Politics & Religion
Religion has been used in various times and places – not for good, but for evil. It would seem that religious fanaticism represents a faith hijacked by those who would use it for judgmental, political, and sometimes murderous purposes. For those of us who see religion as a positive – as something that can heal, restore, and uplift the world – it can be difficult to understand WHY religious fanatics would use religion for anything but good. It can also be hard to understand how killing can ever be a good thing, particularly when it is done in the name of religion.
If you’d like to understand the motivations behind modern-day terrorism and grave acts committed in the name of religion, I recommend When Religion Becomes Evil by Charles Kimball and Terror in the Mind of God by Mark Juergensmeyer.
I would also recommend a new film, Not in God’s Name: In Search of Tolerance with the Dalai Lama (South Carolina ETV/Paradise Filmworks). This movie was released to public TV stations this spring and is now available on DVD. The film explores India, which houses eight religions. The film explains how those religions peacefully coexist…and why sometimes they do not. The filmmaker interviews the Dalai Lama (no stranger to conflict resolution) who recounts the causes and solutions to conflict in the name of God. Here is the trailer:
Through these media you will learn how religious violence often starts with political conflict, economic hardship, or socio-cultural divisions and disagreements. If we as humans can get to the root of these problems, we may find that religion can be a catalyst for peace and relationship-building – instead of a device used to tear down, judge, and destroy. We may find, as the Dalai Lama says in the film, that we are one family. And that we don’t have to blame religion for tearing us apart.
Created by Religion Transcends, 2010
On April 15, US District Judge Barbara Crabb ruled that the law authorizing a National Day of Prayer in the U.S. is unconstitutional and violates the First Amendment (which prohibits a federal endorsement of religion). The National Day of Prayer has been a lawful celebration since 1952 and would have been celebrated this year on May 6.
In this article, Crabb said she didn’t want to suggest prayer is wrong; rather, she wanted to send a message that the government cannot endorse any one religious message from any religion.
President Obama’s role
President Obama did not put an end to the National Day of Prayer. Initially he had said he would proclaim the day but would pray privately (instead of publicly, as the day calls for). Crabb’s ruling stops him from being able to call for the celebration. Obama’s administration says it will appeal the ruling.
The American Center for Law and Justice has also filed an amicus brief to have the decision overturned. The group represents 31 members of Congress.
The Graham issue
The National Day of Prayer Task Force had organized an event at the Pentagon for the National Day of Prayer. Franklin Graham, son of Christian evangelist Billy Graham, was set to speak at the event. But after 9/11, Graham had called Islam a “wicked religion.” So Muslims called for him to be removed from the National Day of Prayer event, and the Pentagon withdrew his invitation. Following the withdrawl, the National Day of Prayer Task Force backed out of the Pentagon event.
Their anger hasn’t died down. But it all seems kind of moot if no one will be able to publicly celebrate the National Day of Prayer.
It seems both sides could be argued – of course Americans would like their freedoms protected without having government tell them what to believe. But does removing a long-held celebration suggest that what’s being celebrated is wrong? What do you think?
Created by Religion Transcends, 2010
I visited China in 2004 on the 25th anniversary of the massacres at Tiananmen Square. My tour guides were lovely, jovial, proud of their country.
As expected, they pointed out the lovely, jovial, proud parts of their country. Look at the mosques over there, the churches on that side – oh, we are quite supportive of religious diversity. I was encouraged. But let’s be honest, the People’s Republic of China is still Communist. Religious diversity? Seriously?
Earlier this month, a Chinese religious scholar named Liu Peng dared to publish a statement in China Daily (the government’s official English-language newspaper) stating China is ready for “an institutional guarantee for the legality and quality of all religions.” He called for equality and legal recognition of religious groups (putting them out in the open instead of forcing them to hide behind closed doors). As Christianity Today explains, the very fact that a government-owned newspaper would publish his statement seems hopeful. Perhaps China is up to the task of talking about religion in public.
Talking, sure, but enacting laws? True religious freedom and diversity under the Communist party seem unlikely at the moment. The Chinese constitution guarantees freedom of religion, but only if you’re part of one of the state-run organizations. The government is still cracking down on independent religious institutions, shutting down churches and arresting religious leaders. Is it really religious freedom if the government tells you which churches you can attend and denies admittance to others?
The Associated Press estimates that about 60 million Chinese are worshipping in churches independent of the government, risking arrest. So it seems like the popular movement is toward religious freedom. Kudos to Liu Peng for getting the discussion rolling. It only takes a spark.
Now the PRC needs to do more than just put on a good face for outsiders. They need to enter the 21st century and allow their people the ability to worship the way they want. Individually. Unrestricted. Accepted.
Created by Religion Transcends, 2009