 World Fair (Eck, 366). The Department of Defense has had Wiccans working for them for over twenty years (Eck, 358). An American orthodox Jew was quoted saying, “…after centuries of being persecuted precisely because of the way he looks and he eats, he is for the first time in a place where it is perfectly all right for him to wear a black coat and to talk Yiddish…” (Eck, 338).

America has “…the American Buddhist Congress, the American Muslim Council, the Federation of Zoroastrians in North America, and the Jain Associations in North America,” among others (Eck, 337). These religious groups have become part of mainstream American culture. Yet they are still discriminated against by fundamental religious minorities, especially those in power. In 2003, the New York Branch of the Salvation Army set in motions to “Christianize” its social services department. A consultant requested “…a list of gay employees, discouraged the hiring of non-Christians, and demanded that all staffers fill out forms detailing their church attendance” (Goldberg, 129). Anyone who did not fit their criteria was fired and anyone who refused to give out such information was eventually driven out.

This fundamentalist minority is becoming so much of a problem that the government has recently intervened on numerous occasions. One such occasion had to do with a young girl being forced to return to public schooling, as opposed to the homeschooling she had been receiving from her mother. Her mother had spent the majority of her daughter’s teachings focusing on Bible study. A state official said “The girl’s ‘vigorous defense of her religious beliefs’ indicated that she had not been exposed to other points of view” (falwell.com). On another occasion, Salam Al-Marayati, an open and active U.S. Muslim and director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, was nominated in 1999 to the National Commission on Terrorism. This was met with great hostility from the Jewish community. He was called by them a “terrorist sympathizer cloaked in a moderate’s guise” (Eck, 362). It’s noteworthy to point out that this was pre-9/11. Though he had more than enough credentials for the position, because of the outcry, his nomination was revoked.

This “vigorous defense” often leads to destructive and violent acts. A “…Lao Buddhist temple on the fringes of Rockford, Illinois, was sprayed with rifle fire and then had a pipe bomb land in the front yard…” (Eck, 340). In 1992, Muslim leaders about to pray at their Massachusetts mosque on Ramadan were hit with stones (Eck, 342). In 1999, three synagogues from a congregation over 150 years old in Sacramento were burned down (Eck, 343). Though these acts demonstrate a deep desire for separatism, what followed in each circumstance was strong connection and support for the victimized religions from religious groups other than their own. The Lao Buddhists of Rockford were immediately and publically welcomed by Urban Ministries, a Christian association. In Massachusetts, the President of the Springfield Council of Churches organized a public invitation to the mosque where Muslim leaders were hit with stones. A local rabbi spoke on television of the mosque, stating that Jews should speak out whenever there is any crime of hate. And as for the three synagogues in Sacramento, the Muslim Public Affairs Council released a statement condemning the attacks.

Adaptation is one of the most basic phenomena of biology. Those who don’t adapt will eventually become extinct. Fundamentalists in America are a minority. With America having acceptance of numerous religions, fundamentalists see themselves as endangered. They are afraid of becoming extinct. And with programs such as “Partners in Dialogue,” they should be (Eck, 370). By accepting other religions, religions have made more friends and allies than enemies, hence making their religion stronger. Fundamentalists must give in to acceptance, for their own survival. If this doesn’t happen, they will be no more. Either way, whether they accept and adapt or condemn and fade away, religious pluralism in America is on its way to becoming a reality, with or without them.

Armstrong, Karen. Kingdom Coming. New York: Norton, 2006.

Eck, Diane L. A New Religious America. San Francisco: Harper, 1997.

Falwell, Jonathan. Is Diversity Threatening Christianity? Fallwell.com. Jerry Falwell. September 02, 2009. http://www.falwell.com/index.cfm?PID=19611.

Positive Pluralism

2009-11-23T12:37:00.000-08:00

Although we live in a pluralistic society, hate-crimes and racism still prevail. In his writing, A New Religious America, the chapter on Bridge Building, by Eck, he claims that relational bridges must be built between religions in order to maintain a “positive pluralism” in America. America should be a place of religious freedom, creating an atmosphere in which adherents of all religions feel comfortable being American, and religious at the same time. Immigrants often come to this country, only to be outcast or victimized because of their religious practices, or to be included due to their removal from these religious practices. Eck points out that second generation immigrants, especially, tend to shed their traditional religious and cultural heritage, and replace it with an American identity, so they fit in. This change in identity is not caused by laws restricting certain religious practices, yet by an intolerant, community with a lack of understanding. Swami Chidan Saraswati, the spiritual leader of a Hindu Temple that was vandalized in the 90's, points out that “there are bad people everywhere, in every religion. It is really just fear based upon lack of understanding.” This lack of understanding among perpetrators of hate crimes is one of the issues instigating violence. In addition, violence stems from suffering. When children are abused at home, bullied at school, or are forced to join gangs for protection, they often become violent themselves. The common thread between these two causes of violent hate-crimes is that changes can be made, resulting in positive pluralism.

In order to produce understanding and tolerance among people in America, we must start in the schools. In fact, “the Dallas interfaith group demonstrates, in no place are the challenges of a new religious America felt more immediately than in the schools.” Because of the religious diversity among students in Dallas, Texas, the Religious Communities Task Force set forth a reference guide for teachers, explaining religious traditions, dietary and medical restrictions, clothing requirements, and cultural differences for every religion represented in the school district. As a future teacher, I see that this would help tremendously, by giving teachers a guide by which to gauge whether a particular students behavior is appropriate or not. Also, it provides an opportunity in the classroom to discuss students religious ideals and practices with other students who are unaware. By demonstrating a climate of tolerance and calm communication in the classroom, children are given a framework from which they can reference when faced with a similar situation in life outside of school. In Teaching Religion in America’s Public schools: A Necessary Disruption, Passe and Willox point out that “although it may be disruptive, it is necessary, even crucial, to follow the route of teaching about religion if we wish to maintain the principle of religious tolerance that undergirds the democratic republic that has evolved for more than two hundred years.”

Another important place to begin striving towards positive pluralism is on the streets, with children. After school-programs, family planning clinics, summer-school programs, and drug-rehabilitation groups should be secular, yet stress religious tolerance. They should inform children and adolescents of the dangers associated with discrimination, as well as exemplify how to interact with people of differing religious backgrounds, how to control anger, and how to debate among each other in a constructive way. By the time children reach 18 years old, morals, ideals, beliefs, practices, and attitudes are often already in place. If we focus the work of building bridges of positive pluralism among children and adolescents in America, we will produce a generation of citizens and immigrants alike, who exhibit extreme levels of tolerance and understanding in a pluralistic society, my definition of positive pluralism.

Works Cited

Eck, Diane L. A New Religious America. San Francisco: Harper, 1997.

Passe, Jeff, and Lara Willox "Teaching Religion in America's Public Schools: A Necessary Disruption." Social Studies 100.3 (2009): 102-106. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.

Christian Nationalism & The Judicial System

2009-11-17T13:00:00.000-08:00

People often look towards the judicial system in America for guidance on what is right and wrong, or allowed and not allowed. The Christian right, or more specifically, Christian Nationalists, look at the judicial system as part of the moral problem in America, they see people in power in the court system as having allowed certain things to pass, like abortion and some gay rights, as a serious downturn in the morality of the country.
As much as people in the Chrisitan Nationalist movement hold rallys and speeches to get their message across, they are not really changing anything because certain laws and rights are still allowed although they may disagree and fight against it. The only way that they would really be able to change things is if one of them was in a position to change the laws or rights and disallow certain things from happening anymore. Many people have strong beliefs, Christian Nationalists just tend to make theirs a little more well known. It is believed that there were, "...two major triggers—the fallout from Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court decision that allowed abortions, and gay rights initiatives" that really made their problems with the courts known (Ramet 2005). As much as they may protest and try to convince people not to do certain things, like have an abortion, it is still legal, so they cannot truly prevent anyone from doing it. The strongest tool that Christian Nationalists have in their fight against these issues is fear and manipulation. They use these tools to convince people in earshot that they will suffer if they commit any of the acts that go against the Christian Nationalist beliefs.
Christian Nationalists want to have America adhere to their beliefs because they feel that this is a Christian country and that is the way it is meant to be. While they feel that they should be able to dictate the laws and decided what is and is not allowed, they, "...want both a Christian America and democratic life (as they understand it), in which there is a measure of religious
freedom" (Ramet 2005). It seems quite contradictory, they want to rule the roost, but at the same time, have some sort of freedom in terms of belief. They are well-versed in the political sphere, and if they keep striving, probably would not have much of a problem getting their members in positions of power in American courts. The big problem here is where does it end. If they do get into the courtrooms and are able to overturn certain rights that so many people fought so hard for, what good is that really going to do. In my opinion, it will only cause more harm than good. No one will ever fully agree on anything, there will always be opposiong beliefs and opinions and it is the way that people handle that and deal with the differences that is really important.

Ramet, Sabrina. "Fighting for the Chrisitian Nation" : The Christian Right and American
Politics". Journal of Human Rights 4.2 (2005): 431-42. Academic Search Premier. Web.
09 November 2009.

Sonia Johnson

2009-11-10T10:32:00.000-08:00

Sonia Johnson's book, From Housewife to Heretic, depicts her early life as a Mormon, to the trial in which she was excommunicated, and to her life after her excommunication. In the small excerpt provided by Mathisen, Johnson points out the unfair way in which she is treated during her trial but what the small excerpt does not show is the way Johnson felt about how women were treated in the Mormon faith and also in society. It was not until Johnson began to attended college that she looked back at her childhood and saw all the unfair treatment that women had in the Mormon faith. Her strong devotion to the cause of equal rights comes from her need to breakaway from religious and cultural bonds that enslaved her into a subservient life.

In another book by Johnson, Going Out of Our Minds: The Metaphysics of Liberation, she goes more in depth with her feelings about the ERA and the treatment she was receiving from the people that she once prayed with and looked to for guidance. She describes how and why the Mormon people were so upset with her activities in the ERA. Johnson was fighting for Equal Rights with other Mormon women and they called themselves "Mormons for ERA". The Mormons Johnson was affiliated with accused her of dragging their religion into politics which they believed was unholy and for that reason they felt she needed to stop. But what the Mormon church failed to see was that they were already part of the ERA movement because they were opposing it. After her excommunication Johnson describes how for the first time she felt spiritual freedom. Not only did Johnson make visible the unfair treatment and male hierarchies of the Mormon church she also pointed out the patriarchies in other religious, specifically Catholicism and Judaism (Johnson). Johnson was latter label as a heretic by the Mormon church because of her beliefs that went against everything they had taught her and fellow believers.

Johnson participated and lead movements that fought for women's right. She was trying to reinvent that role given to women through the patriarchs set up by society. One controversial topic that Johnson had strong beliefs for was abortion. In the beginning of her battles with equal rights and women's rights Johnson found herself fighting religious groups and patriarchies but by the time of Roe vs. Wade Johnson found herself fighting political patriarchs as well. Which leads to the topic of religion in politics and how gender plays into the heiraches. Johnson was fighting these battles during the 70's when women were not allowed the same rights as men but she also makes it clear how religion has had an affect on politcal outcomes.

Works Cited

Mathisen, Robert R. Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco, Texas. Baylor University Press. 2006.

Johnson, Sonia. From Housewife to Heretic. Garden City, New York. Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1981.

Johnson, Sonia. Going out of our Minds: The Metaphysics of Liberation. Freedom, California. The Crossing Press. 1987.

Kingdom Still Coming

2009-11-10T01:59:00.000-08:00

At the end of chapter six of Michelle Goldberg’s Kingdom Coming, a question formed concerning when the book was written. Much of this chapter focuses on Christian Nationalists’ attempts to diminish the power of one of the most essential branches of our government: the Judicial. According to Goldberg, the book took shape in 2004 and came out in 2006 (michellegoldberg.net). The events that have taken place since then have drastically changed the milieu of politics in America. Perhaps this may be demonstrating a futility in creating the change that once seemed so possible for the movement. Or maybe this is just an ebb in a cycle that will demonstrate this group to be even stronger in the future and more pervasive than ever thought.

Goldberg used the Constitution Restoration Act of 2005 as an example of a piece of legislation that, if enacted, would spell the downfall of the judicial system. However, the act has essentially disappeared although it may return in some way years down the road. There is no way a bill such as this would ever pass in our current congress after Demacrats regained control in 2006 and expanded that control significantly in 2008. With the election of Barack Obama in that same year, moderate evangelicals have demonstrated that Republicans do not hold such a firm grasp on their loyalty. However, with control of congress in democratic hands, the movement is even more reliant on Republicans and vice versa. Golderg herself quoted Sydney Blumenthal of The Guardian in an article for the Huffington Post, “Republicans can only hold their base by asserting their conservatism, which alienates the rest of the country. More than ever, the Republicans are dependent upon white evangelical voters,” The influence Christian Nationalism has on the United States at this time is at the least waning since these events have taken place.

Nevertheless, Christian Nationalism is far from being uprooted. It has crawled its way through the Clinton administration, while untiringly attacking it. Now, with Obama in office, these attacks have renewed and will not yield through the course of the next few years. Additionally, any changes that conservatives may make will come at the state level as we have seen in the election of two Republican governors last week. This is more than likely just another beginning. During the Bush years, seeds were planted that will protect a future through not only judicial appointments but faith-based initiatives and more. It is important to remember that this is a political more than religious movement, and yet it is becoming a quasi-hidden social movement as well. Goldberg relates that, through home-schooling, “they’re working to groom a new generation of legal activists from childhood” (Goldberg 172). Children are being indoctrinated by a revisionist history of our country and learning the skills they will need in order to make great change. There seems to be no other word for it; insidious is what this plan is in its efforts to erode at our democracy.

With the Constitution Restoration Act pretty much gone, the tide shifting to a democratically controlled congress, and the election of Barack Obama, it would seem to some that the Christian Nationalist movement has been given a virtual death blow in terms of making any major change to judicial powers. The reality is that this stealthy political movement is prepared for a long fight and will continue to make lasting impacts upon our country for a very long time through its machinations to change what is at the core or our nation.

Resources:

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdon Coming. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2006. Print.

Bill Berkowitz. “Even After an Obama Victory Reports of the Death of the Religious Right are Greatly Exaggerated | Religious Right | ReligionDispatches.” Web. 10 Nov 2009.

“Michelle Goldberg: What, Me Worry? The Christian Right and "Theocracy Hype".” Huffington Post. Web. 10 Nov 2009.

“The Rise of Christian Nationalism, by Michelle Goldberg.” The Humanist. September/October 2007. Web. 10 Nov 2009.

Civil Religion Revisited

2009-11-09T23:26:00.000-08:00

In reading chapter 6 of Goldberg, it is clear that the Christian Nationalist movement directly influences the politics in this country. We are able to see that the separation of church and state are not as separate as we may have thought. When George Bush was in office, he was heavily involved with the Christian Nationalist movement. He supported and funded programs that were run by the Christian Nationalists, and he elected judges who supported his cause in a way that has never been done before. According to Goldberg, “He [Bush] changed the judicial vetting procedure and put forward a slate of jurists far more radically partisan than any in American history.”

The Christian Nationalists are trying to turn this country into a Christian nation. They feel that since the founding fathers were Christian and the basic foundation of this country was made on Christian beliefs, that the country should be a Christian Nationalist country. They feel as if, “Any ruling that contradicts their theology as de facto unconstitutional, and its enforcement tyrannical.” (Goldberg, 155) They feel as if they should have the right into everyone's private lives so that they can prevent premarital sex, homosexuality, abortion, and anything else they deem is a sin.

The Christian Nationalists want to be able to control what is legal and illegal based on their beliefs, which would go against what this country believes in, freedom. When we are forced to abide by a certain religions beliefs, and laws are created based on a faith state, then those who do not believe in that religion are being forced to act against their will. This is why there is such a controversy over the role the Christian Nationalists play in the judicial system. They believe that the country going the way it is will break down old theological battle lines, leading to the establishment of a new theological consensus in the church. (Lovelace, 13) This is something they want to prevent at all costs. This is exactly why Thomas Jefferson supported the separation of church and state. He felt that if the church was involved with state, then people are not free to believe, and if the state is involved with the church, then the religion changes. Therefore, the separation of the two is a healthy way of dealing with each other.

When talking about the Christian Nationalists, we can look back at Bellah and remember his ideas of American civil religion. This is how the Christian Nationalists give themselves an identity. What they need to realize is the difference between the Christian God, and the God that is referred to in all of the founding documents. The Christian God represents a deep spiritual feeling of love and salvation, while the civil religion God is more interested in establishing laws, order, and the rights of man. If they could make this distinction, maybe there would be less disputes between the Christian Nationalists and the judicial system.

Works Cited:
Bellah, Robert N. "Civil Religion in America." Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 96.1 (1967): 1-21. Print.

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdon Coming. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2006. Print.

Lovelace, Richard F. "Homosexuality and the Church." Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2006. 746. Print.

Christian Nationalists in Power

2009-11-09T15:06:00.000-08:00

Christian nationalists believe that it is the will of God to create a country that is strictly run by their own Christian beliefs and values and Goldberg states that the only thing in the way of this happening is by destroying the courts which is their main obstacle. Christian nationalists already believe that America is a Christian based nation and because of this they feel the need to get rid of secular values and laws that clash with their own religious values and beliefs. The only way for them to achieve this is to destroy or take over the power of the courts (Goldberg, 155). By destroying the current judiciary powers and using their organized religious groups and leaders to take over, Christian nationalists would most likely create new laws that supported their religious values and destroy ones that contradicted it. With this being said we can see that many of our current rights could very well be destroyed because of the fact that it goes against someone else’s religious beliefs. With their strong objections to homosexuality, “unholy sex,” abortions and birth control, we see only a portion of what they want to change. It is not just the act of “unholy sex” or sex out of marriage that they are wanting to criminalize, but the act of monitoring these things to be sure that they don’t happen even within one’s own home would be taking away people’s right to privacy. Goldberg states that Rick Santorum shared his beliefs that there is no right to privacy because “…it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that’s antithetical to strong, healthy families" (157). Again, this is an example of how the Christian nationalist would push their extreme values on the rest of the country. In a reader called, Culture, Society, and Sexuality, there is a chapter by Gayle S. Rubin about some of the politics of sexuality. Rubin stated that in the 1940s through the early 60’s “erotic communities” and homosexuals were persecuted due to their activities and lifestyles that went against those of the government at that time (145). “Congressional investigations, executive orders and sensational exposes in the media aimed to root out homosexuals employed by the government. (Rubin, 145). Rubin even stated that the FBI became involved until the 1970s through “systematic surveillance and harassment of homosexuals…” (145). This is just an example of how Christian nationalists would attempt to go about carrying out their religious laws that they so strongly believe in. Again, even if one is heterosexual, this would not mean that they are safe from having their privacy destroyed. Homosexuality is just one of the many things that Christian nationalists would want to destroy. Because they want to be sure that no acts of “unholy” sex would occur they would intrude into people’s privacy. Furthermore, to help them end “unholy” sex they would probably attempt to destroy any influence of sex or anything related to values that they think are sinful. If there is a host of a TV show who was a homosexual does this mean they would take his/her show off the air? If people were fired once before for simply being homosexual then this situation would be no different. It is one thing to use your remote to change a channel when you don’t like what is on but it is completely different to destroy it because it goes against someone’s religious views. If Christian nationalists have issues with people who do not share the same values of sexuality how then will they act towards someone with a completely different religion? If they plan to push their values of a “correct” or “holy” sexuality on people then why would they hesitate to push the religion that influences this idea on the people as well. With so many different religions in America it’s obvious that this would be a problem. We all have a choice because of our rights to freedom and by ever letting Christian nationalists break and take over the judiciary powers we would jeopardize these rights.

References:
Edited by: Richard Guy Parker, Peter Aggleton. Rubin, Gayle S. "Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality." Culture, society and sexuality: a reader. Edition 2 1999: 144-154

Goldberg, Michelle.Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism.New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007.

Emergency Contraceptive

2009-11-09T09:09:00.000-08:00

The lawsuits between, women being refused their prescription for emergency contraceptive, and the pharmacists refusing to fill their prescriptions, are based on individual morals supported by their religion. When a person’s religious Truth is involved, to the individual it is a clear cut issue, I am absolutely right while you are wrong (Jarosch, 2009).

This debate first saw light in April 2005, when Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich created a law which required dispense of emergency contraceptive to be done “without delay,” like all other prescriptions. The first case on this issue was in January 2006, when four pharmacists in Illinois refused to fill prescriptions for emergency contraceptive because of their religious beliefs on this issue. As a result the pharmacists were put on unpaid leave. When the prescription was refused to be filled, the pharmacists were going against the law that was created in 2005. In return, the pharmacists filed a suit in opposition to the law that was created in 2005, saying that the law violated their constitutional rights. Pharmacists should be able to maintain their religious autonomy, and the state should not interfere.

The lawsuit against the 2005 Illinois rule created a compromise between pharmacists, the state, and pharmacies. The pharmacists want religious autonomy, and women need insurance that they have the right to emergency contraceptive without the pharmacist imposing their personal religious belief. This lawsuit created a shift, the duty to fill prescriptions was no longer the job of individual pharmacists, now it is the job of the pharmacy. Non-pharmacists can give emergency contraceptive with the approval of offsite pharmacists. Or individual pharmacists can decline the prescription as long as they return the prescription to the individual.

Not all states have addressed the issue of emergency contraceptives. As of 2009, only thirteen states have directed attention on this issue either through legislature or executive action. Four states have refusal laws, allowing pharmacists the right to refuse. Five states have broader refusal laws allowing several health care providers a right to refuse various services such as emergency contraceptives. In all of the states that allow the pharmacist the choice, they must return the prescription to the individual if they refuse to fill it. Four states protect the access of emergency contraceptives, saying if the medicine is in the back, and it is a valid prescription, then pharmacists must fill the prescription.

There are not many cases seen for women filing claims because women must have damages as a result of the pharmacist not filling the prescription, meaning the woman must become pregnant. When a woman was raped and then refused her prescription for emergency contraceptive she did not win her lawsuit because she did not become pregnant. Because of the unclear and conflicting rules and statutes, individual cases have unpredictable results.

In the last four years, thirteen states have created laws around woman’s right to emergency contraceptive verses pharmacist’s right to decline this medicine. This issue is a result of individual morals/beliefs. Pharmacists are concerned with the state taking away their religious independence while the other side of the argument does not want the imposing of the pharmacist personal religious beliefs on woman.

Goldberg, Michelle. The Christian Rise of Nationalism: Kingdom Coming. New York. Norton Paperback, 2007. P.129-133.

Jarosch, Jeffrey Paul "FINDING SPACE FOR OPPOSING CONSCIENCES: REHABILITATING THE MORAL MARKETPLACE FOR THE EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION DEBATE." Northwestern University Law Review 103.3 (2009): 1461-1493.

The Salvation Army

2009-11-05T00:45:00.000-08:00

When you hear the word Salvation Army many may think of the holidays when people stand outside of stores and ring their bells with red collection bins and ask for donations but he Salvation Army was founded in London in 1985 and was originally called the East London Christian Mission. The Salvation Army’s mission statement states this “The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.” (Salvation Army).With this being said the United States has the constitution which is our set of rules to follow as Americans but the rule of separation between church and state has not been followed in the faith-based organization of the Salvation Army.

When former President Bush took office one of the first things he did was make sure that he and his supporters gave the many different faith-based organizations money. Goldberg had spoken with a former employee of the Salvation Army and they had spoken on a event that had take place in the organization. After the event had taken place Lown and seventeen other employees had filed a lawsuit against the Salvation Army suing them for discrimination. As written to the Los Angeles Times “The department’s position in this case is that religious groups should be able to hire and fire people based on their religious views, even when administering publicity funded programs.” (129, Goldberg) This statement was a cornerstone of former Presidents Bush’s faith-based initiative. This quote makes it seem like the Salvation Army had been given approval by Bush’s administration to discriminate as long as they supported Bush’s agenda. It was later discovered that Bush’s administration had been having secret conversations with the Salvation Army.

“Three years ago, the Salvation Army publication The War Cry ran a strident attack on church-state separation. The article, written by Sam Silligato, recycled the Religious Right's bogus history, contending that the United States was meant to be an officially "Christian nation."”(R.B.). At the New York location in Spring 2003 they had called in Colonel Paul Kelly in to heighten the agency’s evangelical aspect. Once Kelly had arrived many things had started too changed. People were being fired and then the employees that were left were asked to fill out a form listing their religious beliefs and the churches that they had attended in the past ten years and to give the Salvation Army permission to contact the church and ask questions about their characteristics as people. Many refused and this is where the lawsuit came up and the Salvation Army had said that they will guarantee “equal employment” without discrimination. With this many employees became worried about how the new emphasis on evangelism would affect the clients on the Salvation Army.

In conclusion the White house in 2003 had issued a paper explaining why they believed government-funded religious charities should be allowed to discriminate. The paper was titled “Protecting the Civil Rights and Religious Liberty of Faith Based Organizations: Why Religious Hiring Rights Must Be Protected.” (132-133, Goldberg). Overall I fell that Faith Based organizations should not have the right to decide who and who not to hire basing it on their religious background.

Goldberg, Michelle. The Christian Rise of Nationalism: Kingdom Coming. New York. Norton Paperback, 2007. P.129-133.

"Mission Statement". Salvation Army. November 2009

R.B. "THE SALVATION ARMY: DECLARING WAR ON CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION? (Cover story)." Church & State 54.8 (2001): 7. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web.

Crossing the Line Between Church and State

2009-11-04T21:19:00.000-08:00

The separation of church and state has been a prominent fixture in American democracy since Thomas Jefferson pushed for the division. Yet since George W. Bush took office the line between the two has been blurred. One of the first major moves Bush did once entering office was to create the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. He then moved to construct similar offices in other major government departments, clearly crossing the line and bring the state into religion. This move helped him win the religious right vote. As a result in the recent 2009 election the two candidates joined in the support of government funding for faith-based organizations.
The main purpose of faith-based organizations is to help people and rid society of its social ills. On the outside this seems like a good idea, but the reality is that along with providing these services to the needy they also have a religious agenda. Served along side their meal programs for the needy is a hearty helping of Christianity. Michelle Goldberg put it best when she wrote,” …we’re becoming a country in which people literally have to pray for public help”.
The majority of the funds allotted for this program are being snatched up by Christian organizations. In a 2003 study by the Associated Press found that only 56 grantees were not Christian groups (Goldberg 121). This worked out well for Bush, since he was elected on the strength of the Christian Nationalist. This was the same conclusion John Dilulio, the first head of the faith-based office came to, “…the program was meant to help the Bush base, not the poor” (Goldberg 121). By keeping them happy he ensured himself that Christian Nationals would continue to support him and vote for him a second time.
This Christian support is what drove presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John McCain to pledge to continue the program if they were elected. Both candidates were vying for the Christian vote and believed supporting this issue would give it to them. Obama was the first to raise the issue in a speech on July 1, 2008. He wanted to continue with the program but under a new name, the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. He also wanted to eliminate the use of unfair hiring practices that were allowed by Bush. Under Bush organizations could restrict who they hired based on their religion. McCain on the other hand agreed with Bush and wanted to keep the hiring practices as they were. Christian Nationalist who supported Bush bashed Obama for his views, but in the end he won the election.
Religion is an extremely personal matter. One in which the government has no right to enter. Yet they feel the need to fund faith-based programs not because it is the right thing to do but because it is a way of getting elected. The line between church and state has not completely been erased but it has been crossed and because candidates need church support to be elected it will probably never be the same.

References
Boston, R. (2008). 'Faith-based' based flare up: government aid to social service ministries becomes hot topic in presidential campaign. Church & State, 61(8), 172-174. http://search.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org

Conservative Christians Attributions to both God and Satan

2009-11-04T20:12:00.000-08:00

Religious people, particularly conservative Christians, go about their daily lives with the belief that god is constantly working in the world. When good things happen, it is the work of god; when an individual is saved from a life of sin, it is the work of god. However when so called “evil” has been done upon these individuals or they themselves have committed misconduct, it tends to be attributed to the works of Satan. Throughout our class discussions what Satan means to a conservative Christian and how this figure is utilized has not been addressed in depth. In her book, Goldberg (2007) discusses the case of Tonja Myles a former drug addict who prostituted herself to support her habit until she was saved by the word of god. After overcoming her addiction she attributed her previous lifestyle to the works of Satan by describing herself as a former Satan worshipper. Why is it that conservative Christians need to attribute negative events or their own negative behavior to the work of Satan or demons?
A more commonly known answer would be that Satan is the fallen angel so therefore anything perceived as evil in the world must be attributed to the work of Satan. However, in reference to Eliade’s theory, a religious person, in this case a conservative Christian, cannot see space as homogeneous, nor can he or she attribute events in the world to cause and effect response or simple chance. Lupfer, Paola, Brock, and Clement (1994) conducted a study to investigate secular versus religious attributions to events. Researchers distributed a variety of vignettes to 202 participants all of whom differed in their adherents. Researchers asked participants to provide an explanation for the characters behavior or the outcome of the vignette. Researchers found that religious attributions, for example vignettes with positive outcomes being attributed to god and vignettes with negative outcomes being attributed to Satan, were most common among participants who adhered to conservative Christianity. Religious attributions were especially prevalent among conservative Christians when the actions in the vignettes were linked to religious values (Lupfer et al, 1994). In a religious persons world, when a man has fallen off the path of righteousness he is being influenced by Satan or inner demons, but can be saved by being reborn.
Aside from the bible professing acts such as homosexuality a sin, belief in an active Satan serves to justify attitudes of intolerance. In another study, Wilson and Huff (2001) conducted a correlational analysis of Christian’s belief in an active Satan in relation to their attitudes towards homosexuals and ethnic minorities. Researchers had 200 participants complete a prejudice scale along with an attitude towards homosexuals scale and a belief in an active Satan scale. Researchers observed that an active belief in Satan was directly related to intolerance towards homosexuals and ethnic minorities. Conservative Christians belief in an active Satan has fostered hatred towards things that are considered to be unclean such as homosexuality, drugs, and alcoholbecause of the belief that Satan is at work.
How does this attribution to Satan affect religion in American politics? As discussed by Goldberg, conservative Christian politicians believe that the separation between church and state is the work of Satan. The belief in an active Satan with regards to issues such as abortion, prostitution, premarital sex, and homosexuality is a working force that is helping conservative Christians in the political sphere get closer to their goal of saving the worlds sinners. Conservative Christians belief that they are not only battling society’s sinners but the works of Satan is a strong driving force to create religious reform in the political sphere.
References
Wilson, K., & Huff, J. (2001). Scaling Satan. Journal of Psychology, 135(3), 292. Retrieved
November 4, 2009 from Religion and Philosophy Collection database.
Lupfer, M., de Paola, S., Brock, K., & Clement, L. (1994). Making Secular and Religious
Attributions: The Availability Hypothesis Revisited. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 33(2), 162. Retrieved November 4, 2009 from Religion and Philosophy
Collection database.

Compassionate Conservatism

2009-11-04T15:39:00.000-08:00

Picture our country as a club. In this club we have a set of rules that are to be followed by all members within it i.e. the Constitution. Within our set of rules it has been said that there should be a separation between church and state. This doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be religion within the country. This just means that religion shouldn’t be controlled by the government or vice versa, they should remain separate. So, when the elected leader of the country begins funneling taxpayer dollars to clearly religious, or more specifically Christian social services in the name of a “faith-based” initiative what is to be said about the validity of our set of rules?
Heavily influenced by Christian nationalist Marvin Olasky, a strong supporter of scrapping the current welfare system and replacing it with private religious charity, former president Bush made his “compassionate conservatism” policy the center piece of his campaign. He knew that “Accepting Jesus had helped him quit drinking, and that experience seemed to be all the evidence Bush need that Olasky’s theories would work for the entire nation.”(Goldberg, p.113)
Bush and his supporters of the this initiative had to be very careful with their wording to the public using terms such as “faith-based” which appears pluralistic up front yet largely means “Christian-based”. While it is true that small grants where given to non-Christian organizations, they were heavily outweighed by those being given to Christian ones whose primary goal was conversion. What this can lead to is a discriminatory situation in which these social services being backed by the federal government only hire “like-minded” employees to support their mission. “Bush has insisted that religious groups that sponsor Head Start programs should have the right to restrict hiring to church members” (Boston, p. 9) This excerpt from Tom Boston’s article titled “Bush’s Faith Based Revival” is just one example of how this “faith-based” initiative could get out of hand. When social services that are being funded by the federal government are encouraged to discriminate, it throws up a major red flag.
While Bush is no longer the president of the United States, the issue is still quite troublesome. It seems to be a direct violation of the separation of church and state that the Constitution laid the framework for. Yet, with a conservative Christian behind the wheel a lot of these violations were encouraged and promoted. We can only hope that for the sake of the country that these violations do not grow stronger.

Boston, Tom. "Bush's Faith Based Revival." Church & State 57.3 (2004): 7-13. Web. 3 Nov 2009. .

If the Bible is good enough for the church it is good enough for the School and State- (CSC) Goldberg

2009-11-03T22:37:00.000-08:00

Every student attending a public school with in this nation are taught the concept of Evolution. Although many of their families have the option of taking their child to church in order for them to obtain the knowledge of intelligent design, what if their family is not one that chooses to attend church on a regular basis leaving the child to only know of evolution? The question is whether or not every developing mind should only be allowed the option to seek other ideas beyond evolution outside of the public education system or should both concepts be taught within the system?
Stated on the Center for Science and Culture (CSC) website, “if the Bible is good enough for the church, it is good enough for the school and state,” Rather than value of the bible being at stake, it is the imposition of either concepts on a child, who may have the option of attending a church, but its forced to attend school. In a perfect world, all theories would be taught as well as all theories being accepted, but we live in a society where religion is not forced upon anyone. As evolution is seen as a scientific method and must be known prior to achieving many scientific professions our children should be subjected to learn the concepts of this theory (Hewlett, 2006). Sadly, the Evangelical way of life can only be obtained by one who is anti-science, or anti-Darwinism.
“Evolution in Our Schools: What shall we teach?” explores both sides of teaching only evolution in schools, and the idea of teaching both as it can only expand the mind rather than keeping it narrow. Hewlett and Peters claim the position of being Christian Evangelicals who spread the lords word, but ones who have acknowledged the teachings of evolution to their children as it will only ensure their future. As they are very loyal to their beliefs they have not taken belief of evolution, but have taken notice to the theory as it is a part of society and without knowing it can only hold them back.
Too many Conservative Evangelicals, Hewlett and Peters would not be Christian due to their opinion on the matter, but it does raise the question of what would the public education system be like if both scientific and religious theories were to be taught? In many aspects it has been shown that the idea of both or none at all being taught will never exist as we are a society of freedom, the freedom to practice else where just as long as it is not being asked for within an institution that is being funded by tax’s payers money.

Resources

Hewlett, Martinez, and Ted Peters "Evolution in Our Schools: What Should We Teach?." Dialog: A Journal of Theology 45.1 (2006): 106-109. Religion and Philosophy Collection. EBSCO. Web. 3 Nov. 2009.

Goldber, Michelle. The Christian Rise of Nationalism: Kingdom Coming. New York. Norton Paperback, 2007. pg84.

Opposing the Abstinence Only Fight

2009-11-03T12:39:00.000-08:00

“I’m not going to give them a condom… No. Never. Cause they’re going to come back to me, and they’re going to say it didn’t work” stated Leslee Unruh in response to a question regarding the issue of safe sex education in America. As part of the Christian Nationalist, Unruh is among a large community of people that believe in reestablishing the Christian way in America. Part of their effort has been to rid American schools and public of safe sex education, in which people are informed of various contraceptives available to promote safe sex practices. In response the people of the Christian Nation believe that Abstinence-only programs are necessary if morality is to be restored in America. As this group of people establish Abstinence only programs they are using biased information and are endangering those they reach out too.
Abstinence-only programs focus on the idea of “no sex before marriage”, but do not offer any other options. As a result many adolescents that go through these programs are left unknowledgeable. It may delay the action, but based on research by Bearman and Bruckner, “ [teens] are more likely to have oral or anal sex, and that when they do lose their virginity, they’re less likely to use condoms and to seek treatment if they contract STD’s” (137 Goldberg). Not only does abstinence only programs offer little information regarding protecting one’s self it is not representative of the majority of Americans’ needs and wants. According to a “2004 report on "Public Support for Comprehensive Sexuality Education" indicates that 93 percent of parents of junior high school students and 91 percent of parents of high school students believe it is very or somewhat important to have sex education as part of the school curriculum” (Rose).
While abstinence-only programs continue to be a part of American society they continue to misinform people regarding the benefits of sex education. As stated in Kingdom Coming, by Goldberg many of the organizations associated with pro-abstinence education use manipulative tactics. For example, many “Crisis pregnancy centers, or CPC’s, have long, well-documented records of lying to women about their sexual health” (139). In many cases these organizations have deceived women into believing they were health clinics even though the people inside are not medical professionals, but anti-abortion activists (139).
Another problem with these organizations is that they use fear to convince adolescents to not have sex till marriage. In one program the video “No Second Chance” is shown in which a discussion regarding sex outside of marriage is shown while images of men dying from AIDS are also shown (Rose). Other programs use the method of fear as well, in a program by Leslee Unruh rubber viper snakes are used to teach the dangers of condoms.
The issue with these programs is not only that they are miss-informative and deceiving, but that they have received a great amount of support from the American government. According to a 2005 study, “Under the Bush administration, abstinence-only programs have expanded rapidly. While $170 million in federal funds have been slated for FY 2005, President Bush has allocated an additional $39 million for abstinence-until-married education programs, bringing the total request for FY 2006 to $205.5 million. This represents a 50 percent increase in funding since 2004 (Rose). As stated by Goldberg, “almost one billion dollars of government funds had been spent on chastity programs by the end of Bush’s first term” (137).
I do not believe the Christian Nation will ever fully succeed in removing sex education from American public, but they will continue to do whatever they see fit to try to. As we can see this group of people is determined to fulfill their belief in the God given right to “restore” America to the Christian way.

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming. New York: Norton & Co, Inc., 2007.

Rose, Susan. "Going Too Far? Sex, Sin and Social Policy." Volume 84, Number 2, December 2005, 84.2 (2005): 1207-1232.

Against Abstinence-only Education

2009-11-02T16:35:00.000-08:00

Abstinence-only education programs have driven various debates; the methods' effectiveness dictates whether to continue or to abolish them. Christian Nationalists have taken the role to “regain” secularized America back to the Christian nation it “once” was and to “reestablished” the Christian morals and conducts of the American people through various programs like these. The movement has been bombarded with problems because time and time again has shown that these certain strict and specific programs do not necessarily work.
From 2001 to 2009, the programs have “received almost $1.3 billion in federal funding, according to the Office of Management and Budget” (Beil). It would seem that with the financial capacity that these various programs would be effective, but opponents of abstinence-only education methods, which emphasize sex-after-marriage, claim that even with federal funding, there were no desired effects. One program called The Virginity Rules, sponsored by the East Texas Abstinence Program, lost federal funding for it failed to bring about the sought after results of lowering teen births; Texas, which drew the biggest share of abstinence funds in 2000, recorded 62 teen births per 1,000 population compared to the national rate of 40 per 1,000. An 8-million study regarding the efficiency of abstinence-only education showed that there was no difference in age of first sexual intercourse. Another claimed that only 3 abstinence-only programs produced effects, which were weak (Beil). Of course, when students are asked about their opinions on the program‘s success, they would claim that these programs do not work. Bristol Palin claims that, and she should know.
The programs' limitations and strict curriculum do not necessarily reach out to the students. I have suspected that these programs do not even acknowledge students’ inputs, and I have observed that both sex-education classes and abstinence-only classes emphasize greatly on scare tactics; these classes should also emphasize “negotiation skills in sexual relationships and communication … Interventions to help adolescents learn about healthy sexual relationships need to be designed” (DiCenso).
Given that abstinence-only education exclude the importance of condoms and other contraceptives, young people are not able to learn critical, life-saving information. Another reason for the opposition whould be the programs’ violation of human rights and ethical principles. Teachers and health educators, then, are withholding scientific knowledge. Access to accurate health information as a basic human right has been addressed by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and in the program at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (Kantor). Even critics would claim that the program is not helping AIDS treatment programs, which are targeting “populations at greatest risk” (Church and State, para 7). Clearly, denying students vital health information clearly has unfavorable effects.

Sources:
Beil, Laura. "Just Saying No To Abstinence Ed." BMJ. 324.1426 (2002)." Newsweek. 152.17 (2008): Academic Search Premier

Kantor, Leslie. "Abstinence-only Education Violating Students' Rights to Health Information." Journal of the Section of Individual Rights & Responsibilities. 35.3 (2008): Academic Search Premier

"'Abstinence-only' Rule Hurts Fight Against AIDS, Research Report Asserts." Church & State May 2007: 114-115.

DiCenso, Alba. "Interventions to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents: systematic review of randomised controlled trials ." BMJ. 324.1426 (2002): Academic Search Premier

Abstinence is the Only Way

2009-11-02T14:46:00.000-08:00

“My job is not to keep teenagers from having sex. The public schools’ job should not be to keep teens from having sex. Our job should be to tell kids the truth!” (Goldberg 135) This is according to Pam Stenzel, an advocate of abstinence only education.

Abstinence. It is the only way to be free of sexual sin and to maintain a life of purity. It is the truth; it is not a lie. It is not the enemy, but teaching safe sex is. According to Goldberg, the research on abstinence programs and curricula is that it does not do much to stop teens from having sex (137), and according to DeJoy and Perrin, no one has demonstrated that they work (449). In essence, these abstinence only programs seem to cause more problems than they solve and are not the truth, as Stenzel seems to believe.

The first of many problems amongst this line of thinking seems to be the development of these deceptive crisis pregnancy centers, or CPC’s. These are places that mimic women’s health clinics, and yet, when a woman goes inside, they are given abstinence only or anti-abortion speeches, taught nothing about the proper use of contraception, and are instead “encouraged to stop having sex and to embrace ‘second virginity’.” (Goldberg 140) Often times, women who are already having sex are not going to stop, thus, what is the use of pressing one group’s principles on that individual?

Another problem that comes from this is the fact that abstinence only curricula and programs only teach the ineffectiveness of using contraceptives, because the idea is to deter people from having sex at all. Yet, this method is a “disservice to teens who are already sexually active, homosexual teens who are not legally permitted to marry same-sex partners in most states, and young adults who will become sexually active before marriage” (DeJoy 450) because those who choose to have sex are going to have it anyways. This becomes the problem of a person not having proper education about sex, which then leads them to be unlearned about easily preventable things like sexually transmitted diseases or pregnancies.

These “problems” could be easily solved if sexual education were taught in a more proper manner. Yes, teach abstinence as the safest way to prevent pregnancy and disease, but also teach the proper use of contraceptives for those who are either already having sex or are going to make that choice to do so before they are married. Teaching abstinence only curricula, along with the ineffectiveness of contraceptives, is only going to cause more problems for the future.

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming. New York: Norton & Co, Inc., 2007.

DeJoy, Sharon Bernecki, and Perrin, Karen. “Abstinence-Only Education: How We Got Here and Where We're Going”. Journal of Public Health Policy, Vol. 24 (2003). Palgrave Macmillan Journals. pp. 445-459

Abstinence program: a political decision

2009-11-02T13:10:00.000-08:00

Statistical facts on pregnancy rate among teenagers from state highschools have proven that the Abstinence-only programs for sex and health education didn't work, particularly in states where the program is supported and sponsored by the government. The non-working program still being taught in school despite the alerted consequences has indeed shown a rather political decision than medical or health decision. In an attempt to re-create the morality in society, the Christian nationalists have implemented a theoretical conduct which has led the society toward a much more gruesome direction.

Pregnancy among teenagers and STDs contracted rates increased due to the lack of contraception and protective sex education. Despite the fact that Abstinence is the surest way to avoid one hundred percent of the problems caused by sexual activities, it is however impossible to actually convince every teenager not to engage in any sexual activity since the choice is up to them. In fact, students were still becoming parents and contracting STDs according to Jennifer Berghom's article: "Abstinence-only still being taught despite high pregnancy rate" of the Monitor, McAllen, TX. The research for Edcouch-Elsa school district showed an extensively high rate of students who were either going to have a baby or already parents. That alone has brought up the notion for a more comprehensive sex education which would more likely prevent teen pregnancy and STDs contraction in term of truly concerning their medical and health condition rather than the morality of the situation. The negligence of educating teenagers proper use of condoms and contraception as protection from pregnancy and STDs in the abstinence-only program has thus contributed remarkably to the current situation. According to Michelle Goldberg, the application of Abstinence program does succeed in helping kids delay losing their virginity yet the anti-condom message seems to dissuade them from bothering with protection when they do have sex (Goldberg 137). Hence, the consequences it led to has indicated the downside of the condition of society that was ironically supposed to be morally improved by the program itself.

As a strategy of promoting the abstinence program and inflicting it on school education through the support of government, the Christian nationalists has employed the duplication method, "created 'paraprofessional' associations of teachers, doctors, lawyers, and the like,, which mimicked ordinary professional groups in order to erode their legitimacy and eventually replace them" (Goldberg 153). The fact that the organizations established by the force of these evangelical Christians were not meant to provide reliable medical information related to sexual activities to young women but rather to inflict on them the moral doctrine of womanhood through the abstinence program is wrong, both scientifically and morally indeed. By not revealing all the essential scientific facts and exaggerating the ones used to support its claim, the members of these organizations have intensionally distorted the truth and misled the uninformed teen girls or young women. Using scientific claims to navigate a non-scientific belief and create disadvantages to science itself is scientifically askew, keeping the people from knowing the truth they deserve to know is absolute immorality.

The abstinence program is indeed only one of the attempts the evangelical Christian activists made in order to impose their ideological fiction upon the secular society. As clearly as how unethical the affects it has on the society, the continuous support it gets from the government has proved a political employment of a somewhat similar to communist brainwashing method by American democratic system.

References:

Berghom, Jennifer L. "Abstinence-only still being taught despite high pregnancy rates." Monitor, The (McAllen, TX) 18 Oct. 2009: Newspaper Source Plus. EBSCO. Web. 2 Nov. 2009.

Goldberg, Michelle, "Kingdom coming: the rise of Christian Nationalism"

Religion and Science

2009-11-02T11:23:00.000-08:00

James Cardinal Gibbons attempts to explain the "Truth" of religion through the harmony of religion and science. He points to God as the original creator, and that God is truth. Christians believe that the world was created with such an organized complexity that God must have been the creator. However, Richard Dawkins, an author in Science and Christian Belief demonstrates that "God is useless as an explanation of organised complexity because a)he must have organised complexity, the very same property we want to explain, only more so, and b) God's organised complexity would exist unexplained (Richmond 2009)." He argues that this idea of one designer being created by another designer, being created by another designer, would go on forever with no original creator, whereas Darwinism builds up complexity, beginning with simple organisms (an actual beginning).
Gibbons accuses "leaders of modern thought" of degrading Christians by saying "that to enjoy full freedom in searching the secrets of the physical world, you must emancipate yourself from the intellectual restraints imposed on you by the Christian religion (Gibbons 1889)." He goes on to say that these are "ungrateful assertions,since they are spoken by men who are indebted to Christianity for the very discoveries they have made (Gibbns 1889)." The Cardinal is taking offense to the theory of Evolution and asserts that all Christians are being victimized by these scientists. Finally, Christians are getting a taste of their own medicine. After centuries of being considered outsiders by the church, scientists are able to use fact to support their reasoning of Evolution and natural selection. They have had to endure years of verbal abuse, being called profane, chaotic, and liars by those such as Eliade, while theists are supposedly sacred, true, and known.
Despite his solid beliefs, Cardinal Gibbons admits that there are many "truths" in religion that cannot be explained. Yet instead of discussing these so-called truths, the cardinal justifies the unknown by saying "If the ideas of time and space and the relation of soul to body are beyond our comprehension, we cannot be expected with our unaided reason to explain away the apparent incongruities that we find between the unseen and the visible kingdom of the universe (Gibbns 1889)." He is justifying the profane, unknown world, which would completely contradict his theory that God created the world, because everything sacred is supposed to be the truth. He is saying that some things are simply unexplainable; not a valid argument, considering science does give us an explanation of the real truth.
The most laughable of the statements Gibbons makes is that just because we do not know all the explanations of the "truth", it does not mean they are false because some things are always going to be left out. He says "If we hold the two ends of a chain, we know that the connection is complete, though some of the links may be concealed from us (Gibbons 1889)." This statement directly refutes the Christian argument against Evolution, which says that we must have a fossil from every stage of evolution in order to prove it is true, and since we are missing a few fossils, Evolution must be false. These "gaps" in Evolution are exactly congruent with the links of chain metaphor, that says even though there are links missing, we can still make the connection because we are holding both ends. This selection of reading holds so many contradictions. The Cardinal encourages science when it aids in the explanation of religion, and refutes science when it disagrees with religion. To highlight these contradictions and deceptions clearly shows the desperate attempts by the church to regain control in the face of truthful opposition.

Sources:
James Cardinal Gibbons, Our Christian Heritage (Baltimore: John Murphy & Co., 1889), 301-4, 309-10, 319-20. Cited in Mathisen pg.387

Richmond, Patrick "Richard Dawkins' Darwinian Objection to Unexplained Complexity in God." Science & Christian Belief 19.2 (2007): 99-116. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 2 Nov. 2009.

The Success of the Pro-Life Abstinence Movement

2009-11-01T23:54:00.000-08:00

“AIDS is not the enemy” are the words of Pam Stenzel, head of Enlightenment Communications, an abstinence movement advocate (Goldberg, 136). Stenzel’s group, and many others involved with the abstinence movement, driven by Christian beliefs, consider abstinence the one true contraceptive and aggressively, as well as deceptively discourage any other form. But as Michelle Goldberg and William Cooper infer, not only does the abstinence movement create more of the problems it claims it’s trying to stop, but AIDS not being her enemy couldn’t be any further from the truth.

The Abstinence Movement produces numerous bodies of Christian biased literature in the form of instructional guides and textbooks. In “Sex Respect,” abortion is linked to breast cancer, despite many scientific studies disproving this. The “Silver Ring Thing Sexual Abstinence Study Bibles,” which insist accepting abstinence is accepting Jesus Christ as your Savior, preach, “If you have chosen to reject Christ, then your final destination will be the lake of fire. No arguments. Case closed” (Goldberg, 146).

Not only does the abstinence movement have the funding of evangelical Christians to put out this literature, they have government influence as well. Stenzel was appointed by ex-president George W. Bush to be on a task force within the Department of Health and Human Services (Goldberg, 135). David Hager, another Bush appointed government representative, influenced the FDA to reject their ruling to make the morning after pill available without a prescription because of its seventy-two hour effectiveness. A simple memo from David Hager insisting on making it prescription necessary was all the FDA needed to change their minds (Goldberg, 151).

It’s one thing to pose these beliefs on one’s own children, but these people want these beliefs pushed on everyone’s children, and they are extremely manipulative in their implementation. “How to Start and Operate Your Own Pro-Life Outreach Crisis Pregnancy Center” is a manual put out by the Pearson Foundation (Goldberg, 139). They urge setting up crisis prevention centers near if not right next to abortion clinics. Women in need of prenatal care often mistake CPCs for prenatal clinics. Once inside, they are seen not by medical health professionals, but abstinence advocates in white coats. As they watch their ultrasound, the words “Hi mommy!” are typed below (Goldberg, 140). Before they can see their pregnancy results, they are sometimes forced to watch explicit abortion videos, in an effort to dissuade them from getting an abortion. Instead of scientific advice, what they usually get is “A very aggressive anti-abortion campaign” (Goldberg, 140).

The “campaign,” strongly opposes the use of contraceptives, as well as abortions, and pushes their abstinence program upon teens. But as Goldberg explains, “…abstinence programs don’t do much to stop teens from having sex” (Goldberg, 137). Teens who take virginity pledges not only lose their virginity only a couple months after those who don’t, but because of the anti-contraception rule taught to them, they resort to oral and anal sex, exposing themselves to sexually transmitted diseases. Plus, studies show most teens become more sexually active after receiving chastity lessons. They don’t work. By influencing the youth of our nation not to wear condoms, they have put them more at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS, becoming the opposite of “pro-life”, which is also what they preach.

William Cooper, former military man turned rogue radio host, released “Behold a Pale Horse” in 1991. As Cooper stated, due to the baby boom from 1941 to 1955, which not only doubled the world population by 1990 but also disrupted the natural order of the death toll being higher than the rate of life, the Illuminati, a secret society of elites, constructed a two part plan. The first part was to lower the birth rate by creating contraceptives and to encourage homosexuality. “Religion and the old blue laws sabotaged these efforts,” as Cooper wrote. The second part, originally considered a last resort, was to increase the death rate. In an effort to avoid announcing to the public that they must be systematically executed, in 1969 Roman doctor Aurelio Peccei recommended a synthetic “black plague” which would “…attack the autoimmune system and thus render the development of a vaccine impossible” (Cooper). According to Cooper, in 1977, Project MK-NAOMI began in Phoenix, Arizona, where acquired immune deficiency syndrome was manufactured. Africans were infected under the guise of a small-pox vaccine, and in 1978, Dr. Wolf Szmuness implemented the microorganism at the United Stated Centers for Disease Control as a hepatitis B vaccine.

The abstinence movement consider them self “pro-life.” Yet with all of their economic and government influence, because of their unwillingness to accept scientific rationalism, they have actually helped contribute to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and, according to Cooper, death. “AIDS is not the enemy… My child believing that they can shake their fist in the face of a holy God and sin without consequence, and my child spending eternity separated from God, is the enemy” is the full quote from Pam Stenzel (Goldberg, 136). It seems that when the Christian abstinence movement says “pro-life,” what they are referring to is the life that supposedly awaits us after death as opposed to the life that lies before us. In that respect, the abstinence movement has been extremely successful in reaching their goals.

Cooper, William. Behold a Pale Horse. Light Technology Pub., 1991.

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming. New York: Norton & Co, Inc., 2007.

Homosexuality, The Church and America

2009-10-29T14:54:00.001-07:00

In Goldberg’s Kingdom Coming she speaks of the dynamics of how society interacts with one another when it comes to same sex marriages and the evangelical church. This text is very much against homosexuality and is very stern about this belief and conception. In Chapter two of Goldberg’s well-written book she talks about how the conservatives are threatened from homosexuals getting married, and this being detrimental to conservative families and their way of living. “In 2004 millions of Americans decided that, in a time of war and economic uncertainty, there was no issue more urgent than keeping gay people from getting married”(Goldberg Pg 56). It is shocking that individual’s act in this way toward Homosexuals. Why would people be so close-minded and unfair? This was because of the fact that conservatives had their mindset on cleaning their towns and making sure that homosexuality would not spread. The way that these conservative evangelicals went about trying to ban homosexual marriages and homosexuals in general is through the church. Another way of exploiting this inequality was thru through commercializing this idea through television, word of mouth, leaflet’s, and even posters. “The Republican National Committee mailed a voter registration form attached to a four color flyer about “protecting marriage”, the front pictured a brined and a groom and the words, “one man one woman.” Inside it said one vote could make a difference in making sure it stays that way.”(Goldberg Pg 64) This quote thoroughly explains how manipulative this party was. It is horrible for people to try to sway people to become discriminatory against a certain type of belief or people. Knowledge is power and knowing that discrimination is wrong and spreading the word will help people understand that everyone should be free to do what they want to do.

Works cited

Goldberg, Michelle. "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. New York, NY. 2007

Homophobia

2009-10-29T12:52:00.000-07:00

In chapter two of Goldberg's Kingdom Coming, Goldberg explains the homophobia that exists withing the mega churches and how this homophobia was used in politics, especially in the 2004 same sex marriage proposition. The message that homosexuality was becoming a threat to families was being stated by conservatives, "Needing to see their foe as equal to their threat , they exaggerate its strength", and therefore charge against homosexuality with all their strength (Goldberg 69). As a result of trying to cure homosexuality, Goldberg states that many Christian conservatives believe that people can come out of homosexuality , but the people that are born into evangelical communities where homosexuality is seen as a sin long for belonging and therefore go through preparative therapy hoping to become what their families want them to become (Goldberg76). Unfortunately there has been no evidence that these therapies actually help homosexuals leave their sexuality behind and become hetero sexual.
Mega churches, as stated by Goldberg, have situated themselves in exurbs and because of this, they "fill the spiritual and social void, providing atomized residents instant community" (Goldberg 58). Because a community is built it becomes easier for these mega churches to spread their message, in this case that homosexuality is a sin and as stated by Goldberg this is a pattern that repeats itself in the culture of wars, "When religious conservatives are proven wrong, their faith in their righteousness only grows along with their hatred of conspiracy they see arrayed against them"(Goldberg 78). In the article Consequences of Same-Sex Marriage Will be Far Reaching , by Don Wildmon, the founder for the American Family Association, interviewed Mary Ann Glendon, a Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard about same-sex marriage and she stated, “The economic and social costs of this radical social experiment. Astonishingly, in the media coverage of this issue, next to nothing has been said about what this new special preference would cost the rest of society in terms of taxes and insurances premiums.” She states a strong bias against homosexuality and believes that homosexuality goes against the law of God.
Hopefully in the near future, Christians will no longer see homosexuality as a sin and accept it. It is in Goldberg's chapter two that we find that those that are heavily against homosexuality are the religious people, mostly of Christian denominations and sects.

Works cited
Goldberg, Michelle. "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. New York, NY. 2007

Wildmon, Don. "Consequences of same-sex 'marriage' will be far reaching." American Family Association Journal: American Family Association. 2006. Web: 20 October 2009

Two Sides To Every Story…

2009-10-28T16:49:00.000-07:00

Right-winged American politics are plagued and ruled by paranoia, with an ever-changing enemy of attack with a target on their back as described in Goldburg’s “Kingdom Coming”(Ch.2). The hypocrisy and paranoia fuel the Christian–Rights fire to the extreme of brainwashing their worshiper's into believing and thinking the worst. Whether phrased as views on homophobia, anti-gay sentiment or same sex marriage. Paranoia beliefs range from “the abomination of a civilization" to conservative lawmakers in Tennessee attempting to ban homosexuals from living in Rhea County. Churches, new super Mega-churches are set up in rural areas to unite the worshipers by instilling fears, exclaiming that they must fight back and reclaim their Christian nation which is under attack! The conservative-right fuel the fire of intolerance and discrimination. “Homosexuality has become the mobilizing passion for much of the religious right. A populist movement needs an enemy, but one reason the Christian nationalist are so strong is that they’ve made peace with old foes, especially Catholics and African Americans. Gay people have taken the place of obsolete demons.” (Goldburg 52)

The conspiracy theories play out as pastors around the country send their top representative to meet with representatives from D.C. to align issues and set up a strategic plan to back their votes. Worshipers respect and fear the holy and untainted words of their minister without doubt or question. It's the word of God, right? ”So gay people become a threat to the most important thing conservatives have-their families. In standing up to that threat, they see themselves as heroes. Loathing is transformed into virtue.”(Goldburg 69) Therefore, uniting them to take a stand and vote! An anti-gay marriage vote! The hot button issue is no longer segregation or abortion, the country must take back Christian America and protect the tradition of family values. Where does the first amendment come in? Who gets to choose how you live and the choices you get to make in a free and civil society. The hypocrisy in the church has been going on for centuries and so has homosexuality. It is just a matter of time before it will be an issue of the past, yet people are just not ready to go there yet! Close-minded conservatives rule the White House and it is the liberal lefts fault for not being as organized as the conservative right. Due to popular or unpopular belief, trying to find a non bias scholarly article was near impossible. Each article makes references or questions the relevance for today's society; Pro or Anti Homosexual writers take examples from the Bible's Old Testament, Plato's Symposium, Genesis or the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Goldberg, Michelle. "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. New York, NY. 2007

Coalition of the Willing?

2009-10-28T10:28:00.000-07:00

Tax cuts for the large corporations and the wealthy, dismantling social security and other government programs, anti-public education, anti-welfare, a hawkish foreign policy, upholding a ban on all forms of abortion, lax gun laws, overturn environmental and consumer protection laws, and standing for the "sanctity of marriage" by preventing homosexuals from marrying.

The above demands have been on the Republican Party platform for decades; the far-right has held an anti-government regulation and morality-upholding through government intervention coalition since the 1970s. The "Red State" religious voters obviously have a staunch opposition to abortion rights and gay rights, but why would these voters, who are in the lower-to-middle income bracket, vote against their economic interests? It is because conservatives have been able to forge an alliance between free-market neo-conservatives, and Christian fundamentalists, and have done it successfully.

Goldberg sites the 2004 Presidential election as an example of how homosexuality was politicized in a negative way. Gay marriage bans were on the ballot in a dozen states, and churches were galvanized to vote to protect the sanctity of marriage (Goldberg 54). False claims, such as churches who do not recognize gay marriages would have their tax exemptions stripped, were rampant throughout the campaign. Images of gay couples in San Francisco were also used to mobilize church-going voters.

She also mentions Anita Bryant's campaign in the late 1970s to repeal Florida laws that were seen as "gay-friendly". Bryant famously said that homosexuals "want to recruit your children and teach them the virtues of becoming homosexual" (Fetner 411).

One can point out that the economic recession would turn many voters around into making the economy, not "moral values", a priority. However, Obama's big win in 2008 alongside Prop. 8 in California, as well as the victory of Anita Bryant's anti-gay legislation in Florida at a time of economic recession, were evidence that this may not be the case (Fenter 414).

The Religious Right's movement has been a reactionary one; with more people attaining rights and liberties, Conservatives became outraged in the decline of moral standards in society. As Goldberg puts it, gays and lesbians were targeted as the epitome of moral decay. That gays would ultimately bring down civilization. This is why religious conservatives will unlikely defect from the GOP; the Democrats have long been associated with liberal social changes. As long as the Republican Party continues its opposition to gay marriage by adopting the rhetoric of Christian Fundamentalism, they will lose the argument that the GOP is a "big tent" party. However, as what we have seen, homophobia can bring out the religious vote, which can be a factor in winning an election.

Homosexuality has become the mobilizing issue for the Religious Right; they have "tolerated" gays and lesbians up until a point. To the Christian, marriage is sacred and is one of the binding institutions, alongside the family, that hold society together. When they see gays engaging in marriage and the adoption of children, the line is crossed and immorality is assaulting what is sacred. Therefore, the "homosexual agenda" is an attack on God.

Works Cited:
Fenter, Tina."Working With Anita Bryant: The Impact of Christian Gay Activism on Lesbian and Gay Movement Claims. from Social Problems, Vol 48, No. 33. University of California Press. 2001

Goldberg, Michelle. "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. New York, NY. 2007

Christianity and Science

2009-10-27T07:08:00.000-07:00

In the third chapter of Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, Goldberg discusses the on-going argument of teaching creationism, which is often disguised as Intelligent Design. She considers the different techniques that Intelligent Design supporters use to coerce the subject into schools. First, creationism is disguised as Intelligent Design. In Intelligent Design, religion is played down and scientific speech is employed to make it seem more like an actual science, not the pseudoscience it really is. Intelligent Design supporters also obtain degrees in areas that qualify their opinions, and become publicly active through groups like the CSC. These supporters plan strategic approaches, such as "The Wedge Strategy" to manipulate their ideas into the mainstream.

The article I read, Most Beautiful and Most Wonderful: Why Darwin is Still Right, discusses the importance of educating ourselves about Intelligent Design and evolution. The supporters of Intelligent Design know their stuff; and consequently could win an argument with an evolutionist. To combat the infiltration of Intelligent Design in schools today, we need to know more about Charles Darwin's theory and the theory of Intelligent Design. In most debates, it doesn't matter so much the material that is being debated upon, but on the debaters themselves. Putting an end to the teaching on Intelligent Design rests in the knowledge of evolutionists.

I attended a private Christian high school. For our freshman year, we were required to take 'Earth Science.' It was basically a class taught to cement the ideas of creationism. The class did touch upon Evolution, but in such a way that you were considered an idiot if you agreed with the text book. The teacher and students actually laughed about how lost evolutionists were. I can't speak for other private religious schools--but it is a shame that they have the power to choose to educate their students or to shroud them in ignorance. It should not be a choice for the individual school to make. Goldberg explains that a school doesn't need permission to teach Intelligent Design--that all they need is a mandate to teach "the scientific strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory." This allows Intelligent Design to end up in the classroom just the same.

Works Cited:

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. New York, New York. W. W. Norton & Company. 2006.

Most Beautiful and Most Wonderful: Why Darwin is Still Right. Virginia Quarterly Review, Vol. 82 Issue 2, p1-3. 2006.

Fundamentalisms Hurtful Rise

2009-10-26T20:30:00.000-07:00

The rise of Fundamentalism caused issues for Americans. With the 1920’s controversy over Fundamentalism Vs. Modernism, two direct paths were created for religious exploration. Liberalism led toward open interpretations of the bible and open change to traditional views and customs, while Conservatism caused issues due to its literal interpretations of the bible and lack of flexibility.

In Robert Mathisen’s, “Critical Issues in American Religious History,” article 105, “The Bible and Modern Critisicism,” David Heagle, a German Professor, provides us with his view, criticizing Modernism. In another article, “Fundamentalism as A Challenge for Religious Education,” written by Heinz Streib, a Professor at Bielefield University, the opposing view is expressed as finding negative effects of Fundamentalism.

In Heagle’s document from the early 1900’s, he attempts to persuade people to believe that the Bible is a “proven, divinely inspired, heaven-given book, a communication from a Father to his children.” (pg550). Heagle states that the Bible condemns man; therefore, saying God is superior to all. Heagle also states that the Bible is superior to all other religious documents because no other god gave his son for the good of man. Heagle is arguing against Modernism because he believes that God has authority over all men, and that no Christian should change the word of God in order to modernize his life. The fight between the up rise of Modernism and Fundamentalism created a wide gap between the two over the next century.

In Streib’s article we can see what Fundamentalism has done to the youth that were raised under such circumstance. Although this article does acknowledge a positive influence of Fundamentalism, the sense of community among the church, it appears that the negative influence of Fundamentalism is superior. This article gives case studies to show how the rearing of children under the Fundamentalist views are raised by authoritarian parents who have narrow points of view. The families live their lives by the word of the bible, without modern interpretation; therefore little room is left for issues such as children’s needs. Children raised in this setting often have psychological oppression due to the lack of affection from parents, as well as complications with resolving conflict.

The rise of fundamentalism brought with it a feeling of certainty, one could lean on the Bible for confidence in all aspects of life, however, many contradictions made by the Bible were overlooked. Fundamentalists used persuasion to overcome their fear of the rise of Modernism by using this authoritarian style against their children. The fear Fundamentalists held against scientism made them fight even harder for the rise of Fundamentalism. They let fear overpower clarity, creating a support system for a contradictory bible.

“Fundamentalism as A Challenge for Religious Education.” Religious Education 2001, Volume 96 Issue 2, Pg 227-244

Streib, Heinz.

http://search.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rlh&AN=5337725&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live

Mathisen, Robert R. “Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2^nd Revised Edition).” Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

Evolution and Intelligent Design

2009-10-26T13:59:00.000-07:00

In chapter three of her book Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, Michelle Goldberg explores the past and present role of intelligent design in American society and its tumultuous relationship with science. In their article “Sociobiology and Creationism: Two Ethnosociologies of American Culture” authors J. Patrick Gray and Linda D. Wolfe steer clear of the usual debate regarding which is correct: evolution or intelligent design. Rather, they take an absurd sidestep, reconciling the two concepts to promote traditional American values and demote alternative lifestyles which they claim, “threaten to destroy this [American] way of life” (Gray et al).

Though they recognize the differences between the two ideologies, Gray and Wolfe primarily focus on what they perceive to be their similarities. They claim that human rationality fails to dominate nature in the way that it must and that the secular world view is responsible for problems in today’s society. They also focus on the idea that anything that damages the family damages society, which they judge by using America’s “moral code” which is supported by both creationists (because it is what God wants) and evolutionists (because natural selection deems it so). It is important to note that Gray and Wolfe do not define “moral code” in their article, but judging from their thesis, one can assume that morals refer to traditional values that are the social-norm.

I do not agree with Gray and Wolfe, whose ideas are strained, obscure, and offer little insight into any real analysis between the relationship of evolution and creationism. That being said, I did think that their attempt to reconcile the two concepts was interesting. In Kingdom Coming, Goldberg stresses that one can believe in both evolution and intelligent design. We learned in class that some people, when faced with the dichotomy between science and God, often make the two compatible, reject one or the other, make the other sacred, or form a new kind of Christianity. Conservatives Gray and Wolfe have forged a new system, one that essentially rejects evolution while living in harmony with it--though one could argue that they manipulate and even bastardize evolution for their own Evangelical purposes.

Works Cited:

Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. New York,
New York. W.W. Norton & Company. 2006.

Sociobiology and Creationism: Two Ethnosociologies of American Culture
J. Patrick Gray and Linda D. Wolfe. American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 84, No. 3 (Sep., 1982), pp. 580-594. JSTOR.

Opposites?

2009-10-26T07:26:00.000-07:00

Everything you need to know about the sectarian/secular divide in a title: “Lord of the Laboratory: Intelligent Design and the War on Enlightenment-” which is the third chapter in Michelle Goldberg’s book, “Kingdom Coming.” The chapter itself chronicles the history and present day intention of the Theory of Intelligent Design, the people behind it, as well as secular resistance to it. After reading the chapter, it occurred to me, that the opportunity here is not in a traditional, rational approach at deconstruction, but rather, a rational approach that attempts to transcend the confines of our typical definitions of both “the enlightenment” and the “conservative religious movement,” in the effort to understand the schism that is at the root of the greater secular/sectarian divide. After all, it seems only fair, that in going after “fundamentalists” in the name of rationality, then in the name of rationality/reason, one must also go after “enlightenment.”

Jason Boulet, in an essay titled in part, “I believe in enmindment,” quotes Peter Dale Scott, while illustrating distinctions between “human rationality itself and the imperfect crystallization of it we call Enlightenment” (p.925). Boulet, then paraphrases Scott while equating "rationalist reformers with religious fundamentalists," pointing out that what both groups are attempting to accomplish is the “establishment of unalterable and absolute Truth upon which to base the reconstruction and regulation of society.” These similarities result in both secular and religious camps achieving, Boulet quoting Scott again, something called “outer enlightenment;” which are “faces of the same mundane necessity, created in the effort to “change the world” (928).

This language game is interesting and it relates to our class discussions about the consequences of certain forms of the sacred. One possible consequence of a person, or a group of people laying claim to the “sacred,” is that in doing so they create the profane. Does the same hold true when terms like, “enlightenment,” or conversely, “conservative” are employed for institutional use? That is, in labeling a cause “enlightened,” do we create ignorance and darkness? When proclaiming ourselves “Conservative,” are we being radical?

References:

Goldberg, Michelle. (2006). Kingdom Coming: the rise of Christian nationalism. W. W. Norton
& Company, Inc. New York, N.Y. 2006.

Boulet, Jason. (2006). I believe in enmindment’: Enlightenments, Taoism, and Language
in Peter Dale Scott’s Minding the Darkness. University Of Toronto Quarterly, Vol.
75 Number 4, Fall. Pp. 925-944. Retrieved October 20th, 2009, from Academic
Search Premier data base.

Christian missionaries and Alaskan Indians

2009-10-15T09:44:00.001-07:00

The Christian missionaries went above and beyond to convert as many American Indians as they could in any way possible. These people believed that because they were Christian everyone else around them should be also. They should educate the American Indians, even if the Indians did not want the help. When missionaries went to Alaska in the late 1800s they found a tribe of Alaskan Indians and built a church and a school to educate them about Christianity. These missionaries did not even think that these people may have had their own religion and ceremonies that they performed and did not need Christianity. “This promise will surely be fulfilled to these people, for they are hungering and thirsting for more light. It would be a great wrong for the Church to neglect these people longer.” (Mathisen) This kind of ignorance was the thought of many Christian missionaries.
In an article written in Natural History, it explains how religion has changed for Alaskan Indians because of the Christian missionaries. The ceremonies, such as masked dancing, had all but disappeared after the 1900s. The ceremonial masked dancing has started up again for some Alaskan tribes, but there is still much damage left by the Christian missionaries. Although the missionaries changed many things about Alaskan Indian religion, instead of the Indians completely forgetting their own religion, they adapted the Christian religion to their own. “When Christian missionaries began arriving in the 1840s, the term agayu was applied to the newly introduced religious ceremonies and came to mean prayer, worship, and participation in the new religion.” (Natural History) The Alaskan Indians adapted prayer to their own ceremonies.

Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

“The Yup'ik way of making prayer." Natural History 105.8 (1996): 12. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO.

Religion and Extremism

2009-10-14T09:28:00.000-07:00

The series of documents provided in Mathesin’s reader concerning the role of religion in the civil rights movement includes a wide variety of different religious groups and their philosophical beliefs. These beliefs provoke thoughts that in many cases, promotes extreme ideologies and behaviors of its adherents. One example of extremism is illustrated in the document of the interview with a Klu Klux Klan member in regards to the murder of three civil rights workers in 1964 The Klan definitely did not support the civil rights movement, and they equated governmental policies that supported civil rights as a form of communism. The Klu Klux Klan also wanted to maintain racial purity. Somehow they believed that this relates to Christianity.
Another document provided in these readings detailed The Black Muslim Movement, also prevalent during this time period. Black Muslims in this country wanted to demand equality for blacks with the support of their religious affiliation. These demands came in the form of propositions. Black Muslims wanted to form a separate state within this country and they wanted to be exempt from taxation as long as they were being discriminated against. The part that interested me the most was the subject of intermarriage. One of the propositions prohibits intermarriage, or “race mixing”.
Black Muslims seem to agree with the Klu Klux Klan that it would be bad to lose their racial purity. Today, Malcolm X is one of the most notable figures to be remembered from the Black Muslim Movement. This organization believed that racial separateness was better than what they felt were the vague promises of racial equality that the United States had to offer them and they strongly believed that you cannot have capitalism without racism. At the same time, Malcolm and his followers were adamant about excluding whites from their organization and yet professed not to be racist.

Simon, JohnJ; Spellman, A B; Gardner, Jigs
Monthly Review
02-01-2005
P. 25

P.S.
I looked on the internet for more information the Klu Klux Klan and found their website. Although I was unable to produce a peer reviewed document to discuss for the purpose of this blog I recommend that anyone interested in religion and extremism in the United States should view this website to gain greater insight into the ideology that continues to exist in our country more than 40 years after the civil rights movement.

The Black Messiah

2009-10-12T15:15:00.000-07:00

Many religious groups share an image of Jesus Christ; however the groups have different visions of who Jesus was in order to claim him as their own. People create a Jesus depending on their need, they use the ideas of Jesus then morph the ideas to fit that groups particular desires.

The image of Jesus is distorted to fit the individual group’s needs and desires, according to my scholarly source. Poor people follow Jesus because they think he was poor, Romantics followed Jesus because they thought he, like themselves, was a naturalist, and the black community in America during the Civil Rights Movement followed Jesus because they thought he was black. In regards to the black community, the Black Messiah had nothing to do with slavery. Rather, this group believed that Jesus was a powerful and big black man, who was a leader of black people. Therefore, the white community in America should treat the black community equal because the God the white people worship is actually black. Whether Jesus was white or black, rich or poor, naturalist or technologist, I do not know. But it is clear, that creating a Jesus that shares a commonality with an oppressed group can give that group a sacred understanding as to why they are suffering, helping them live through it.

According to Albert B. Clearge Jr., white Jesus was given to slaves as a way to create bondage over them by the white world (Mathisen, Doc 137). He felt that the Black Church through the Black Messiah was a weekly escape for the black community during this time of extreme racism. At the Black Church, the preacher would help this oppressed group, giving them strength to continue to fight for equality and faith that one day this cruelty will end. The Black Messiah was a means of unifying all blacks. The black community needed this during the Civil Rights Movement.

Religion is social constructed to meet the needs of individuals. During the Civil Rights Movement, a vision of a Black Messiah is passed around the black community as a means of encouragement. By having an icon of Jesus as a black man, priests could preach equality using Jesus as its backbone. The church gave people the strength to endure the suffering; through this congregation people had faith that the end of segregation was possible.

Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

"The Use and Abuse of the Name of Jesus." Studies in World Christianity Oct. 2001: 141.

Segregation in Church and Schools

2009-10-12T14:43:00.000-07:00

Segregation in Church and Schools

In America racism and segregation had been going on for awhile in both churches and schools. Still today there is racism and segregation in states located in the United States of America. In this blog I will discuss the article by Mathisen and discuss the scholarly article I have found that goes hand in hand with the article from the book. I will also discuss how still today there is segregation in schools. In the Mathisen article it starts out with a quote by Weldon James saying "In the South itself the 1954-57 period demonstrated that perhaps the greatest threat to the unity sought by organized segregationists came from the churches, themselves entangled in all but continuous debate" (Mathisen, 693).
The quote above has proven to be true being that the business man, the lawyer, the teacher and the newspaper man all had their own opinions but were all scarred to actually say what or how they really felt. The business man feared the economic effects that would happen to the community; he feared that violence would break out. The lawyer may have sometimes doubted the Supreme Court but believed the laws were for the right reasons. The teacher may be in having separate schools but would not speak up if it meant public education would be abolished. The newspaper man may see the problems in his own neighborhood but in the grand picture of it all can see inevitability the desegregation national and international perspectives. In the long run the ministers were the biggest threat to organized segregationists because they were the ones that preached and spread the word to large groups of people.
In the article I found it discussed the Jesuits and where they came from which was New Orleans. The Jesuits had researched the racial practices during World War II and decided after the war it was now time to end the segregation in their order and ministries. "By integrating Jesuit-run educational institutions, retreat houses, and parishes as well as the religious order itself, members of the Society of Jesus, however, ran the risk of alienating benefactors, hampering apostolic effectiveness, and decreasing vocations. Nevertheless, the Jesuits had conclude that racial segregation was incompatible with church teachings regarding Christian justice and charity--"Jim Crow" Catholicism was no longer welcomed at church" (Anderson). Just years before the Jesuits had made their decision the Supreme Court case of Brown vs. Board of education had occurred along with the Montgomery Boycott. The Jesuits had decided that racial segregation was morally wrong and was an unexamined case of the civil right movement in the United States. After World War II the Southern Catholics still keep and practiced segregation while the southern Jesuits had changed and came up with a policy statement regarding interracial affairs in 1952.

Still Today in the United States we have to some point segregation, while I was searching around for articles I came upon the story of Charleston High School in Mississippi where until 2008 they had segregated Proms each year. In Mississippi they had integrated their public schools in 1970 but still in this small Delta town they had segregation. Back in 1997 Morgan Freeman had gave an offer to the school that if they had a integrated prom he would pay for the whole thing but the school did not take him up on his offer until 2008. In 2008 a documentary titled Prom in Mississippi was filmed while the planning off the prom went into the works. Charleston High school planned the prom with some parents happy about it and others highly upset about what was going to occur that year. The parents that disagreed with the integrated prom had still paid and had their children attend a white only prom. This just goes to prove that it does not matter how much our nation has grown and changed there will always be people that are racist and feel we should be segregated.

Anderson, B., BLACK, WHITE, AND CATHOLIC: SOUTHERN JESUITS CONFRONT THE RACE QUESTION, 1952, Catholic Historical Review; Jul2005, Vol. 91 Issue 3, p484-505, 22p

Mathisen, R., Critical Issues in American Religious History, 2006, Baylor University p693-696

Gervin, C, MPB News, Feb2009, http://www.mpbonline.org/content/charleston-high-schools-first-integrated-prom-gets-hollywood-treatment

Martin Luther King Jr. and civil disobedience

2009-10-12T14:06:00.000-07:00

Non-violent resistance, also know civil disobedience, was an idea that motivated Martin Luther King’s strategy during the Civil Rights Movement that began in the fifties. This was not the first time the tactic had been used in American history. American colonist, according to Linda T. Wynn, “employed [non-violent resistance] during the revolution when they boycotted British imports and offered resistance to taxation without representation”. Wynn states that this theory was first described by Henry David Thoreau, in his 1849 essay, “civil disobedience”. She explains how Thoreau’s essay says that in regards to civil disobedience, it is morally just to resist unjust laws.

During the civil rights movement, leaders like reverend Martin Luther King Jr. adopted the strategy in the fight for equality amongst African Americans. In the primary document, “Martin Luther King explains nonviolent resistance (1967)”, we learn that King was fascinated by Thoreau’s ideas. He also heard a lecture by a Howard University professor, who lectured about his experiences in India. Martin Luther King was quoted in the document as saying that his professor’s “message was so profound and electrifying that [he] left meeting and bought a half-dozen books on Gandhi and his life” (704). The ideas of Thoreau, Gandhi, and even his God, Jesus Christ, kept Marin Luther King focused on a peaceful movement. He believed that the attacks should be made on the forces of evil inflicting the even (the law) rather than the actual people committing the hateful acts. He also believed that the tension was not between whites and blacks but rather between justice and injustice.

In India Gandhi led a movement against unjust laws as well. It was in 1906 that he called upon his fellow Indians to the law that asked for the registration of Indian colonies. Gandhi asked that the people suffer any punishment that came along with defying the law. Wynn explains how “the adopted plan led to a seven-year struggle in which thousands of Indians were jailed, flogged or shot for striking, refusing to register, burning their registration cards, or engaging in other forms of non-violent resistance”. Gandhi movement is also known as the non-cooperative movement.

In America, the Montgomery bus boycott was an example of non-violent resistance which captured the essence of Gandhi’s vision. America took notice when the movement was no longer philosophical non-violence in which King would preach about injustice. The movement had shifted to tactful non-violence. Wynn explains how people were no longer just talking about Thoreau and Gandhi’s philosophies; they were organizing and putting those philosophies into action, which came in the form of boycotts and protest.

The article is a great resource to the understanding of Martin Luther King’s, as well as many other civil rights leaders, motivation and passion behind the way they handled the struggle for equality in America. It gives us more background information on the ideas of Thoreau and Gandhi, which were part of the foundation of the struggle, and the belief in a just world. The civil rights movement grew as more people adopted the philosophy and used it to organize people as well as to promote activism. The Northern Student Movement was a group of predominately white youth who also believed in the movement. More and more groups began to form and continued to put words into action

Works Cited
Wynn, Linda T. "Non-Violent Resistance." Freedom Facts & Firsts: 400 Years of the African American Civil Rights Experience (2009): 59-60. History Reference Center. EBSCO. Web. 12 Oct. 2009.

Rebirth of Social Gospel Movement

2009-10-12T11:55:00.000-07:00

During Social Gospel movement of the early twentieth century Protestant Christian churches focused their strength on instilling the nation with Christian Ethics. It was a call for socially aware religion that focused on the social problems that were occurring at the time. Sixty years later the country was undergoing changes that would bring the beliefs of the Social Gospel back to prominence. With the help of leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. and organizations like the National Council of Churches racial issues were now being dealt with
As early as 1950 the National Council was addressing the issue of race within the church. From 1950 to 1958 the Council issued twenty-four resolutions outlining their stance on racial issues. The most important being their “Statement on the Church and Segregation”. This statement made it clear where the church stood on the matter, “the pattern of segregation is diametrically opposed to what Christians believe about the worth of men, we must take our stand against it.” [1] This was the first major move by the Council to instruct its churches to move for desegregation in their churches and their communities. This resolution by the council fueled the civil rights movement and set the stage for African American church leaders to push for equality throughout the nation.
During the time of these moves by the Council Martin Luther King Jr. was starting to gain a name for him among white and black church members alike. He spent his early days traveling the country speaking to mostly white churches. His fearlessness to enter any venue and speak on the issues affecting his people set him aside from all others. He embodied a new breed of black church leader and by 1963 he was the face of the civil rights movement. Martin Luther King Jr. was leading his people out of the darkness that had been forcefully placed on them for hundreds of years. He demanded that the Christian ideals that had been taught to slaves long ago be fulfilled.
In the early part of the twentieth Century leaders on the Social Gospel movement feared social evils would ruin the great nation their Protestant forefathers had built. The issue of equality was one of their concerns, but never to the large extent. This was due to the fact that the leaders behind this early movement were white. During the late 1950’s and early 1960’s the birth to a new form of Social Gospel began, one that focused on racial equality. While the mainstream church was responsible for some of this much of the success of the movement can be attributed to African American church leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. These leaders involved the church directly in the issues facing African Americans and by doing this a new movement was born.
[1] James F. Findlay Jr. The Origins of Activism. 1950

Similarities Between the Black Muslims and the Klu Klux Klan

2009-10-10T21:11:00.000-07:00

The Klu Klux Klan is an American, Anglo-Saxon racist organization, set on making the "white race" superior to all other races, with superiority over the "black race" in particular. The Nation of Islam, an African-American group, though claiming they want nothing more than equal rights, has a goal of "black" supremacy throughout America. Though these two groups might be at opposite spectrums, they have more in common than they would like to admit.

Realizing how unappreciated they were in the society they lived in, which was primarily Caucasian and Christian and was considered by the Liston Pope of Yale Divinity School "...the most segregated major institution in American society" (Mathisen, 702), Islamicism became the religion of choice for extremist African Americans. Though the beliefs entailed in these two religions had their differences, they are both forms of deism, both contain a messiah, and they both arise from the axial age.

The Black Muslim movement in America was created out of what Eric Lincoln calls the "Armageddon complex," which is a "removal of their source of discomfort rather than to going anywhere themselves" (Mathisen, 700). This called for a removal of the Anglo-Saxon, Christian people of America, since their home was originally in Europe. Removing African Americans from the rest of society was what white Christian America had been doing to African Americans on a daily basis.

Among the many extremist black groups of the time, the Black Muslims were the most organized. They had a newspaper called "Mr. Muhammad Speaks." One particular issue contained a list of ten propositions. The ninth and tenth go as follows: "We want equal education-but separate schools...", and, "We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited" (700, 701).

"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." This is known as the "14 words," a creed most Klu Klux Klan groups abide by (adl.org). It includes, but is not limited to, segregation and intermarriage between races. And although the KKK didn't specifically demand a belief in Christianity, it was a given amongst them that most were Anglo-saxon protestants, which would require devotion to another creed, the bible. The point of this is both groups wanted to keep the "race" pure, both culturally and biologically. Both groups are also known to enforce these beliefs aggressively, even today.

In April of 2009, Michael Conklin and four other young Caucasian men were arrested for beating a Hispanic male. He was wearing a shirt with nazi and KKK symbols. Conklin was reportedly yelling out "White power" during the attack (adl.org). Jamil Al-Amin, on the other hand, once chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, an active sect of the Black Muslims, is now in prison for shooting and killing a white police officer. He has openly stated, "Violence is as Ameican as cherry pie," and, "If America don't come around, we're gonna burn it down" (Pipes).

Both the KKK and the Black Muslims use religion to drive their messages. They both are for segregation and opposed to intermarriage. Both are organized and have a creed to which they abide to, and both have no problem using violence to implemement their goals. The KKK and Black Muslims have deep rooted belief systems and are extremley passionate towards their causes. However their motivation comes from two different experiences; defense on behalf of the Black Muslims, and racial superiority with regard to the KKK. Whatever their motivations may be, their hatred for one another keeps them from acknowledging any form of common ground with each other. But as Martin Luther King wrote, "To strike back in the same [hateful] way as his opponent would do nothing but increase the existence of hate in the universe... All humanity is involved in a single process, and all men are brothers. If you harm me, you harm yourself" (Mathisen, 705).

adl.org. Extremism in America, 2009. Web. 10 October 2009.

immigration.lohudblogs.com. More on Rockland KKK Hate Crime, 2009. Web. 11 September 2009.

Mathisen, Robert R. Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006.

Pipes, Daniel. [Belway Snipers]: Converts to Violence? New York Post 25 October 2002.

Similarities Between the Black Muslims and the Klu Klux Klan

2009-10-10T21:03:00.000-07:00

The Klu Klux Klan is an American, Anglo0Saxon racist organization, set on making the "white race" superior to all other races, with superiority over the "black race" in particular. The Nation of Islam, an African-American group, though claiming they want nothing more than equal rights, has a goal of "black" supremacy throughout America. Though these two groups might be at opposite spectrums, they have more in common than they would like to admit.

Realizing how unappreciated they were in the society they lived in, which was primarily Caucasian and Christian, Islamicism became the religion of choice for extremist African Americans. Though the beliefs entailed in these two religions had their differences, they are both forms of deism, both contain a messiah, and they both arise from the axial age.

The Black Muslim movement in America was created out of what Eric Lincoln calls the "Armageddon complex," which is a "removal of their source of discomfort rather than to going anywhere themselves" (Mathisen, 700). This called for a removal of the Anglo-Saxon, Christian people of America, since their home was originally in Europe. Removing African Americans from the rest of society was what white Christian America had been doing to African Americans on a daily basis.

Among the many extremist black groups of the time, the Black Muslims were the most organized. They had a newspaper called "Mr. Muhammad Speaks." One particular issue contained a list of ten propositions. The ninth and tenth go as follows: "We want equal education-but separate schools...", and, "We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited" (700, 701).

"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." This is known as the "14 words," a creed most Klu Klux Klan groups abide by (adl.org). It includes, but is not limited to, segregation and intermarriage between races. The point of this is to keep the "white race" pure, both culturally and biologically. They are known to enforce these such things aggressively and violently, even today.

In April of 2009, Michael Conklin and four other young Caucasian men were arrested for beating a Hispanic male. He was wearing a shirt with nazi and KKK symbols. Conklin was reportedly yelling out "White power" during the attack (adl.org). Jamil Al-Amin, on the other hand, once chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, an active sect of the Black Muslims, is now in prison for shooting and killing a white police officer. He has openly stated, "Violence is as Ameican as cherry pie," and, "If America don't come around, we're gonna burn it down" (Pipes).

Both the KKK and the Black Muslims use religion to drive their messages. They both are for segregation and opposed to intermarriage. Both are organized and have a creed to which they abide to, and both have no problem using violence to implemement their goals. The KKK and Black Muslims have deep rooted belief systems and are extremley passionate towards their causes. What is sad is that their beliefs and actions, founded on hate, keep them from acknowledging any form of common ground with each other. If these two groups dropped their guard toward each other and came together, I think they would have the power to do great things.

adl.org. Extremism in America, 2009. Web. 10 October 2009.

immigration.lohudblogs.com. More on Rockland KKK Hate Crime, 2009. Web. 11 September 2009.

Mathisen, Robert R. Critical Issues in American Religious History. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006.

Pipes, Daniel. [Belway Snipers]: Converts to Violence? New York Post 25 October 2002.

Birmingham and Reinhold Niebuhr

2009-10-08T13:37:00.000-07:00

In reading Martin Luther King Jr's Letter from Birmingham Jail it is apparent that he is influenced by many great peace and justice fighters on his views of morality and justice for all. One person from which he quoted in his letter was Reinhold Niebuhr. In his letter to congress he reminds them of what Niebuhr once said, "Groups tend to be more immoral than individuals." When giving this quote more thought and paralleling it to incidents throughout history and present day this simple statement embodies all the unjust and immoral acts people have justified because their were people following and believing their every thought.

Reinhold Niebuhr was a protestant American theologists who studied and contemplated morality in individuals and collectives. He sought out to determine what the difference between morality was during the Liberal Movement from a religious and secular stand point. Many of the injustices Martin Luther King Jr. saw in society Niebuhr also saw as problematic. In his book, Moral Man and Immoral Society : A Study of Ethics and Politics his first chapter opens with his confusion of why humans still cannot live peacefully, "For all the centuries of experience, men have not yet learned how to live together without compounding their vices and covering each other 'with mud and with blood'"(pg. 1). In Martin Luther King Jr's letter he raises the same questions of how it is possible for a civilization so advanced to not be able to look past color and race. Martin Luther King Jr. parallels Niebuhr's thoughts on morality when he states, "Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly...Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds." Both Niebuhr and King Jr. see the United States as a society in which people should feel they belong rather than one that has not been able to look past race, classes, or nations.

While Martin Luther King Jr. is influenced by many different scholars, philosophers, and people Niebuhr was a white protestant who shared many of the same confusions that Martin Luther Kings Jr. found himself fighting his whole life. Both men question the notion of morality, injustice, and equality during unjust and difficult times.

Works Citied:
Niebhur, Reinhold. Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study of Ethics and Politics. 2nd ed. Rev. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960.

2009-10-08T02:34:00.001-07:00

Religion and church played a highly important role in the civil rights movement of the 1950’s and 1960’s. Many of the people that came together during this time to support the movement for freedom of African Americans had religious affiliations and made part of organizations like the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The Church during this time became a symbol in the civil rights movement.

In “The Civil Rights Movement and the Soul of America” Adam Fairclough states that

the church was the oldest and most respected institution in the black South (Fairclough, 724). The church became a place that brought together the masses fighting for justice, extending into communities and bridging the gaps that existed within individuals. According to Dr. Bernard Lafayette Jr., director of the Center for Non-Violence and Peace Studies at the University of Rhode Island, the church was a facility in the community beyond the control of white power structure; it was a place where people could speak the truth, sing, or even shout (Lafayette, 3). The churches became the place where information was discussed and spread among the people involved; it was one of the most important meeting places at this time. Martin Luther King Jr. mentions in his letter to the Clergymen, that many times he would see churches and question about who worshiped there and who their God was because many times these churches did not fight against segregation or other unjust laws because to them, since these were laws, they could not be broken.

Martin Luther King Jr. states in his letter the difference of a just and unjust law. He defines these as, “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law” with this he argues that segregation is an unjust law that must not be followed because sin is separation (King). King also mentions that they shall wait no longer for a change because throughout history too much time has been given to such matters and he believed that now is the time to act. King being a religious leader shows that there were many other religious leaders that helped with the struggle for freedom.

In the article by Fairclough, it is mentioned that ministers were trapped in the role of leaders due to unreasonableness of the white officials and the enthusiasm of the black population. Clergy and lay church leaders played an important role because many of them were financially independent and because of this, they were able to represent an independent voice in the community. Overall, faith seems to have fueled the power of the African Americans that fought for their civil rights. Churches and religion were a kind of compass that help direct them in the direction that they headed.

References:
King Jr., Martin Luther. "Letter from Birmingham Jail". April 16, 1963. Web. October 6, 2008.

Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd
Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

Lafayette, Bernard Jr. “The Role of Religion in Civil Rights Movements.” Faith and Progressive Policy: Proud Past, Promising Future. (2004): 1-13. Web. October 6, 2009

American Relgion and the Civil Rights Movement

2009-10-07T20:50:00.000-07:00

The civil rights movement symbolizes a conflict both in America as a nation and in the religions of American society. We see in the writing by Martin Luther King how the civil rights movement was a time where African Americans were protesting and fighting for their rights. King states that unlike Elijah Muhammad who demonstrated with violence and hatred, he thought it was more effective to protest in a nonviolent manner. Kings reasoning for demonstrating was because it was the most effective way to start negotiations. We see this when he says, “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which had constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue.”

When King wrote his letter to his fellow Christian brothers who accused him of being an extremist, he made a direct correlation between his actions and those of other respected people and prophets that many people in the American society could relate to. James F. Findlay Jr. wrote in his article, “The Origins of Activism, 1250-1963,” that the National Council and the Protestant church continued to play a major role in America at this time. (Mathisen, 710) Because King was aware of the heavy influence that the Protestant and other Christian denominations played in America, he tried to make a connection to them by relating his extremist behaviors to those of Jesus, Amos, Martin Luther, Paul, John Bunyan, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson. Most Americans could relate and support at least one of these figures, which is why Martin Luther King Jr. referenced them. He hoped to gain some support and understanding for the African American cause.

King tells us that throughout the civil rights movement there were two kinds of African Americans. There were the ones who ended up living with and adjusting to segregation, and then those who opposed it and acted out in violence. King did not feel as if violence was the answer to their problems. He felt as if there needed to be a mix of both in order to from a peaceful resolution. Findlay Jr. talks about how the National Council met on many accounts trying to work out and discuss the segregation problems and "create a non-segregated church and a non-segregated community." King thought that the only way to establish peace and equality was to demonstrate it himself, no matter what the consequences were.

Findlay, James F., Jr. "The Origins of Activism 1950-1963." Critical Issues in American Religious 

 History. By Robert R. Mathisen. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. 710-718. Print.

The Two Americas

2009-10-07T14:28:00.000-07:00

"An injustice somewhere, is a threat to justice everywhere" (King). Martin Luther King's words were a calling to those oppressed in the United States. In addition, he also calls out the "Guilty Bystander", the individual who does not speak out against injustice when he or she is witnessing it against a fellow human being (Ling 1998). King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) would have argues that fighting the injustices of segregation and racial inequality was a Christian mission, and that committing civil disobedience was upholding good laws by breaking an unjust one. As King stated, "I would agree with St. Augustine that 'an unjust law is no law at all'" (King 1963). While King, the SCLC, and other civil rights groups were pivotal in pressing for the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, they were not strong enough in tackling economic issues that hurt racial equality in terms of income.

According to Peter Ling, the areas that King and SCLC failed were creating a big enough coalition to take on economic inequality, as well as having a strategy in building a coalition around this issue. While King did speak out against the Vietnam War and advocating a radical redistribution of wealth, these ideas never really took off; after all, the coalition that King helped build was centered on a decade-long struggle against Southern segregation (Ling 1998). Other organizations lasted longer than the SCLC because they had broader agendas. Take for instance the NAACP; Adam Faiclough argues that the NAACP lasted longer than SCLC because it had long-term goals that tackled more than just the segregation and voting rights questions (Mathisen 730).

The Civil Rights Movement did advance African-Americans to a level never before seen at the political level; racial equality was the most advanced it had ever been. However, this did not change race relations in the South in the decades after King's murder. "White Flight" and the increasing plight of America's ghettos proved there to be a gap between Black America and White America in terms of income.
All of this is proof that society can ban racism in its laws, it cannot ban racism in the hearts of people. While we have progress as a people, Americans have a long way to go in grasping the troubling issue of race in this society. And it certainly has a long way to go regarding alleviating the vast inequality in wealth in the United States. This, above all, formalizes the reality of "two Americas".

References:
1. Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd
Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

2. King Jr., Martin Luther. "Letter from Birmingham Jail". April 16, 1963

3. Ling, Peter. "Martin Luther King's Half-Forgotten Dream". April 1998.
http://web.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/ehost/pdf?vid=3&hid=11&sid=3b768fde-bc33-41c1-8352-a55aaa93b6aa%40sessionmgr10

The Influence of Religion and Politics in the Civil Rights Movement

2009-10-06T19:55:00.000-07:00

During the Civil Rights Movement religion played an important role because it inspired and motivated many to create organized movements and demonstrations that would affect and change the injustices of that time. An example is how the Southern Christian Leadership Conference became organized starting from within the church-led protests. In Fredrick C. Harris’s article,Something Within: Religion as a Mobilizer of African-American Political Activism, he states that “The church as an indigenous organization could provide the leadership base, social interaction, and communication networks required for collective action” (p 45). This shows how religion was not just used as an emotional and mental experience but rather it helped bring people together to show them that they needed to be a part of the church and later an organization, which was necessary in order to bring change within society. The social structure of this specific religion was helping the civil rights movement bring more supporters together because people were able to connect and bond with one another culturally as well as through their beliefs. However, what I found interesting was that with all the emphasis being on the leaders of church organizations such as, the SCLC was that behind these organizations were many people who were not religious leaders that made the civil rights movement possible. Also, Mathesin makes a point that “Churchmen had always functioned as leaders and spokesmen, but they usually accommodated to the racial mores of the time...(p.721). On the other hand, Mathesin says that “…generations of black activists and intellectuals had excoriated the church for its conservatism and lack of social and political awareness” (p721) This again shows how the people who were behind the scenes of the civil rights movement that were not religious leaders played such a strong role in keeping the movement strong in structure and organization. While at the same time the religious leaders seem to have played the role of using their speeches to move and keep the people inspired to never give up. In Martin Luther King’s letter to Birmingham he explains what the attended goal was to achieve with the non violence campaign and the fact that the reason there are no negotiations is because no one will listen or take them seriously so the problem must be dealt with upfront. He also uses examples of Hitler and a Communist country, and even historical events from the Bible to compare that the evils of the past are not so different from the evil of the inequalities that people of color were dealing with. In the aid for desegregation and equality for African Americans, policies in the United States were also changing. According to Mathesin there were political breakthroughs for African Americans and because of these improvements African Americans were becoming closer to gaining stronger political involvement.

References:
1. Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd
Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

2. King, Martin Luther Jr. Letter from Birmingham Jail.

3.Harris, Fredrick C. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 45

The Anglo-Saxon Rite

2009-10-06T12:08:00.000-07:00

There has been a belief among Anglo-Saxon race that land is theirs by default and that they are the only race that lives in the rite. In Josiah Strong’s writings entitled “Our Country” it is suggested that Anglo-Saxons have shaped their lives by two main ideas, civil liberty and “pure spiritual Christianity”; with these ideas in mind the Anglo-Saxon race has set out to evangelize the world.
In support of civil liberty and “pure spiritual Christianity” Strong uses the Darwinian belief in natural selection. He states that “there is apparently much truth in the belief that the wonderful progress of the United States, as well as the character of people, are the results of natural selection” (Mathisen 506). By using this approach Strong argues that Anglo-Saxons will one day dominate the world; they will “move down upon Mexico, down upon Central and South America, out upon the islands of the sea, over upon Africa and beyond” (Mathisen 507). As we can see Strong has interpreted Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection to work in favor of the Anglo-Saxon race. He believes it is by God’s will that the Anglo-Saxons spread their beliefs and ways of living upon the inferior races.
Strong also states that “North America is to the great home of the Anglo-Saxon” implying that no other race is welcome there. His ethnocentric attitude is greatly apparent here. It seems that Strong does oppose the presence of the Chinese, but if by natural selection the ideas of Anglo-Saxon life are to supersede all others why should Strong be opposed to their immigration? As stated by a theorist in an article by Carlos Closson “the infiltration of inferior races is not evil, but a benefit” (Closson 77). If Strong’s use of natural selection is correct than why would he be opposed to the immigration of other races?

1. Closson, Carlos C. “The Real Opportunity of the So-Called Anglo-Saxon Race”
The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 76-97. The University of Chicago Press, 1900.

2. Robert R. Mathisen, Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Baylor University Press, 2006.

Manifest Destiny

2009-10-06T10:59:00.000-07:00

I have read about the idea of Manifest Destiny in history classes before, but it is different to read the writings of people who so clearly believed in it completely. Until now, it has been an interesting, if misguided, idea that has had its time. An idea whose time is long over, and which I find it difficult to believe that people took so seriously for as long as they did. In the readings on empire building, the support for destiny decided by God, a manifest destiny, becomes stronger in each document.
In the first document we have a priest who is simply interested in educating the people he finds in Alaska. He finds them to be ignorant and lost, in a beautiful country, and in need of the guidance he can provide. Here we already see the beginnings of the later demands in the simple duty, placed by God, that this missionary feels toward the people he has met.
In the second document we have a missionary who believes that all methods are viable for the introduction of Christian religion into China. He argues that the charitable founding of a hospital can be as effective as a mission, though it is indirect. He feels that the good of the hospital will be seen by the people, and that this will lead them to see the good of the Christian God. Again, we see the responsibility to teach and lead a people to the acceptance of the Christian religion. It is interesting then then that the people themselves don't always see it that way.
The notice from the Boxer revolution is interesting in that it is the one article from a “native” perspective which we are given in this collection. Some of the other readings provide hints that all is not seen so positively from the other side. In this notice the claim is made that the Chinese have been lied to and disrespected. It calls for the churches to be burned and for the Christians to be removed from the country.
Finally we have several articles which move beyond the duty to teach the word of God. We have the duty to spread our civil religion as well as our Christian religion. This is where the writings seem to change tone for me. Previously and now we have a level of concern for the people who are being converted. But in the last articles it has become a duty to convert at any cost. The people of the world must be educated to accept our ideals of liberty and to accept our God, even if they are to child-like or savage to understand that this is what they need. It is not unusual for these writers that we govern other peoples against the will or that we use armed force to bring liberty to the people of the Philippines. This is our divinely mandated destiny, our manifest destiny, we are the people chosen by God to bring enlightenment and freedom to the world. Not to mention, as in the article by Beveridge, that this expansion is also necessary to our markets.
What interested me about these documents was the language that was used in the arguments for imperial expansion. While it is quite clear that the wording becomes stronger and more extreme, this is a somewhat superficial difference. The underlying metaphors remain very similar. In his book Moral Politics, George Lakoff describes the common metaphors used in American politics. On of the major ones he identifies in many levels of American society is that of the family. America is family in which the government is the parent. Religion is a family in which God is the parent.
The family metaphor can be applied to many different kinds of relationships, and it is one which Lakoff identifies as extremely important to the American people. I would argue that this metaphor is applied in the manifest destiny arguments as well. Mankind is a family and America is the parent. According to Lakoff there are major identifications for the role of parent. There is the Strict Father, or authoritarian, role, and the is the Nurturant Parent.
In the early documents we see the Nurturant Parent in effect, the parent, Americans and missionaries, want to care for and nurture the people. Educating their “children” and raising them up to be complete people such as themselves. In the later documents we see the Strict Father, enforcing the rules of the parent, bringing liberty to people who are not yet ready to find it for themselves These two roles are not mutually exclusive, but rather support each other. The difference is in emphasis. The Strict Father is ready to nurture, but only if his commands are heeded and his authority recognized.

1. Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.
2. Lakoff, George. 2002 Moral Politics. University Of Chicago Press

Propaganda of Superiority

2009-10-06T02:23:00.000-07:00

Upon reading the excerpts from Josiah Strong’s Our Country, I could not help but be astonished by his writings that, in our time, are drenched in what is considered politically incorrect. He elicits his view that the Anglo-Saxon race is by far the most superior, and is destined to cast the world in its form because of its roots and inherent qualities of “pure spiritual Christianity” and “civil liberty.” His structure for his writing is of a supreme confidence that these ideals will be unstoppable as they “disposess…, assimilate…, and mold… until… it has Anglo-Saxonized mankind.” These words, however intolerant of other cultures and religions as they may sound, are but words of fear when taken into context with the rest of his book which speaks of the many dangers infringing upon the United States during this period. Much of his book, although not noted in Mathisen, is speaking at length of the problems caused by immigration, socialism, overcrowding of cities, and authoritarian religions such as Catholicism and Mormonism (Evans 55). These together are shown to be a great crisis that must be paid attention to if the image he has imagined is to take place.

Thus, his tact of influence begins with the portion published in Mathisen’s compilation. This is where he becomes the great propagandist for his ethnocentric views and delivers an argument based on loosely translated Darwinian theory demonstrating how Anglo-Saxons are not only the fittest of all mankind, but could, should, and would become THE power that “will spread itself over the Earth.” Strong’s understanding of the current and future strength of the United States as a burgeoning world power propelled him to demonstrate and persuade how the country should be controlled by those he saw fittest to do so. His writing here is to convince and embolden the average and above-average Anglo-Saxon to action in order to prevent their God-given right to leadership of America from being taken away. Essentially, he is transmitting his hope for the Anglo-Saxon race seeing not only the dangers taking shape against it within our country but also the opportunities at that moment in time to shape how the US was to be formed then and what kind of nation it would become in the future. This push to legitimize Anglo-Saxon superiority still lingers in our country to this very day as his writings influenced many leaders at the time and they, in turn, have guided others, perhaps the whole country, into a mindset of superiority.

Resources:

1. Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd
Revised Edition). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006. Print.

2. Evans, Christopher Hodge. The Kingdom is Always But Coming: A Life of Walter Rauschenbusch. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2004

3. Berge, William H. Voices for Imperialism: Josiah Strong and the Protestant Clergy. Eastern Kentucky University: Border States: Journal of the Kentucky-Tennessee American Studies Association. No. 1 (1973)

4. BOOKRAGS STAFF. "Josiah Strong". 2005. October 6 2009. http://www.bookrags.com/biography/josiah-strong/

The Imperial March

2009-10-05T14:31:00.000-07:00

American imperialism is an interesting thing; to the outsider it often includes the forcing of unwanted American ideals and values onto a culture that is otherwise unfamiliar with them. Yet from the American perspective this imperialism is know as Manifest Destiny. “It is a mighty people that He has planted on this soil; a people sprung from the most masterful blood of history; a people imperial by virtue of their power, by right of their institutions, by authority of their heaven-directed purposes, the propagandists and not the misers of liberty.” (Mathisen, Doc 101) By tapping into the realm of religion, American imperialism is pushed even further by justifying itself be through the work of God. “The Manifest Destiny Doctrine was based on the idea that America had a divine providence.” (Fouskas & Gokay, pp. 194) The attitude of the American people in this regard is that it is America’s duty to “enlighten” the rest of the world with their values whether the rest of the world wants it or not.
The result of this mindset creates a common feeling of superiority within the American people. This was an especially prominent feature of America’s Manifest Destiny as the country was stretching its wings and gaining power. “Some of the stronger races, doubtless, may be able to preserve their integrity; but, in order to compete with the Anglo-Saxons, they will probably be forced to adopt his methods and instruments, his civilization and his religion.”(Mathisen, Doc 98) This assumed superiority is not a healthy thing for a country to have, especially one with such great power at its disposal. Despite living in what is often times viewed as a “progressive” culture, archaic beliefs like American imperialism are still alive and well today albeit in slightly different forms. “..the USA has seized the attacks of 9/11 as almost a long-sought-for opportunity ‘to expand and increase its military and economic grip on the resources of Eurasia, and that this reaction to 9/11 is the product of a general decline of American economic power in the world’s political system’ that has ‘promoted a militarist drift in U.S foreign policy’”. (Fouskas & Gokay, pp. 196)
This imperialism creates an “us or them” mentality which is not conducive to peaceful activity in the world. Why is it that our country has historically and still needs to justify its actions under the guise of some civic or messianic duty? Could it be perhaps that the true attentions behind these “duties” are in fact completely the opposite from anything resembling a righteous cause? If this is in fact the case, then perhaps we need to take a step back and reevaluate the actions our country is making and decide whether they are really helping the world.

1. Robert R. Mathisen, Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd Revised Edition). Baylor University Press, 2006.
2. Vassilis K. Fouskas & Bulent Gokay. “The New American Imperialsim: Bush’s War on Terror and Blood for Oil.” Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, Vol. 6, No.1&2, Spring & Summer 2007.

Religion, Racism, and Patriotism

2009-10-05T10:47:00.000-07:00

In his article “The March of the Flag,” Albert J. Beveridge touts American imperialism and expansion in the Phillipines through religion, racism, and patriotism.

A basis for his belief is his assertion that Caucasian Americans are God’s chosen people (Mathisen, Doc 101). He writes that God “...has marked the American people as His chosen nation to finally lead in the regeneration of the world. This is the divine mission of America” (Merriam). His audacious proclamation is ludicrous in its assumption that one group may claim superiority over others on the basis of religion and is reminiscent of archaic arguments of the past that justified conquest and persecution of entire races as in the Crusades. I do not understand how a person can think their beliefs, values, and religion are superior to that of those they have never met or know little about. Beveridge either forgets or ignores that fact that all cultures develop in their own way, based on a myriad of factors including geographic location and resources, and nearby cultures.

To any rational being, Beveridge’s ideology seems absurd. Yet he does believe it and furthermore he goes on to ask the question, “Has God endowed us with gifts beyond our desserts and marked us as the people of His peculiar favor, merely to rot in our own selfishness…?” He speaks of imperialism as a national and God-given directive for the American people. His speech is peppered with references to religion and implements God’s name numerous times for his audience of faith filled politicians. He makes a clear connection between divine Providence and the popular American concept of Manifest Destiny. It is clear that Beveridge views himself as having a moral duty to propagate America’s religious beliefs to those he deems “less fortunate.”

Intense racism is another theme that dominates Beveridge’s article. He advocates the idea that Anglo-Saxons are superior to other races, and he arrogantly writes of whites as being the ruling race of the world (Mathisen, Doc 101). In the time of severe anti-African American, anti-Chinese, and anti-Native American sentiments, as well as anti-immigration, Anglo-Saxon supremacy was a familiar and widely held idea.
In “Racism in the Expansionist Controversy of 1898-1900,” Allen H. Merriam states Beveridge refers “to the Fillipinos as ‘primitive’ and ‘warlike children’ [and] contrasted them to the Anglo-Saxons, whom he called the ‘proudest, ablest, purest race of history.’” The article further states that Beveridge was considered an expert on the Philippines (Merriam).

This article also plays heavily to American patriotism and the concept of Manifest Destiny--the so-called responsibility of Americans citizens to propagate their culture, liberty, values, and “God’s kingdom on Earth.” Through this characteristically American belief, Beveridge has curtailed America’s entire history into two words – Manifest Destiny. From the time of the Puritans to that of Lewis and Clark, American expansion was a highly popular concept. It paid homage to the country’s brave forefathers, who tamed the once savage nation and made it what is today. Beveridge takes “comfort in the fact that ‘the authors of themselves governed the Indian race without his consent...after the fashion of our governing race’” (Merriam). Beveridge’s article implies that should Americans end their progress of the “march of the flag,” they would disgrace their country and the courageous men--their ancestors--who piloted the march all those years ago.

In conclusion, “The March of the Flag” illustrates the deep connection between religion, patriotism and racism in 19th Century America. Beveridge’s article is rhetorical and highly provocative in its incendiary statements. He invokes the name of God, swells the pride of the Anglo-Saxon race, and calls for a remembrance of history and patriotism. It is no small wonder that the American people were swayed to believe that the annexation of the Philippines was their mission.

Works Cited:
1. Mathesin, Robert, R. Critical Issues in American Religious History: A Reader (2nd
Revised Edition). Baylor University Press, 2006.
2. Merriam, Allen, H. “Racism in the Expansionist Controversy of 1898-1900.” Phylon
(1960-), Vol. 39, No. 4 (4th Qtr., 1978), pp. 369-380.