[Vision2020] True Muslims and True Americans

[Taro Tanaka]

Paul Rumelhart godshatter at yahoo.com wrote:

[[ 3. Respecting actions taken that derive from a particular belief.  Here
is where the line really is.  If a Satanist sacrifices someone, they've
crossed the line and should be punished.  If a Satanist is known to be
about to sacrifice someone, they should be stopped and tried in a court
of law.  That goes for Muslims who interpret the Qu'ran to say that they
should kill Americans as well as Christians who think God has told them
to kill an abortion doctor.  If you cross this line in the other
direction, you are into the realm of Thought Crimes.  If there is one
inalienable right, it's the right to think what you want to think.  The
inside of your head is sacrosanct.  It's when thoughts become actions
that society has the right to intervene. ]]

Paul, that's not called respecting someone's religious beliefs; that's 
called goring someone's ox, and I'm all for it. "Freedom of religion" means 
freedom to PRACTICE one's religion. Obviously, it is not possible for a 
society to allow religious freedom for all religions. If some Mexican 
immigrants want to build a big pyramid in New Mexico and use obsidian knives 
to cut out people's beating hearts at the apex, that will obviously conflict 
with the religious beliefs of all modern Americans. "But our gods command us 
to sacrifice to them," they will protest. "Even the people we sacrifice 
agree that their deaths are necessary." To that any reasonable person -- 
even Nick Gier, I presume -- would reply, "Your so-called gods are full of 
sh*t and you're under arrest." But even as we say that, we have to recognize 
that entire societies based on such practices existed for many centuries. It 
is possible to build a society based on a religion that cuts out people's 
beating hearts with an obsidian knife. But it is not possible for such a 
society to continue to exist once certain other religions -- especially 
Christianity -- start to permeate that society. Because certain other 
religions, expecially Christianity, would declare war on such practices. It 
is a war to the death -- the death of one religious system or the other. The 
two religious systems cannot coexist. And that is precisely why there are no 
longer any societies based on cutting out people's beating hearts with 
obsidian knives.

That was a pretty extreme example, but it illustrates the point. Freedom of 
religion is the freedom to PRACTICE one's religion, and no society can grant 
full freedom to all religions. So anyone who says he respects all religious 
beliefs is, for one reaon or another, not telling the truth. It is simply a 
fact that nobody respects all religious beliefs.

I think this is as good a time as any to point out one of the faulty hidden 
assumptions at work when people try to distinguish between intellectual 
assent to a certain set of propositions on the one hand, and actually living 
in terms of one's beliefs on the other. I bring this up because both Paul 
and Nick have spoken along the lines that anyone is free to believe anything 
they want, and that is what "respecting religious beliefs" is all about; but 
people might be stepping over the line into forbidden territory if they try 
to actually put those beliefs into practice.

This is called gnosticism. It is the view that limits religion to the realm 
of ideas and concepts. But the Bible rejects that view vehemently. The 
epistle of James says:

'. . . faith, if it has no works, is dead in itself. Yes, a man will say, 
"You have faith, and I have works." Show me your faith without works, and I 
by my works will show you my faith. You believe that God is one. You do 
well. The demons also believe, and shudder. But are you willing to know, 
vain man, that faith apart from works is dead? Wasn't Abraham our father 
justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? You 
see that faith worked with his works, and by works faith was perfected; and 
the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was 
accounted to him as righteousness;" and he was called the friend of God. You 
see then that by works, a man is justified, and not only by faith.'

Here James is saying very clearly that if mere intellectual assent to 
certain propositions is all that is called for, the demons know all those 
things very well. They are able to pay intellectuall assent to the 
truthfulness of the creedal statements of Christendom, but their 
intellectual assent is not accompanied by obedience, and it is obedience 
that is demanded. Why are Christians obedient? Because they have faith that 
God demands and shall reward their obedience. In other words, part of the 
Christian's intellectual assent is that mere intellectual assent is not 
enough. This is a religious belief that is bound to put someone on a 
collision course with folks like Nick Gier. Whenever Nick Gier lives out his 
religious beliefs, my ox is getting gored, at least potentially. And 
whenever I live out my religious beliefs, Nick Gier's ox is getting gored, 
at least potentially. I don't see any reason to apologize for this state of 
affairs or to pretend that it doesn't exist. I believe in calling a spade a 
spade. It simply is not possible to equally respect all religious beliefs.

-- Princess Sushitushi

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/