I agree with many of Cassandra's points. I think that while the United States maintains secularism in the public domain, it does not completely distance itself from religion. The establishment/free excercise clause mentioned by Cassandra completely underscores that point. And one can see that in the evolution of how the clause has been interpreted by the Courts over the years. Any level of government is not permitted to be seen as favoring one religion over the other, but support for religion/spirituality in general is sometimes permitted.
Also, the government shall not hinder any person's ability to practice his/her religion as long as the practice stays within permissible bounds. This, for me, is what the United States prizes itself upon. Regardless of how much it seems as if holidays, schedules, the pledge of allegiance, etc. are guided by the Christian faith, one is free to practice his/her religion as he/she sees fit. I remember that one of you mentioned that even in Oman, people are allowed to practice any faith in any way that they prefer, but I think that the overt presence of Islam in the public domain makes it practically harder for people to do so freely. It takes us back to the discussion about the separation of church and state. In the West, this tradition of separation (although not very old) is held very deep and everyone is convinced that it is the best way to go. I think that in the Islamic world, there has always been an intermingling of religion and culture, of religion and law, Islam being a 'way of life' and not just a 'way of faith.' I think that people look at this tradition as a strength, a way of maintaing a cohesive society, and I think rightfully so. Westerners need to realize that while it is a different way of organizing society, it is not necessarily a less optimal way of doing so, its just different, and it is their strength. Any effort to change this forcefully could be devastating. If change is necessary, it will happen bottom-up and it will happen when the majority of the people find it necessary.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Religion responses
I was going to mention a few things that I have been thinking about since our last DVC. I remember that it was mentioned that if the US were to put its stamp on the peace process in Israel and Palestine, it would be seen in a good light and helpful for its image in the world. Granted, I don’t know a whole lot about this subject, but some attempts like the Camp David accords under former President Clinton and present Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s recent efforts in the region. (“When Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice decided in 2006 to get serious about trying to shape a legacy in the Middle East, she asked the State Department historian's office for reports on past U.S. efforts to strike an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. She received a stack of papers three feet high.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/14/AR2008041402397.html) The criticism, I guess, is that our policy tilts toward Israel.
Also, the phrase Inshallah is not quite the same as saying God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
The difference is that it seems to suggest that all that pledge allegiance to the US are also pledging allegiance to a God. As I understand, “Inshallah,” though it expresses some of the same sort of sentiments, is a very personal decision to say in personal conversations, and does not enter into governmental affairs.
Even for the West, the idea of secularism is a relatively new idea. In the past, the kings of several countries believed that they were divinely entrusted with the power to rule, and certain religions like Anglicanism were established under the state. Not until the 16th century’s Protestant Reformation under Martin Luther did the two begin to separate more.
It was also mentioned that the US has always been a melting pot and therefore the issue of one religion has been little of a problem. This is in the past, but as I said during our discussion, the history of religious freedom hasn’t always been so harmonious, ie, the discrimination against Catholics when the Irish began immigrating to the United States roughly a century ago. Today, it is definitely very much a discussion here in the US, and has been in many court decisions recently. Within our constitution, the Bill of Rights protects the rights of the people, it says that:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”,
Though many argue that the meaning of this statement was never to have a completely secular government, and the idea of “the separation of church and state” was not the intention of the amendment. I just wanted to give a little background into the history of government, society, and religion in the United States, as Dr. Bernard brought up the case of an atheist father who filed a court case against the inclusion of the phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance, “One nation, under God.”
This is not to say that the US is a completely secular place. Until a few decades ago, it was common for everything to be closed on the Christian holy day, Sunday. School and government holidays revolve around Christian holidays, and companies like McDonalds have developed products like the fish sandwich to fill the needs of Catholics (especially) during the period of Lent. I cannot even count how many times that people have tried to convert me over the years, and I have some funny stories from back when I lived in the middle of nowhere and some Jehovah’s Witnesses pushed their way into our house and just took a seat in our living room and began to talk about their religion. It was difficult for us to get them out. The problem is, like Natalie said, when the government gets at all involved in religious expression. It has gotten to the point where some public schools now have holiday parties without Christmas trees. Maybe it is this sensitivity to the diversity of religion that makes it somewhat taboo to discuss religion in polite conversation.
We were talking in class about Islamic vs. Christian fundamentalism, as terrorism and fundamentalism is not restricted to one religion. For example, the Ku Klux Clan, an American organization usually associated with horrible acts of racism, relies on Christian religious ideology, but it seems that religion is only a shield for what their primary concern is. Some people here wonder if Islam is in need of a reformation, or if it too is the excuse being hidden behind for political reasons. Many Muslims who have spoken out in the state say that indeed, these movements are not justified under Islam, and that, in fact, any holy book has verses that can be extracted to create a radical ideology. There was a professor here that suggested that poor economic conditions, etc. within a country caused some radical organizations to look for a scapegoat. I was wondering what you all’s perspective on all of this is, as I certainly don’t know that much about the religion.
Also, the phrase Inshallah is not quite the same as saying God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
The difference is that it seems to suggest that all that pledge allegiance to the US are also pledging allegiance to a God. As I understand, “Inshallah,” though it expresses some of the same sort of sentiments, is a very personal decision to say in personal conversations, and does not enter into governmental affairs.
Even for the West, the idea of secularism is a relatively new idea. In the past, the kings of several countries believed that they were divinely entrusted with the power to rule, and certain religions like Anglicanism were established under the state. Not until the 16th century’s Protestant Reformation under Martin Luther did the two begin to separate more.
It was also mentioned that the US has always been a melting pot and therefore the issue of one religion has been little of a problem. This is in the past, but as I said during our discussion, the history of religious freedom hasn’t always been so harmonious, ie, the discrimination against Catholics when the Irish began immigrating to the United States roughly a century ago. Today, it is definitely very much a discussion here in the US, and has been in many court decisions recently. Within our constitution, the Bill of Rights protects the rights of the people, it says that:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”,
Though many argue that the meaning of this statement was never to have a completely secular government, and the idea of “the separation of church and state” was not the intention of the amendment. I just wanted to give a little background into the history of government, society, and religion in the United States, as Dr. Bernard brought up the case of an atheist father who filed a court case against the inclusion of the phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance, “One nation, under God.”
This is not to say that the US is a completely secular place. Until a few decades ago, it was common for everything to be closed on the Christian holy day, Sunday. School and government holidays revolve around Christian holidays, and companies like McDonalds have developed products like the fish sandwich to fill the needs of Catholics (especially) during the period of Lent. I cannot even count how many times that people have tried to convert me over the years, and I have some funny stories from back when I lived in the middle of nowhere and some Jehovah’s Witnesses pushed their way into our house and just took a seat in our living room and began to talk about their religion. It was difficult for us to get them out. The problem is, like Natalie said, when the government gets at all involved in religious expression. It has gotten to the point where some public schools now have holiday parties without Christmas trees. Maybe it is this sensitivity to the diversity of religion that makes it somewhat taboo to discuss religion in polite conversation.
We were talking in class about Islamic vs. Christian fundamentalism, as terrorism and fundamentalism is not restricted to one religion. For example, the Ku Klux Clan, an American organization usually associated with horrible acts of racism, relies on Christian religious ideology, but it seems that religion is only a shield for what their primary concern is. Some people here wonder if Islam is in need of a reformation, or if it too is the excuse being hidden behind for political reasons. Many Muslims who have spoken out in the state say that indeed, these movements are not justified under Islam, and that, in fact, any holy book has verses that can be extracted to create a radical ideology. There was a professor here that suggested that poor economic conditions, etc. within a country caused some radical organizations to look for a scapegoat. I was wondering what you all’s perspective on all of this is, as I certainly don’t know that much about the religion.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Religion at AU
I thought that since we're now moving into religion it would be fun to give you an idea of the diversity of religion in the United States using our University as an example.
The religious center on campus is officially called Kay Spiritual Center, which is also known as the "flaming cupcake" because of the shape of its roof. Kay hosts many religions including, but not limited to: Baha'i, Islam, Judaism, Presbyterian, United Methodist, Baptist, Buddhist, Christian Scientist, Lutheran, Quaker, Unitarian Universalism, Roman Catholicism, Latter-Day Saints, and Hinduism.
The religious center on campus is officially called Kay Spiritual Center, which is also known as the "flaming cupcake" because of the shape of its roof. Kay hosts many religions including, but not limited to: Baha'i, Islam, Judaism, Presbyterian, United Methodist, Baptist, Buddhist, Christian Scientist, Lutheran, Quaker, Unitarian Universalism, Roman Catholicism, Latter-Day Saints, and Hinduism.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Last DVC
Hi Everyone,
I liked our discussion a few days ago, but I find that there is a lot more room for exploration and debate in some of the topics we discussed. In particular, I found it really interesting to see the differences in the level of individual freedom expected between our two cultures. While I understand the point made that if the Sultan of Oman is sensitive to the issues of the Omani people that democracy is not necessarily needed, it goes against what I have been brought up to believe. For me, it is my natural instinct to believe that I should have say at all times in political issues and that it is my right to voice my opinion. I was just hoping that maybe someone could provide a differing perspective so that we could come to some sort of conclusion (if there is one) on this issue.
Secondly, I liked the brief discussion we had in regard to Samuel Huntington's clash of cultures idea. I am unsure as to whether the international political climate is shifting to a more cultural perspective. It seems that currently there is most definitely some sort of tension between the Western and Arab worlds, but I am not ready to conclude that this indicates a future of cultural problems and fighting. I liked the point made in our last discussion that it is not that our two cultures are clashing, but rather we have an inability to accommodate and accept one another's values. Personally, I find that there is a lack of trust between our two cultures for a variety of reasons (
What do you all think? I am very open to criticism so feel free to respond, agree, disagree, or write about a completely different topic. Hope all is well and I am excited for our next DVC. Bye.
Juergen Todenhöfer article
The Juergen Todenhöfer article mentioned by Professor Groen during our last video conference can be found here, under "Sunday, March 16th 2008." Click on "third part."
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Our next video conference
From posts so far it seems like there is interest in these topics:
How the West/Christian and the Arab/Islamic world view and treat one another.
Gender roles would be an interesting topic because there is in some ways a distinct difference between our two countries, as was touched upon in our first conference conversation.
The state of education in developed countries, which to me is interesting first of all because I am currently in the process of pursuing a college degree, and secondly, because (as Asma pointed out) many students in developed countries do not take advantage of their education.
Religion is most definitely a pertinent topic, if only because it has shaped so much of our cultures.
Our perspectives on human rights based on our cultural and political backgrounds.
I suggest that for our next conversation we focus upon either how the western world treats the Arab world and vice versa, or gender roles.
Please comment and let me (and everyone else) know what you would like to do for our next DVC.
How the West/Christian and the Arab/Islamic world view and treat one another.
Gender roles would be an interesting topic because there is in some ways a distinct difference between our two countries, as was touched upon in our first conference conversation.
The state of education in developed countries, which to me is interesting first of all because I am currently in the process of pursuing a college degree, and secondly, because (as Asma pointed out) many students in developed countries do not take advantage of their education.
Religion is most definitely a pertinent topic, if only because it has shaped so much of our cultures.
Our perspectives on human rights based on our cultural and political backgrounds.
I suggest that for our next conversation we focus upon either how the western world treats the Arab world and vice versa, or gender roles.
Please comment and let me (and everyone else) know what you would like to do for our next DVC.
facebook?
hey guys...
I don't know how big facebook is in Oman, but we all have them and I know I've found a few of you already. Professor Groen says we need to increase communication, and I feel like that would be a good way to see each other's lives a little better.
I'm under "shannon cummings" at "american university '11" and "upper dublin high school '07." If you guys could just post the names and networks you used, we could friend each other.
Alright, talk to everyone oon!
shannon
I don't know how big facebook is in Oman, but we all have them and I know I've found a few of you already. Professor Groen says we need to increase communication, and I feel like that would be a good way to see each other's lives a little better.
I'm under "shannon cummings" at "american university '11" and "upper dublin high school '07." If you guys could just post the names and networks you used, we could friend each other.
Alright, talk to everyone oon!
shannon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)