http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html

Nanna

This piece has prompted a lot of reaction, Nanna. This next one suggests a Chinese solution to the religious "problem" and so, in sensitivity to our non-monotheistic friends

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/us/03prayerbook.html?em&ex=1188964800&en=ed6875b947feb814&ei=5070

Now the [US] nation’s largest Jewish movement, Reform Judaism, is preparing to adopt a new prayer book that was intended to offer something for everyone — traditionalists, progressives and everyone else — even those who do not believe in God.

The changes reveal a movement that is growing in different directions simultaneously, absorbing non-Jewish spouses and Jews with little formal religious education while also trying to appeal to Jews seeking a return to tradition.

Traditional touches coexist with a text that sometimes departs from tradition by omitting or modifying some prayers and by using language that is gender-neutral. References to God as “He” have been removed, and whenever Jewish patriarchs are named — like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, so are the matriarchs — like Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah. The prayer book took more than 20 years to develop and was tested in about 300 congregations. ...

The Reform movement, which originated in Germany in the 19th century, claims 1.5 million members in 900 congregations in North America. There are about 5.2 million Jews in the United States, according to the National Jewish Population Survey, conducted from 2000 to 2001.

Well, I dunno...as a fixer-upper of various technical problems, I am unsure that goats will do the trick. Glad that SAS' symbol isn't Odin...

Goats sacrificed to fix Nepal jet

Nepal's state-run airline has confirmed that it sacrificed two goats to appease a Hindu god, following technical problems with one of its aircraft.

Nepal Airlines said the animals were slaughtered in front of the plane - a Boeing 757 - at Kathmandu airport.

The offering was made to Akash Bhairab, the Hindu god of sky protection, whose symbol is seen on the company's planes.

The airline said that after Sunday's ceremony the plane successfully completed a flight to Hong Kong.

"The snag in the plane has now been fixed and the aircraft has resumed its flights," senior airline official Raju KC was quoted as saying by Reuters. ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6979292.stm

Nanna

Q.E.D.

For me humans are more important than animals...

Jacek

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6981326.stm

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has become the patron of South Africa's Barbecue (Braai) Day, saying the pastime is a unifying force in a divided country. …

"We have 11 different official languages but only one word for the wonderful institution of braai: in Xhosa, English, Afrikaans, whatever," he said.

Originally written by Arthur Borges on August 23, 2007 6:18 PM "Bridging The Religious Divide" has been one of TC's most popular threads, so popular that its size has again become unwieldy for the system. So I've frozen Divide (2) and Welcome to Divide (3).

Indeed, seen politically 'Bridging The Religious Divide' has survived two coup attempts and is in its 3rd term, a rare feat. This could be attributed to the nature of issues at debate; neither too hot to burn themselves out nor too cold to freeze into a standstill (as has happened to some threads). Its title is inviting as opposed to isolating so we should expect more diverse participation as more are beckoned to have their say.

Nashon

Another Hindu god (this time in India) is in the news (as reported by Pakistan's The News):

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=72430 Premier Manmohan Singh on Friday put on hold the half-billion-dollar plan to dredge sandy shoals in a strip of sea between India and Sri Lanka after Hindus objected, saying the formation was created by the god Ram. According to the Hindu epic Ramayana, the islands were built by an army of monkeys to allow Ram to cross the Palk Strait that separates India and Sri Lanka and rescue his kidnapped wife.

Time for an "According to the Vatican." Snippets from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9f4ea546-5da4-11dc-8d22-0000779fd2ac.html:

On the cobblestones outside the great 8th century mosque in Córdoba, once the largest mosque in the western world, Mansur Escudero, a Spanish convert to Islam, unfolds his prayer mat and kneels down to pray.

Muslims are not allowed to pray inside. The Roman Catholic Church, custodian of the building since the 13th century, says it would "confuse" Christians to see Muslims worshipping there. Mr Escudero has lobbied the Vatican to transform the Córdoba mosque into an ecumenical place of worship, - "a symbol of religious tolerance and co-existence," he says - but his campaign has not met with success. ...

"Reconquest? For what, and for whom?" asks Tolba Sidi Mohammed, a translator from Mauritania who lives in Granada. "Most Muslims who have settled in Spain have come fleeing hunger, or political persecution, or both. So the idea that we are bent on reconquering Spain is absurd," he says.

Snippets on the fundamentalist mindset from http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174837/tomdispatch_interview_james_carroll_american_fundamentalisms

I am sticking this in here but this piece, by a Roman Catholic, has a much broader than just religious meaning and neatly ties in with other threads. 

Let's call this tendentious.

From The Atlantic Monthly:

Liberal democracies may well be suspicious of political movements animated by theology, but they shouldn't suppose that religious belief is irrational.

The news that Hindu fanatics have forced the withdrawal of an Indian government report because it cast doubt on the existence of a deity will obviously strike most people as a triumph for superstitious nonsense. The important point, however, is that it's not irrational to claim that any particular God exists just because it's simultaneously nonsense. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/andrew_brown/2007/09/imaginary_gods_are_really_immo.html

....Step outside of it, though, and one sees immediately that flaw intrinsic to deductive logic: it's only as good as the premise on which it is built. That magnificent skyscraper is tottering atop a flimsy foundation bobbing precariously in quicksand — it's no surprise that many of the godly are frantically gesturing those obnoxiously inquisitive atheists away with such an air of desperate concern. A few pokes have made the structure wobble and sway, and if enough of us get together, we could push it all right over. All those exquisite arguments and detailed apologetics resting atop the rotting corpse of of god-belief … it would be such a shame if something happened to it, wouldn't it?

Unfortunately, what collapses relatively easily with our nudging and poking and pushing is the fancy brickwork rising above the ugly foundation, not the foundation itself. And that foundation is worshipped by the unpleasant mass called fundamentalism, and the fundamentalists are also pushing at the theological structure — they'd like to replace it with their own bizarre (but also internally rational) construction. That should worry us, because there's also another reason religion is rational. It's an unpleasantly cynical, nasty reason, and I'm shocked that Andrew Brown would bring it up. Religion is politically useful as a tool for terror. What could be more intimidating than the idea that you can be tortured or executed for merely thinking heresy?.... http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/09/is_religion_rational.php

The doomsday cult that prophesied the end of the world in September last year is still clinging on to its pessimistic view of the future, though it has since edited the prophesy to suit the fact that this sinful world is still here.

http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=1&newsid=106625

House of Yahweh, a little-known cult, grabbed the headlines at around this time last year after prophesying that the world was in imminent danger of being wiped out in a nuclear war. Its members retreated to holes in the ground and wore gas masks.

September 12, 2006 — the mother of all doomsdays according to the House of Yahweh — came and went without the firing of a single nuclear missile. The sect immediately moved the day of reckoning to June 2007 which also, in total defiance of the prophesy, passed quietly.

The sect’s holy scriptures contain the same number of books as the Bible. But members believe that the Bible was distorted by scribes, translators and theologians. (Story by Macharia Mwangi and Watoro Kamau)

Nashon in Kenya

Good to see you, Nashon!

Speaking of sects: http://www.slate.com/id/2174061/entry/0/

In 2006, both states' attorneys general, concerned over the effects of the widespread but illegal practice of polygamy, jointly released a 57-page primer on the topic for use by "human services professionals, law enforcement officers and others" (excepts below and on the following six pages). The training manual says FLDS has 10,000 members (Page 6) and calls Jeffs' sect "the most restrictive and isolated" (Page 7) of all Mormon fundamentalist groups. Former FLDS members report being taught that "the Holocaust never existed and that the government fabricated the story of man landing on the moon in order to hide tax money" (Page 7).

"In our societies fuelled by having, faith is often only considered as a disruptive and destructive force .... Animated with a positive and vital energy, the monks of Rangoon [In Burma] are thus doing everyone a universal favour. They are not destroying anything, but are putting things straight and back into perspective on the scale of the planet and of all civilizations. Their peaceful procession shows the dissident and positive power of real spirituality, the kind that carries society's deep aspirations without claiming power. Bare-foot religion has no weapons, but it remains, after the death of ideologies, the only force capable of viscerally gripping a population." La Vie (France) http://europe.courrierinternational.com/eurotopics/article.asp?langue=uk&publication=27/09/2007&cat=REFLECTIONS&pi=0#0

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/opinion/07meacham.html?em&ex=1191988800&en=14109fa6c7f73277&ei=5087%0A

A Nation of Christians Is Not a Christian Nation

[snip] In an interview with Beliefnet.com last weekend, [John] McCain repeated what is an article of faith among many American evangelicals: “the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation.”

According to Scripture, however, believers are to be wary of all mortal powers. Their home is the kingdom of God, which transcends all earthly things, not any particular nation-state. The Psalmist advises believers to “put not your trust in princes.” The author of Job says that the Lord “shows no partiality to princes nor regards the rich above the poor, for they are all the work of his hands.” ...

The only acknowledgment of religion in the original Constitution is a utilitarian one: the document is dated “in the year of our Lord 1787.” Even the religion clause of the First Amendment is framed dryly and without reference to any particular faith. The Connecticut ratifying convention debated rewriting the preamble to take note of God’s authority, but the effort failed. ...

Thomas Jefferson said that his bill for religious liberty in Virginia was “meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindu, and infidel of every denomination.” ... Washington wrote the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I., saying, “happily the government of the United States ... gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. ... Everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.” ...

The founders were not anti-religion. Many of them were faithful in their personal lives, and in their public language they evoked God. They grounded the founding principle of the nation — that all men are created equal — in the divine. But they wanted faith to be one thread in the country’s tapestry, not the whole tapestry. ...

I think many of the current issues with regards to the relationship between church and state in contemporary America are explained by the fact that the concept of what it means to be a "Christian" has changed.  To a substantial number of Americans, to be a "Christian" means to be an evangelical Protestant, and you must constantly re-affirm that you "accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior."  This sort of Christianity, chiefly of the Baptist variety, is virtually the only religion in much of the South, which is where the religious energy of the U.S. comes from.  Southern Baptism is highly fundamentalist in nature and most adherents profess to believe in the literal truth of the bible (hence the constant debates about evolution in the U.S.).  Such Christians typically have very little tolerance for alternative views of Christianity, let alone non-Christian faiths such as Judaism or (especially) Islam.  In their mind, until you have turned yourself over to Jesus and accepted him as your lord and savior, you are damned and it is their duty to make you see the error of your ways.  As a result, no other religious view can really be permitted to endure; at most they are to be tolerated until the evangelical "mission" is successful.

When the U.S. was formed, the Christianity of the elite who designed the government was much less rigid, largely of the deist variety that viewed God as somewhat removed from human life.  There was not this felt need to convert everyone and to insist that people accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

This is somewhat ironic given the history of Christianity in its early days.  One of the particularly noteworthy aspects of the Roman empire was that it was quite tolerant of religious diversity.  The Greco-Roman pantheon coexisted rather peacefully with other religious systems in Rome's diverse territory, and the state didn't really care who you worshipped, as long as you also acknowledged the divinity of the emperor.  The Christians ran into trouble (and ultimately lions) precisely because they refused to do this.  Now it is the Christians who are in control (in the U.S., and in the west generally since the 4th century AD), and in America they essentially insist that other sects pay homage to their emperor.  The oppressed thus become the oppressor as the wheel of history turns on.

See also Paulo Freire (1921-1997), as quoted at http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Paulo_Freire.

J.

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on October 11, 2007 7:24 AM ....they might just be different ways of answering the same questions.

Or are they, when clashing in public, rather than private, space?

On the October 11 broadcast of Steve Malzberg's WOR (New York) radio show, right-wing pundit Ann Coulter stood by her recent comment -- documented by Media Matters for America -- that "we" Christians "just want Jews to be perfected." ..

During the October 8 Big Idea, Deutsch asked Coulter: "If you had your way ... and your dreams, which are genuine, came true ... what would this country look like?" Coulter responded, "It would look like New York City during the [2004] Republican National Convention. In fact, that's what I think heaven is going to look like." She then described the convention: "People were happy. They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America." Deutsch then asked, "It would be better if we were all Christian?" Coulter replied, "Yes," later adding, "[W]e just want Jews to be perfected, as they say." http://mediamatters.org/items/200710150002?f=h_top

Originally written by Arthur Borges on October 18, 2007 6:11 AM NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. soldier who said his Christian beliefs compelled him to love his enemies, not kill them, has been granted conscientious objector status and honorably discharged, according to New York Civil Liberties Union. [/QUOE] Indeed it is difficult to see how someone who believes otherwise could still be understood to be a Christian.  These "beliefs" are not simply, as the article suggests, some fanciful creation of the soldier's, but are rather a reflection of a clear injunction from Christ himself: You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? If you only greet your friends, what more do you do than others? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. Matthew 5:43-48

[snip] of course a Christian wants everyone to be a Christian. I assume all vegans think the world would be better if everyone were a vegan. And the global warming wackos would like everyone to believe in their crackpot global warming theory. And nonsmokers would like everyone not to smoke. ...

Christians accept the Old Testament. Jews don't accept the New Testament, so, you know, as long as we're playing this new sport of "he who is offended first wins," if anyone's going to be offended by anyone else's religion, the Jews believe that my savior, a Jew, was a raving lunatic, and you don't see me sniffling and crying. http://mediamatters.org/items/200710160009?f=h_top

See who's talking about wackos and crackpots ... I wonder if she failed kindergarten science.

the Jews believe that my savior, a Jew, was a raving lunatic

Yeees ... based on what evidence, exactly?

An excerpt from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?em&ex=1194411600&en=badcb0cd4859ff09&ei=5070:

HarperOne, an imprint of HarperCollins, has just released “There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind,” a book attributed to Flew and a co-author, the Christian apologist Roy Abraham Varghese. “There Is a God” is an intellectual’s bildungsroman written in simple language for a mass audience. It’s the first-person account of a preacher’s son who, away at Methodist boarding school, defied his father to become a teenage atheist, later wrote on atheism at Oxford, spent his life fighting for unbelief and then did an about-face in his old age, embracing the truth of a higher power. The book offers elegant, user-friendly descriptions of the arguments that persuaded Flew, arguments familiar to anyone who has heard evangelical Christians’ “scientific proof” of God. From the “fine tuning” argument that the laws of nature are too perfect to have been accidents to the “intelligent design” argument that human biology cannot be explained by evolution to various computations meant to show that probability favors a divine creator, “There Is a God” is perhaps the handiest primer ever written on the science (many would say pseudoscience) of religious belief.

Flew’s “conversion,” first reported in late 2004, has cast him into culture wars that he contentedly avoided his whole life. Although Flew still rejects Christianity, saying only that he now believes in “an intelligence that explains both its own existence and that of the world,” evangelicals are understandably excited. For them, Flew has become very useful, very quickly. In late 2006, Flew was among the signers of a letter to Tony Blair asking that intelligent design be included in the British science curriculum. Flew’s fame has reached even to small-town Pennsylvania, where in 2005 Judge John E. Jones cited Flew in his landmark decision prohibiting the teaching of intelligent design in the town of Dover. Referring to a publication of the Dover School Board, Jones wrote that “the newsletter all but admits that I.D. is religious by quoting Anthony [sic] Flew, described as a ‘world famous atheist who now believes in intelligent design.’ ”

But is Flew’s conversion what it seems to be? Depending on whom you ask, Antony Flew is either a true convert whose lifelong intellectual searchings finally brought him to God or a senescent scholar possibly being exploited by his associates. The version you prefer will depend on how you interpret a story that began 20 years ago, when some evangelical Christians found an atheist who, they thought, might be persuaded to join their side. In the intellectual tug of war that ensued, Flew himself — a continent away, his memory failing, without an Internet connection — had no idea how fiercely he was being fought over or how many of his acquaintances were calling or writing him just to shore up their cases. For a time, Flew hardly spoke to the media, leaving evangelicals and atheists to trade interpretations of his rare, oracular pronouncements. Was he now a believer in intelligent design? In Christianity? In some vague, intelligent “life force”? With the publication of his new book, Flew is once again talking, and this summer I traveled to England to speak with him. But as I discovered, a conversation with him confuses more than it clarifies. With his powers in decline, Antony Flew, a man who devoted his life to rational argument, has become a mere symbol, a trophy in a battle fought by people whose agendas he does not fully understand.

special report on religion and public life

RELIGIOUS observance is rising. The proportion of the world's population attached to the four biggest religions—Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism—rose from 67% in 1900 to 73% in 2005 and may reach 80% by 2050. Fundamentalist versions of religions are doing best.

See here how your religion, and not the force of arguments, determines your outlook:

Jacek

Now two new books (to be published in the coming months) renew the debate. Their authors come from opposite directions – one from theism to agnosticism, the other from atheism to theism – but they meet, or rather cross paths, on the subject of suffering and evil.

Bart D. Ehrman is a professor of religious studies and his book is titled “God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer.”

He might have been talking about Antony Flew’s “There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.”

http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/suffering-evil-and-the-existence-of-god/?em&ex=1194498000&en=db6f6120c33bce04&ei=5070

 I would like to comment on the following passages from Mr. Flew's book. Bear in mind, that in playing the devil's advocate, I classify myself as one who hopes that there is a God. Flew writes, “How can a universe of mindless matter produce beings with intrinsic ends [and] self-replication capabilities?” 

“ . . . our knowledge of the universe must stop with the big bang, which is to be seen as the ultimate fact.”  “The laws of physics are ‘lawless laws’ that arise from the void – end of discussion.” Flew tackles the why is there something instead of nothing question and writes: “The only satisfactory explanation for the origin of such ‘end-directed, self-replicating’ life as we see on earth is an infinitely intelligent Mind.”

My comment, "The something from nothing dilemma is the most mind-blowing question we on earth contemplate.  If one believes that the intelligent life we see on earth (something from nothing) requires an infinitely intelligent mind, then we have to wonder how this infinitely intelligent God sprang from nothing."

Louie Lawent - author of "The Louie/God Interviews (What The Big Fella Really Thinks About Man And The Universe)" 

www.myspace.com/LouieLawent

Hi Jacek,

Thank you welcoming me to the forum.  Yes, I was going to make reference to the God has been here forever view in my initial post.  Even though it's not your viewpoint, as you're just stating what's been said, I will never subscribe to that.  There has to be beginnings.  Forever is only a forward-looking proposition.  It bothers me that theology brings this "God has been here forever" concept to the table.  It seems to me that the fear is that if God had been "born" He would be diminished, that God Himself being the result of a random event would be a threat to "meaning" itself.  Then we'd have to wonder how God makes sense of His own creation.

If there have to be beginning, so there was a beginning, what happened just before that beginning?  If there is an end to the universe, or let's say, the spaces and matter and emptiness of matter being those spaces, what's just behind them?  Infinity must exist, because the alternative is implausible.  But can we comprehend it?  In an age where we measure everything and believe that everything has a measure and a weight, are we limiting our limited comprehension even further?  Before we could measure it, would we have believed in the ultrasonic sound that guides a bat, or the colours clearly painted on a flower visible to a honeybee in the form of a vivid bull's eye, but revealing itself as a uniformly-coloured series of petals to us?

Maxi

This will be once again from Stephen Hawking or the Quintessence thread: Can you show me where the surface of a sphere starts, please?

It bothers me that theology brings this "God has been here forever" concept to the table.

Then, by all means, go for my Post #131587! How about: "Not God but the Universe has always been there"? Mind you: not the Earth which we know wasn't there 15 billion years ago or so, and not the universe that is accessible to us as humans in 2007. I mean the Universe, whatever it is.

Jacek

Greetings Maxi and Jacek,

Discussions of "wonder" like these are fascinating because, for one thing, many points are hard to refute because there is no proof to be found.  Maxi, I too have a hard time wrapping myself around the thought of what's beyond the last point "measured."  Because even if it were a physical wall, what's beyond the wall?  I still believe the universe has an end point in all directions.  If it were infinite, our universe would not be expanding, as it would already be infinite.  My belief is no matter how you slice it - God began from nothing or the universe without God as a Creator began from nothing.  Like I say, I don't believe in "forever" projecting backwards.  Something from nothing is mind-blowing but logic tells me it must be so.  Maybe you folks can clear something up for me as you will have a better understanding.  Doesn't the latest (or at least one brand of string theory) posit that there was no beginning, no big  bang? If so, I'd have to dismiss it, as I remain firm in there being "a beginning." 

Hi Louie,

Same request about font size.  This would be better. 

If it were infinite, our universe would not be expanding, as it would already be infinite

What is this thing we call universe which is expanding?  Is the portion we are in expanding, or is the Everything expanding?  What is it that we are measuring as expanding?  Is it not the conglomerate of stars, planets, and matter within what we can measure?  Would it not make sense that clusters elsewhere might be contracting?  What about the nothingness - what is "it" doing? 

God began from nothing or the universe without God as a Creator began from nothing.

Why must there a beginning, or an end?  Why a journey from A to B?  Why linear?  This is why the Nasrudin stories exist - to expand our horizons beyond our horizons. The minute such stories are "translated" they lose their meaning.

Think of the metaphor of Flatland, brought out so eloquently in a Simpsons episode of all things.  Imagine that we live in a 2 D world, and something else is 3D (which still keeps us within the confines of our perceptions, since we are adding a dimension to our known dimensions).  What is a circle and what is a sphere?  We represent a sphere through a circle.  Bart Simpson goes through the wall and as a cartoon character finds himself in a normal 3-dimensional world.  Does anything he sees make sense to him?

Or - I have been fascinated by the "visual" perception of the blind ever since I did a translation of experiences back in the 1950's.  Geometry was the most difficult thing for blind students to grasp.  In those days they used paper that would raise in welts if you drew on it, so that drawings could be made.  The blind live in a 3 dimensional all-surrounding world.  We live in a world that is always in front of us.  The blind are surrounded by sound.  We see a book and a house as the same square, and a circle and sphere are the same thing.  This makes no sense to a blind person.  The blind tend to draw a table as a square with legs sticking out on all sides, and even that is confusing, becuase they know the table with its 3-dimensional contours.

We interpret everything according to what we know.  We create models, and we live within these models, and the best we can do is to create alternate models. So we talk about beginning, ending, measurements, proportions.

Maxi

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on November 6, 2007 10:07 AM special report on religion and public life

EARLIER this year Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking to his country's parliament, posed two questions: “Who are our enemies?” and “Why do they hate us?” He described an axis of evil, with Iran's enemies being “all the wicked men of the world, whether abroad or at home”. The root cause of their hatred was religious—a loathing of “whomsoever should serve the glory of God”. Having described George Bush's atrocities, he told the cheering MPs, “Truly, your great enemy is the American—through that enmity that is in him against all that is of God in you.” Fortunately, Iran would not fight alone: it had the support of Muslims around the world. Be bold, he advised, and “you will find that you act for a very great many people that are God's own.”

For Mr Ahmadinejad, read Oliver Cromwell; for Iran, England; and for America, Catholic Spain. The quotes above come from a speech made by Cromwell to the English Parliament in 1656. Parliament then passed an oath of loyalty in which English Catholics were asked to disown the pope and most of the canons of Catholic belief, or face losing two-thirds of their worldly goods. Shortly afterwards Cromwell invaded Ireland.

[...]

All this means that the modern wars of religion are mercifully less violent and all-consuming than their predecessors; but also that tackling the politics of religion is more awkward than it used to be. Culture wars are now global .... http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10015219

If you gather together a group of self-professed foreign-policy experts—whether they be neoconservatives, realpolitickers or urbane European diplomats—you can count on a sneer if you mention “inter-faith dialogue”. At best, they say, it is liberal waffle; at worst it is naive appeasement. But who is being naive?

Back in the 1990s, Douglas Johnson, a former diplomat, wrote a prescient book called “Religion: The Missing Dimension of Statecraft”. Since then he has laboured to bring together religious leaders. His efforts are easy to mock. Mr Johnson talks proudly about getting groups of southern Sudanese Christian and Muslim leaders together in 2000; the results have not been perfect peace. But the religious dimension in the conflict has decreased—and that has increased the (slim) chances of a solution.

In northern Nigeria, where this special report began, the Catholic Archbishop of Jos gets a lot of stick from his fellow Christians for setting up meetings with the local imam and visiting mosques. “You are sleeping with a snake,” one Protestant preacher told him. But nowadays if there is a flare-up between Christians and Muslims, the imam and the bishop go together to try to sort it out—and that seems to help.

Doubtless something ghastly will happen again soon in Jos that the archbishop and his new friend will fail to prevent. But that does not mean they are wrong to try. Take Ireland as an example. The cycle of violence that Cromwell did so much to create lasted for well over 300 years. Eventually sectarianism involved a tangle of other ideas, including class, economics and crime. The beginning of the end came when preachers from both sides of Ireland's religious divide began to join together to condemn violence. After each atrocity Catholic priests and Protestant pastors stood side by side on bloodied pavements pointing out that the bombers and God had nothing to do with each other. In most other parts of the world that coming together has yet to happen. http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10015163

This debate may soon acquire a geographical dimension. Philip Jenkins points out that by 2050, the time when climate change is expected to start biting, most of the largest Christian countries will be located in the global South: Brazil, Mexico, Nigeria, Congo, Ethiopia, Uganda, the Philippines, China. He thinks that environmental change could spark inter-communal rivalry, recalling the “little ice age” at the end of the 13th century which caused starvation and pogroms, with Christians turning on Jews in Europe and Muslims turning on Christians in Africa and Asia. Mr LaHaye may yet get his Antichrist. http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10015177

From The Times Literary Supplement

John Cornwell
DARWIN’S ANGEL
An angelic riposte to The God Delusion
171pp. Profile Books. £10.99
978 1 84668 048 9

John Humphrys
IN GOD WE DOUBT
Confessions of a failed atheist
323pp. Hodder and Stoughton. £18.99.
978 0 340 95126 2

[excerpt] Fundamental to the discussion to which both books are seeking to contribute is the relationship between faith and reason. Too often the two have been pitted against each other, as if they were in necessary contradiction. Religious faith is not a matter of the unquestioning acceptance of unmotivated belief, demanded of us by some overriding authority. Quite the contrary. Faith is a commitment to a form of motivated belief, differing only from scientific reason in the nature of the subject of that belief and the kind of motivations appropriate to it. Science achieves its success by the modesty of its ambition, only considering impersonal experience open to repetition at will. Personal experience, let alone encounter with the transpersonal reality of God, does not fit within this limited protocol. The concept of reality offered by scientism is that of a world of metastable, replicating and information-processing systems, but it has no persons in it. Darwin’s angel criticizes Dawkins for a lack of trust in the power of imagination to explore reality, such as we exercise through poetry. He is said to sound “as though he would substitute a series of case-notes on senile dementia for King Lear”.

No progress will be made in the debate about religious belief unless participants are prepared to recognize that the issue of truth is as important to religion as it is to science. Dawkins invokes Bertrand Russell’s parable of the teapot irrationally claimed to be in unobserved orbit in the solar system. Of course there are no grounds for belief in this piece of celestial crockery, but there are grounds offered for religious belief, though admittedly different people evaluate their persuasiveness differently. Religion does not have access to absolute proof of its beliefs but, on careful analysis, nor does science. In all realms of human inquiry, the interlacing of experience and interpretation introduces a degree of precariousness into the argument. Yet this does not mean that we cannot attain beliefs sufficiently well motivated to be the basis for rational commitment. In his book on the philosophy of science, Personal Knowlege (1964), Michael Polanyi stated that he was writing in order to explain how (scientifically) he could commit himself to what he believed to be true, while knowing it might be false. That is the human epistemic condition. Recognizing this should encourage caution, but not induce intellectual paralysis. It is in this spirit that the dialogue between science and religion needs to be conducted.

John Polkinghorne was formerly Professor of Mathematical Physics at Cambridge University, and President of Queens' College. His autobiography From Physicist to Priest was published this year.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/the_tls/article2778493.ece

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10015219

Permit me to doubt that any religion ever pushed for democracy and if it did, religion was pushed in front with democracy a necessary evil, and then only in so far as it served/serves the Church.

I don't even think that Poland is a good example but I'll leave it to those who live there to explain.

Nanna

"But democracy is not about majority rule; it is about minority rights. If there is no culture of not simply tolerating minorities, but actually treating them with equal rights, real democracy can’t take root. ...

India is now celebrating 60 years of democracy precisely because it is also celebrating millennia of diversity, including centuries of Muslim rule." http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/opinion/11friedman.html?em&ex=1195016400&en=8c595f20f5f7fcbc&ei=5070

Indians (also those who used to hang out at TC: Post #78691) are proud of Akbar, and sure enough the NYT op-ed columnist also has a quote on him:

“The Muslim Emperor Akbar, who ruled India in the 16th century at the pinnacle of the Mughal Empire, had Christians, Hindus, Jain and Zoroastrians in his court. Many of his senior officials were Hindus. On his deathbed, Jesuit priests tried to convert him, but he refused. Here was a man who knew who he was, yet he had respect for all religions. Nehru, a Hindu and India’s first prime minister, was a great admirer of Akbar.”

Akbar wasn’t just tolerant. He was embracing of other faiths and ideas, which is why his empire was probably the most powerful in Indian history."

and from the various gods who populate their heads...

Jacek

On why some Others are definitely better than others and why some forms of xenophobia are absolutely desirable:

What European Islamophobia and anti-Semitism have in common--and what they don't.

BY URIYA SHAVIT

[snip] The temptation to draw parallels between past and present is unquestionably strong--but is it justified? There are certainly some notable points of similarity between prewar European anti-Semitism and the enmity directed toward the Muslim immigrants living in Europe now. However, there is a quintessential difference between the two: The fear of a Jewish conspiracy against European civilization had no basis in fact, whereas fear of the expansionist ambitions openly expressed by senior figures in the Muslim-Arab world, and shared by some ordinary Muslims, is not groundless. ...

There is no escaping the obvious conclusion: From a purely ideological point of view, European fear of Islam is not mistaken. ...

The European Muslim on his way to the mosque is different from the European Jew on his way to the synagogue. He represents a potential member of an imagined community that envisages the West as Muslim and Islam as the new world order. To fear such an eventuality is not pure xenophobia; it is firmly grounded in reality. ...

Mr. Shavit is a historian of the Middle East researching Islam in Europe for the Minerva Foundation, a subsidiary of the Max Planck Society. His book "The Wars of Democracy: The West and the Arabs from the Fall of Communism to the War in Iraq" will be published this year by the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies. http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010859

"On why some Others are definitely better than others and why some forms of xenophobia are absolutely desirable"

Nonsense. It's not xenophobia to fear those who are openly calling for your subjugation. Or perhaps you have not been watching the news these past few decades. Or perhaps you believe that it was Jews who blew up the trains in Madrid and London.

Ooops. Forgot. Of course it was Jews. After all, they are also responsible for 9/11. And for the Black Death. And indeed, for all Jew-hatred.

All of them? A worldwide conspiracy then? Then the tile of that article is too restrictive. It should not be talking about European Islamophobia only, but should mobilize all mankind against The Infidels. The just ousted Polish cabinet was doing everything it could to have the US antimissile shield installed on Poland's territory so that when Iran starts bombing Europe, at least Poland could be safe. In vain... Now we can only pray as we are counting down with everybody else...

Jacek

by David Sipress

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=43407&pid=&keyword=muslim&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=2&sortBy=popular ID: 43407, Published in The New Yorker March 13, 2000

Excellent, Jacek! Please, do continue!

Ann-Christine

nonsense indeed... this systematic victimized and hateful bashing of the other...   Read again carefully: the author quoted by Jacek is actually on YOUR side (since you always seem to need to have opposing "sides"...)

df

by Donald Reilly

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=36772&pid=&keyword=hate&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=3&sortBy=popular ID: 36772, Published in The New Yorker November 3, 1997

Hmm, something is telling me, Ann-Christine, that you may not be part of the worldwide conspiracy, at least not against my country, which must be making my just ousted prime minister FURIOUS!

by Charles Barsotti

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=120857&pid=&keyword=hate&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=49&sortBy=popular

Jacek (working hard to conform but, boy, is it tough:

by Bruce Eric Kaplan

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=46587&pid=&keyword=hate&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=6&sortBy=popular ID: 46587, Published in The New Yorker November 12, 2001

The pretext is only what it is - a pretext, just as masses are only what they are.

by Frank Cotham

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=44303&pid=&keyword=war&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=16&sortBy=popular ID: 44303, Published in The New Yorker September 4, 2000

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on November 14, 2007 6:08 PM by J.B. Handelsman http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=32730&pid=&keyword=war§ion=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=85&sortBy=popular “I’m afraid I have to recuse myself, ladies. I don’t want to be responsible for the Trojan War.” ID: 32730, Published in The New Yorker February 19, 1996

HOW TO RECUSE

• Write or sign a memo or complete a form called the Statement of Conflict of Interest, including:                
• Name
• Position & Agency
• Describe the Nature of your Conflict
• Indicate that you are recusing from participation
• Sign the memo or form under penalty of perjury
   
• Present the original to your presiding officer, appointing authority, director, or immediate superior

• Send a copy to the Ethics Commission
• http://www.ethics.ri.gov/Training/Recuse.htm

Nanna

Now I've got matriarchy I have always advocated...

Jacek

J'ADOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORE!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/science/20tier.html?em&ex=1195794000&en=3f82e67cf9eef1b4&ei=5070

Now that biologists in Oregon have reported using cloning to produce a monkey embryo and extract stem cells, it looks more plausible than before that a human embryo will be cloned and that, some day, a cloned human will be born. But not necessarily on this side of the Pacific. ...

“Asian religions worry less than Western religions that biotechnology is about ‘playing God,’” says Cynthia Fox, the author of “Cell of Cells,” a book about the global race among stem-cell researchers. “Therapeutic cloning in particular jibes well with the Buddhist and Hindu ideas of reincarnation.”

You can see this East-West divide in maps drawn up by Lee M. Silver, a molecular biologist at Princeton. Dr. Silver, who analyzes clashes of spirituality and science in his book “Challenging Nature,” has been charting biotechnology policies around the world and trying to make spiritual sense of who’s afraid of what.

Most of southern and eastern Asia displays relatively little opposition to either cloned embryonic stem-cell research or genetically modified crops. ...

Map

Laws on Cloning

Bridging through bashing?

From http://www.365gay.com/Newscon07/11/112407queen.htm (via Harper's Magazine):

Last month Uganda's leading Muslim cleric proposed to President Yoweri Museveni that gays be rounded up and marooned on an island in Lake Victoria until they die.

Sheikh Ramathan Shaban Mubajje told reporters of his plan following the much publicized meeting with Museveni.

"I asked President Museveni to get us an island on Lake Victoria and we take these homosexuals and they die out there," Mubajje told reporters.

"If they die there then we shall have no more homosexuals in the country."

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission said last month that it had uncovered evidence that the Bush administration has funded groups in Uganda that actively promote violence and discrimination against lesbians and gay men. (story) ...

Ssempa and his coalition, which includes Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Baptists, Seventh Day Adventists, and Evangelicals, also have threatened the safety of Ugandan LGBT rights activists by posting their names, photos and addresses on a website

Bridging through law: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071210/lalami

In her keenly observed book The Politics of the Veil, historian Joan Wallach Scott examines the particular French obsession with the foulard [islamique], which culminated in March 2004 with the adoption of a law that made it illegal for students to display any "conspicuous signs" of religious affiliation. The law further specified that the Muslim headscarf, the Jewish skullcap and large crosses were not to be worn but that "medallions, small crosses, stars of David, hands of Fatima, and small Korans" were permitted. Despite the multireligious contortions, it was very clear, of course, that the law was primarily aimed at Muslim schoolgirls.

The decade-long debate in France over the foulard was marked by three specific controversies....

Kenya: Raila’s secret MoU with Muslims revealed

Published on November 28, 2007, 12:00 am

http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143978106

The lid has finally been lifted on the controversial Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Muslim leaders and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) presidential candidate, Mr Raila Odinga. With its secrets unveiled at an international press conference in Nairobi on Tuesday, the ghost of the six-point document — which has been a subject of intense propaganda, cyber wars and a source of concern for sections of the Christian community — was, hopefully, finally exorcised.

After captivating the country (Kenya) for several weeks, it was an anti-climax of sorts when the much talked about MoU turned out to be merely a timid piece of quid pro quo paper agreement between someone seeking votes for a top political office and a group that believes they have been treated as third-rate citizens by successive governments.

Hatred between Muslims and Christians: In the pact, copies of which were provided to the media, Raila promised to initiate within the first year of his presidency deliberate policies and programmes to redress historical, current and structural marginalisation and injustices on Muslims in Kenya. (Story by Ben Agina).

Calls in Sudan for Execution of Briton
Friday, November 30, 2007 11:21:25 AM

By MOHAMED OSMAN

Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and knives, rallied Friday in a central square and demanded the execution of a British teacher convicted of insulting Islam for allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Muhammad."

In response to the demonstration, teacher Gillian Gibbons was moved from the women's prison near Khartoum to a secret location for her safety, her lawyer said.

The protesters streamed out of mosques after Friday sermons, as pickup trucks with loudspeakers blared messages against Gibbons, who was sentenced Thursday to 15 days in prison and deportation. She avoided the more serious punishment of 40 lashes. Thousands massed in central Martyrs Square outside the presidential palace, where hundreds of riot police were deployed. They did not try to stop the rally, which lasted about an hour.

"Shame, shame on the U.K.," protesters chanted.

They called for Gibbons' execution, saying, "No tolerance: Execution," and "Kill her, kill her by firing squad."

[continues...]

Well, execution by firing squad is certainly more civilized that a videotaped beheading!  Now that's what I call bridging a religious divide!

Scott, who doesn't own a teddy bear, but if he did would name it Jesús.

Every time, I read about this woman and that teddy bear, I get a feeling that there's more to this than meets the two glass(y) teddy bear eyes.  

Nanna

Eerrh, it seems to me the two religions, besides having commonanility preceding Abraham, preaches that the universe is the creation of god. Then, we probably have to also explore the universe in order to have a better understanding. Let's see...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/eclipse_unrest_010110_wg.html MAIDUGURI, Nigeria (Reuters, Jan 2001) -- Rampaging Muslims burned down scores of hotels and bars in a northern Nigerian city in reaction to the lunar eclipse which they blamed on sinners, residents said on Wednesday.

Now, we get back down to earth and consider the worldly pleasures...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States National Prohibition was accomplished by means of the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (ratified January 29, 1919) and the Volstead Act (passed October 28, 1919). It was truly a cooperative effort with "progressives" making up a substantial portion of both major political parties. The main force were pietistic Protestants, who comprised majorities in the Republican party in the North, and the Democratic party in the South. Catholics and Germans were the main detractors; however, Germans were discredited by World War I, and their protests were ignored.

It's possible that miracles exist, but for me, this is a "miracle" that just isn't.  Saint Mary Frances of the Five Wounds of Jesus, who spent half her life in chastity, now helps childless women become pregnant.  

This is a rather interesting article, by a former professor of mine:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/cgirs/publications/gpb/GPB1.pdf

I would no more try to reason with these fanatics than I would with members of the secular utopian groups he mentions.  Al-Qaeda...just an Islamic version of Sendero Luminoso?  Of the Red Guards?

I'd like to propose a thread: Bridging the divide between civilization and savagery.

Dr. Richards asserts that as fact, yes.  I fear he succumbs to the false equivalency argument in so doing, but I confess to admiring his turn of phrase.

Wikipedia defines schizophrenia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia A person experiencing schizophrenia may demonstrate symptoms such as disorganized thinking, auditory hallucinations, and delusions.

And postulating with a fertile imagination and probable similarities on the fate of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel:

http://www5.ocn.ne.jp/~magi9/isracame.htm Yusufzai They live in Afghanistan. Yusufzai means children of Joseph. They have customs of ancient Israelites. Pathans They live in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They have the customs of circumcision on the 8th day, fringes of robe, Sabbath, Kashrut, Tefilin, etc. Kashmiri people In Kashmir they have the same land names as were in the ancient northern kingdom of Israel. They have the feast of Passover and the legend that they came from Israel.

Gee, that included those in the Pakistan-Kashmir-Afghanistan region. But the postulates regarding Japan are very interesting.

Bridging through cinema:

This Sunday morning, I will take my eldest daughter, Lucy, nearly 8, to Mass at our church down the street, as I do every week. Afterward, I will drop her off at Sunday school for First Communion preparation. Then, if she desires, I'll take her to see a movie the Catholic League is urging me to boycott, a film based on a series of books the League claims was "written to promote atheism and denigrate Christianity, especially Roman Catholicism."

The run-up to New Line's lavish adaptation of Philip Pullman's "The Golden Compass" has been marked by indignant protest from Christian quarters. The film is based on the first of Pullman's wildly successful, Whitbread and Carnegie award-winning trilogy, a series that makes generous and undeniably negative use of Catholic imagery: In "His Dark Materials," the world is run by the cruel "Magisterium" -- which happens to be the word for the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. A former nun declares, "The Christian religion is a very powerful and convincing mistake." People have animal spirit companions called, provocatively, daemons. And the author kills his God figure." http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2007/12/04/compass/index_np.html?source=newsletter

Hard to bridge, if at all:

by David Sipress

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=6G7UCRNDP97S9L836B7E99BW601DC94B&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=124686&pid=&keyword=obsession&section=cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=5&sortBy=popular ID: 124686, Published in The New Yorker December 10, 2007

Originally written by Ann-Christine Nassar - Pateffoz on December 4, 2007 6:09 AM Originally written by Shiong-Fong Lew on December 3, 2007 11:50 PM Wikipedia defines schizophrenia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia A person experiencing schizophrenia may demonstrate symptoms such as disorganized thinking, auditory hallucinations, and delusions. EXCELLENT, Shiong, excellent!!!!! The best laugh I've had for days. Ann-Christine

But since as a general rule we tend to be disorganized in our thinking and cling to versions of reality, because we must have a version, it describes the state of most human beings to varying degrees.  The first step in being able to understand others is a self-awareness of this, so that we can step beyond ourselves.

Maxi

Which is actually an excellent quick test we can run on fellows like the one in Post #134173--by asking them just one question: "Can you step beyond yourself for a moment, Sir?" and watching what they do.

Jacek

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on May 21, 2004 4:51 PM "Francis Bacon wrote in Of Atheism "A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." As you study all this in depth, do you find yourself moving toward religion or away from religion? It's hard to say. It really depends on what one's definition of religion is. Some people define religion in a rather abstract way, as the order and the harmony and the wonder of the universe. And from that point of view, yes, string theory is revealing great order, great harmony, and great beauty. So if you define religion in that way, then we are going toward it. But if you use a more conventional notion of religion, which involves some divine being that set all things up, I think the best we can say is that string theory has nothing to say about it one way or another. ..."

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on December 15, 2004 9:05 AM ....the physicist Paul Davies .... In The Mind of God he subscribes to the idea of a dipolar God who/which reconciles the cosmic necessity with contingency, order with chance. This rigorous account, while steering clear of any anecdotes or myths we celebrate around Christmas, reads like a scientific detective story. There is room for both evolution, which is a fact, and a designer universe at the same time.

I highly recommend this short companion to Dawkins: The Dawkins Delusion?

Alister E. McGrath (1953) promotes "scientific theology" and opposes atheism.

He has been highly critical of Richard Dawkins, calling him "embarrassingly ignorant of Christian theology". His book: The Dawkins Delusion? – a response to Dawkins's The God Delusion – was published by SPCK in February 2007, and the two had public debate recently on the topic, "Does religious belief damage the health of a society, or is it necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society?"[2]

He was interviewed by Richard Dawkins about his book Dawkins' God and faith in general for the television documentary The Root of All Evil? McGrath's interview was not included in the final cut, but the unedited footage is available online.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath)

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071203/pollitt

There's no question in my mind that horror at militant Islam and fear of Muslim immigration lie behind at least some of the current vogue for atheism--you don't make the bestseller list by excoriating the evils of Lutheranism or Buddhism. The problem is that the more scorn one feels for religious belief, the less able one is to appreciate "reformed" or "moderate" variants of the faith. After all, pro-gay Episcopalians and liberation theology Catholics still believe in Christ, the afterlife, sin; reformed Jews still find wisdom in the Old Testament. Strictly speaking, an atheist should have no truck with any of it. But if all you can offer people is reasons to quit their religion--which also often means their community, their family, their support system and their identity--you're not going to have many takers. For every brilliant angry teenager you strengthen in doubt, there's a mosque- or churchful of people who'll choose the old-time religion if the only other choice is nothing. ...

Because he wants to see Muslim immigrants well integrated in a Europe that currently marginalizes them, [Ian] Buruma is interested in world-famous philosopher Tariq Ramadan, who says he wants to create a modern Islam, an Islam for Muslims in the West, an Islam that would provide an alternative to the jihadist fire-breathers attractive to the disaffected young. For his profile of Ramadan in The New York Times Magazine, Buruma was attacked at tremendous length and with staggering ferocity in The New Republic by Paul Berman, who thinks Ramadan is a dangerous apologist if not a covert jihadist. Certainly (as Buruma would agree) Ramadan is no friend of women's rights. One of the more troubling charges against him is that he has called for a moratorium on stoning of unchaste women--not a ban. Ramadan justified his wording by arguing that Muslims wouldn't accept a total ban. ...

Berman and Buruma took shots at each other in a recent New York Review of Books...

* * *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GodTube

GodTube is a free video sharing website much like YouTube, but which specializes in Christian-themed videos. In particular, GodTube has been compared to Conservapedia, a Christian conservative encyclopedia opposed to Wikipedia, and MyChurch, a Christian version of MySpace.

GodTube was founded in January, 2007 .... According to comScore GodTube was the fastest growing website for the month of August, 2007.

"Intolerance is not restricted to new atheism. The same might be said of various forms of fundamentalist religion, and there is a sense in which the two extremes deserve each other. The consequences of this mutual contempt and abuse are tragic, because there is much to be learnt from the creative encounter between an evolutionary science, conscious of its own limits, and a self-critical theology, rooted in an awareness of the ultimate mystery of its subject matter."

Snippets from a review of

Tina Beattie
THE NEW ATHEISTS

John C. Lennox
GOD’S UNDERTAKER

Hans Küng
THE BEGINNING OF ALL THINGS

John Polkinghorne
FROM PHYSICIST TO PRIEST, AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

In The New Atheists, her wide-ranging survey of this scene, Tina Beattie appeals for a rediscovery of the forgotten art of conversation, the quiet and courteous voice of wisdom, and the value of kindness in our dealings with one another”. It is clear that this is not where the protagonists are at present, but Beattie’s book provides a useful guide towards mutual understanding. ...

John Lennox, is an Oxford mathematician, and sets out to tackle the new atheists head on. My guess is that he would find Beattie too ready to understand her opponents, and not forceful enough in proposing counter-arguments. ...

Hans Küng, the eminent Roman Catholic theologian, has written what he describes as “a short book on the meaning of the universe”, .... He also draws an interesting parallel between cosmology and Gödel’s famous incompleteness theorem. The latter is a mathematical proof that no system of axioms can prove itself as being free from contradiction. Nor, says Küng, can a theory of the universe. The point was originally made by Stephen Hawking, who admitted that he had given up his quest for a “grand unified theory of everything” on the grounds that we are part of it. Any explanation which tries to include the observer doing the explaining must necessarily be incomplete. Add to this Popper’s dictum about the tentativeness of all scientific statements as being falsifiable but not ultimately provable, and the limitations of our knowledge become all too apparent. Both scientists and theologians, in other words, and even popes, need to accept their fallibility. ...

John Polkinghorne is a safer guide. His autobiography, From Physicist to Priest, is as charming and humble as the man himself. A scholarship in mathematics to Trinity College, Cambridge, set him on course; a post-doctoral fellowship took him to California, where he was a member of the team working on particle physics at a crucial stage in the development of the so-called Standard Model of the physical structure of matter; and at the age of thirty-eight he was back in Cambridge as the first holder of the newly established chair of Mathematical Physics. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society at the age of forty-four, and, three years later, offered himself for ordination in the Church of England. ...

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/the_tls/article3040291.ece

Originally written by Harry Bornemann on December 13, 2007 6:13 PM ".... and you are really sure that your plane will go in 1 hour?" and he had to admit: "Yes, I am sure about that..."

Today that's still in the realm of probability... A high one, but it's still a bet. Which put's it close to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager 

Jacek

Theologian John Haught explains why science and God are not at odds in http://goodjesuitbadjesuit.blogspot.com/2007/12/fr-john-haught-sj-on-why-he-thinks-like.html (originally in Salon.com, but with all the required clicking on sponsor logos there, I end up being unable to read that magazine):

John Haught has set out to answer by proposing a "theology of evolution." Haught is a Roman Catholic theologian at Georgetown University and a prolific author. His books include(review) "God After Darwin," "Is Nature Enough?" and the forthcoming "God and the New Atheism." He's steeped in evolutionary theory as well as Christian theology. Haught believes Darwin is "a gift to theology." He says evolutionary biology has forced modern theologians to clarify their thinking by rejecting outdated arguments about God as an intrusive designer. Haught reclaims the theology of his intellectual hero, Jesuit priest and paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who died more than half a century ago. Teilhard believed that we live in a universe evolving toward ever greater complexity and, ultimately, to consciousness.
Haught is an intriguing figure in the debate over evolution. He was the only theologian to testify as an expert witness in the landmark 2005 Dover trial that ruled against teaching intelligent design in public schools. Haught testified against intelligent design, arguing that it's both phony science and bad theology. But Haught is also a fierce critic of hardcore atheists like Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, who claim that evolution leads logically to atheism. He says both sides place too much faith in science. "Ironically," Haught writes, "ID advocates share with their ideological enemies, the evolutionary materialists, the assumption that science itself can provide ultimate explanations."

1. Sip the vodka, don't gulp.

2. There are 10 commandments, not 12.

3. There are 12 disciples, not 10.

4. Jesus was consecrated, not constipated.

5. Jacob wagered his donkey. He did not beat his ass.

6. We do not refer to Jesus Christ as the late J.C.

7. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not referred to as Daddy, Junior, and the Spook.

8. David slew Goliath. He did not kick the shit out of him.

9. When David was hit by a rock and knocked off his donkey, don't say he was stoned off his ass.

10. We do not refer to the cross as the "Big T."

11. When Jesus broke the bread at the Last Supper he said, " Take this and eat it for it is my body." He did not say, "Eat me!"

12. The Virgin Mary is not called "Mary with the cherry."

13. The recommended grace before a meal is not: Rub-A-Dub-Dub thanks for the grub, yay God.

14. Next Sunday, there will be a taffy pulling contest at St. Peter's, not a peter pulling contest at St. Taffy's.

In 2001, the Supreme Court of the United States concurred with District Judge Susan Dlott that the declaration of Christmas Day as a federal holiday did not violate the US constitution of separating church and state.

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1024822 http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/ganul3.htm http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/case/25.html One is never jailed For not having a tree For not going to church For not spreading glee! The court will uphold Seemingly contradictory causes Decreeing "The establishment" AND "Santa" both worthwhile "CLAUS(es)!"

In 1990, the US Supreme Court ruled that banning flag-burning violated provisions for free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/faclibrary/case.aspx?case=US_v_Eichman

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/faclibrary/case.aspx?case=TX_v_Johnson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Eichman

Join a liberal sect? Sure, there will be openness, but probably not much holy mystery. Conservative religion offers spiritual intensity, but also the very exclusiveness that makes many cringe. The New Age welcomes everything, but its mix-and-match attitude often feels less authentic than immersion in an established tradition.

Then there’s Perennialism, a lesser-known tendency in religious thinking that was set in motion by an idiosyncratic French writer named René Guénon (1886–1951), developed by Frithjof Schuon (1907–98), and is fostered today by a small group of writers, philosophers, and professors of comparative religion.

On the one hand, Perennialism rejects a modern world that has slipped off the rails. Yet it also embraces all variations of Christian, Muslim, and Jewish faith, as well as Asian religions and indigenous schools of thought. Perennialists believe that all religions are part of one great religion; that all wisdom makes up a great river of truth that all modern people should return to for what the Gospels call “living water.”

Will they be able to bridge the divide?

Passing through a tiny "Door of Humility", U.S. President George W. Bush made a pilgrimage to the traditional birthplace of Jesus on Thursday in the West Bank. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=943680&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1

In other news Pat Robertson's New Year's Forecast: "China Will Be The Largest Christian Nation On Earth"

Funny to see how GWB needs to show his humility...

Jacek, don't you have some other Buddhist quote about those who speak and don't do, those who are arrogant etc... and the ones like me who point their finger at those?

Laurent

Frankly, do we need a quote for hubris?

"What I'm praying about is China. I'm asking for 250 million in China. We haven't had that breakthrough yet but I think we're going to get it. God's going to give us China. And China will be the largest Christian nation on the face of the earth. They're going to come to Jesus."

Pat Robertson's New Year's Forecast: "China Will Be The Largest Christian Nation On Earth"

 

 

19

All dharma agrees at one point

COMMENTARY

The entire Buddhist teachings (dharma) are about lessening one's self absorption, one's ego-clinging. This is what brings happiness to you and all beings.

--Pema Chodron

http://euobserver.com/9/25457

Syria's grand mufti, the country's top religious authority, Sheik Ahmad Bader Hassoun, on Tuesday (14 January) was the first of a series of religious and state leaders to address MEPs in the context of the newly launched "European Year of Intercultural Dialogue". ...

The European Parliament's draft guest list of speakers to the debates on religion, put together by the leaders of the seven political groups represented in the house, has caused outrage among MEPs, as not a single woman is to be found on the list. ...

Dutch Liberal MEP Sophie in 't Veld asked why in approving the list as part of the Year of Intercultural Dialogue, the group leaders had interpreted this exclusively as being an "inter-religious monologue". ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,2244151,00.html

The long-standing antagonism between Germany and the Church of Scientology escalated over the weekend when a high-profile historian compared Tom Cruise's performance in a Scientology video with the style of the Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels.

Guido Knopp, who has written a number of books on Hitler and his inner circle, said the video, which surfaced on YouTube last week, "inevitably" recalled Goebbels' speech in a Berlin sports stadium when he asked "Do you want total war?" and the crowd thundered "Yes!"

"The intention is to create self-confidence and reconciliation with the environment," Paina explains. "We want these kids to challenge themselves. …

Tunisian theologian Amel Grami speaks about tendencies toward re-Islamization among Tunisian women. She explains: "An entire generation of young people have no more dreams, no more ideals, no more future. They simply sense that we have failed. Many of my students understand quite well that a master's degree in Arabic literature isn't worth anything these days. These young people feel humiliated in their own countries. Until a few years ago, young people who felt that their own societies did not respect them would emigrate. Today, the borders are increasingly blocked, and anyone who manages to go to Europe has a tough row to hoe, as an Arab and Muslim. Today, these young people know that they have no hope. And so they escape into religion." Neue Zürcher Zeitung (Switzerland) http://europe.courrierinternational.com/eurotopics/article.asp?langue=uk&publication=21/01/2008&cat=REFLECTIONS&pi=1#1

http://www.utne.com/2008-22-08/Spirituality/In-Gods-Name.aspx?utm_content=1%2F23%2F08+Spirituality+++&utm_campaign=Spirituality&utm_source=iPost&utm_medium=email

The gender-specific words “Father,” “King,” and “Lord” are often used in hymn and liturgy when referring to a Christian God. Feminist theologian Elizabeth Johnson, interviewed in U.S. Catholic magazine, is trying to change that. Johnson objects to more than the perception of God as a male (read: worldly and finite) being. She also takes issue with the paternalistic view of religion that the words instill. According to Johnson, the gendered language reinforces outdated perceptions of God that are straining the vital connection between people and spirituality.

* * *

...vs. bridging through conversion: http://www.utne.com/2008-01-21/Spirituality/Jewish-Converts-Seeking-Converts.aspx?utm_content=1%2F23%2F08+Spirituality+++&utm_campaign=Spirituality&utm_source=iPost&utm_medium=email

Jennifer Siegel reports in the Forward [on] 55 African American converts to Judaism....

Matthews and his fellow converts haven’t abandoned all areas of evangelical emphasis, however. In fact, they’re now actively seeking more members. ...

The belief that one’s primary spiritual responsibility is converting others is common in evangelical circles but hardly a central tenet of Judaism. ...

The Gospel reaches out via text messaging

http://www.dailyestimate.com/article.asp?idarticle=13836

Not much bridging this time.

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on January 25, 2008 12:53 PM there is enough evidence to demonstrate that Jesus did in fact not only exist, but was crucified and then seen by over 500 people, on several occasions, after this event. In matters of faith you cannot prove or disprove anything. That kind of test simply does not apply there, unless metaphorically. We can only use litmus paper, for example, to test for chemical acidity or basicity, period. Yet we use the "litmus test" metaphorically to test just about anything else in life. While man simply could not live without mythos, it is important to keep the mythos and logos separate in our minds (see Karen Armstrong elsewhere on TC).

The spirituality website Beliefnet is running a series of images, uploaded by their readers, of what Jesus looks like: http://www.utne.com/2008-01-29

* * *

Over the years, the idea that incontrovertible proof isn’t really the point of faith has had some trouble sinking in. Nowhere is this more evident than in the persistent efforts by some believers to prove the accuracy of detailed scriptural accounts via archeological or geological evidence. Even the attempts that aren’t outright hoaxes are often pretty unpersuasive—requiring great leaps of faith. http://www.utne.com/2008-01-30

* * *

Jan.-Feb. issue of Mother Jones provides a financial narrative that hinges more squarely on the Good Book. Mariah Blake reports on apocalypse-minded evangelicals defrauded by Ness Energy International, a company claiming access to untapped Israeli oil fields. Faithful investors believed the tall tales of unknown reserves because of Biblical hints that the discovery of Israeli oil signals Armageddon. The prophesized oil was never found, and many investors were swindled out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Still, some continue to display a strange optimism: http://www.utne.com/2008-01-28

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/04/news

In his January/February cover story, “A World Without Islam,” Graham Fuller takes issue with those who blame religion for the rift between East and West. He imagines what the world have looked like without Islam—and argues that it would look much the same.

Graham E. Fuller is a former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council at the CIA in charge of long-range strategic forecasting. He is currently adjunct professor of history at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver. He is the author of numerous books about the Middle East, including The Future of Political Islam (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003).

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4149

From the people who brought you the Creation Museum, the newest, peer-reviewed, creationist research journal has just gone live. It's called Answers Research Journal, published by the organization Answers in Genesis. So far the journal has tackled some tough questions, including: How do germs fit into the story of Adam and Eve?

For a different take on the birth of the universe, LiveScience has a list of the top ten creation myths. The question posed is: Did Norse bulls create the earth, or was it the work of Chinese cosmic eggs?

http://www.utne.com/2008-02-05/Science-Technology/Creationist-Science-Journal-Created

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2254592,00.html

The Archbishop of Canterbury drew criticism from across the political spectrum last night after he backed the introduction of sharia law in Britain and argued that adopting some aspects of it seemed "unavoidable". Rowan Williams, the most senior figure in the Church of England, said that giving Islamic law official status in the UK would help to achieve social cohesion because some Muslims did not relate to the British legal system.

Ministers cool on archbishop's sharia suggestion

Leader: Sharia and the state

Full text: The Archbishop of Canterbury's speech

Q&A: Sharia law

Andrew Brown: Laws of the land

Suddenly, I'm awake. Fer crying out loud.

International attention alone saved the teacher from publicly receiving 40 lashes for having named a teddy bear after the Prophet. I guess the British teacher didn't relate to Sharia Law.

If Muslims want to live in a country where there's a clear separation between church and state shouldn't they abide by the law?

I'd love to know how the international community (e.g. EU) would react if British Law sentenced a Muslim to 40 lashes while tied to a pole in Kensington Square.

Nanna

Made me shiver at the very thought of the Pole being in upper case...

Time to leave the cave?

Jacek

Yes, unless you have a cartoon that fits exactly ...

Nanna, playing doubful thomas

Thomas, Thomas...

by Leo Cullum

http://www.thenewyorkerstore.com

You called...?

Nanna

Originally written by Harry Bornemann on February 8, 2008 7:04 AM We don't need that - we have our Sado Maso Shows on Techno Love Parades and Carnival.

And wild 'gothic' youngsters running through our streets...

A comment loosely related to the emergence of language (Post #138132) and dealing with (small) people in the hope of persuading them to stop using lashes... From http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health:

Originally written by Jacek Krankowski on February 8, 2008 3:05 PM In his latest book, “The Happiest Toddler on the Block,” Dr. Karp .... redefines what being a toddler means. In his view, toddlers are not just small people. In fact, for all practical purposes, they’re not even small Homo sapiens.  “All of us get more primitive when we get upset, that’s why they call it ‘going ape,’ ” Dr. Karp says.

Interesting, Jacek. My German Shepherd, now almost two years old, has been a trial. Had I known how difficult it would be to teach this incredibly sweet, but huge and totally unafraid animal how to behave I would never...

New research shows that dogs and especially the very intelligent Shepherd, must be treated with care and consideration. Hmph...try being pulled along the street by 42kg of brute strength. Anything I knew about training dogs (and I have had a few) was completely useless. Imagine walking this huge dog several times a day and having your arms, your shoulders, your hips and your knees completely pulled to smitherens. I could barely keep my temper.

Then one day, 18 months later, I lost it...yank & smack...I yanked on the chain and then smacked her on the nose. Guess what happened. She's walked like a dream ever since. No more pulling.

I am NOT advocating constant or even daily yanking and smacking...but in the case of Aria this got her attention. She's a dog not a child...

CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE YANKED AND/OR SMACKED.

Nanna

Originally written by John Kinory on February 8, 2008 3:06 PM Rowan is a well-known tosser with an IQ well below room temperature, a laughing stock even among many of his own hierarchy.

Is this how he became "the most senior figure" in his Organization?

J.

Of course they should, like any other non Muslim living in a Muslim country and abiding by its law, for that matter.

Ann-Christine

What could be better? Bridging through the Bible...

The Bible as Graphic Novel, With a Samurai Stranger Called Christ

"Ajinbayo Akinsiku wants the world to know Jesus Christ, just not the gentle, blue-eyed Christ of old Hollywood movies and illustrated Bibles.

Mr. Akinsiku says his Son of God is “a samurai stranger who’s come to town, in silhouette,” here to shake things up in a new, much-abridged version of the Bible rooted in manga, the Japanese form of graphic novels.

“We present things in a very brazen way,” said Mr. Akinsiku, who hopes to become an Anglican priest and who is the author of “The Manga Bible: From Genesis to Revelation.” “Christ is a hard guy, seeking revolution and revolt, a tough guy.”

[…]

In the Manga Bible, whose heroes look and sound like skateboarders in Bedouin gear, Noah gets tripped up counting the animals in the Ark: “That’s 11,344 animals? Arggh! I’ve lost count again. I’m going to have to start from scratch!”

Abraham rides a horse out of an explosion to save Lot. Og, king of Bashan, looms like an early Darth Vader. The Sermon on the Mount did not make the book, though, because there was not enough action to it."

[…]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/us/10manga.html

Nanna 

Originally written by John Kinory on February 8, 2008 9:06 AM Rowan is a well-known tosser with an IQ well below room temperature, a laughing stock even among many of his own hierarchy. Fortunately, anything he suggests is likely to happen is almost certainly never going to happen. The patience of the English has been stretched to breaking point, something that few outsiders are able to see, and I predict it snapping within a few years. Any attempt to introduce aspects of Sharia may be the last straw. The snapping could become ugly, but imo it's inevitable.

Hmmm....  In the US, of course, there is a major constitutional impediment our "sharia-advocating friends" would have to try to surmount — the Second Amendment.

Okay, Scott, I'll bite. How does it relate?

The Second Amendment to the United States' Constitution - Bill of Rights.

[...]

"In the early months of 1789, the United States was engaged in an ideological conflict between Federalists, who favored a stronger central government, and Antifederalists, who were skeptical of a strong central government. This conflict was accentuated by the recent news of a brewing, potentially violent revolution in France with similar Antifederal tensions. Also, the conflict in beliefs continued between northern states, that generally favored Federalist values, and southern states, that tended to share Antifederalist values.

Intense concerns gripped the country of the potential for success or failure of the newly-formed United States. The first presidential inauguration of George Washington had occurred just a few short weeks earlier. A spirited public concern and debate from this time is captured in numerous heated newspaper articles, personal diaries, and letters from this pivotal time in United States history.

Antifederalists supported the proposal to amend the Constitution with clearly-defined and enumerated rights to provide further constraints on the new government, while opponents felt that by listing only certain rights, other unlisted rights would fail to be protected. Amidst this debate, a compromise was reached, and James Madison drafted what ultimately became the United States Bill of Rights, which was proposed to the Congress on June 8, 1789.

The original text of what was to become the Second Amendment, as brought to the floor to the first session of the first congress of the U.S. House of Representatives, was:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person. ^[27] "

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution}

Nanna

I just meant that our having an armed citizenry probably would foreclose any attempt to foist that, um, "legal tradition" on us.

Have you no faith in the Federal Judiciary?

Nanna

I prefer to say confidence rather than faith, but sure.  I just consider the 200 million firearms in private hands in the US excellent insurance. 

Rowan Williams is a typical "useful idiot," in the Leninist sense.  Thirty years ago people of his kind were telling us that we must get used to living in a world in which communism was ascendant.  Now they're carrying water for a different totalitarian ideology.  I can't guess at what the "new" version will be 30 years hence, but I'm sure that an Archbishop of Canterbury will be trying to get us to reconcile ourselves to it, while editorial writers at The Guardian will be guilt-tripping us for not actively advocating it.

Originally written by Salmaan Kureemun on February 11, 2008 4:27 PM  An excerpt from the site: "Sara Hadi and Rebecca Katz, two Muslim and Jewish graduates from the Al-Iman School and the Abraham Joshua Heschel School in NY, partnered and produced a ten-minute documentary upon their graduation from the Unity Program, a full-year high school course that educate Muslim and Jewish students about Islam and Judaism while strengthening the relationships students have to their own religious tradition." Youtube video:

I find these initiatives excellent. Thank you for sharing this with us, Salmaan.

Ann-Christine

But Kenya is essentially multi-confessional, and there was no (I'm supposing) tradition of civil law before the British instituted one.  And...Williams is talking about introducing an alien, non-democratic legal regime into Britain.  Big difference, imj.

Also: Do Kenyan citizens not also have a right of appeal to the civil system?  If so, the civil system is the system of last resort.

Question for people who advocate this "tradition" for use in Western countries: Why would you even want to live among people whose mores and institutions you revile?  If you want sharia courts, why not move to one of the many majority-Muslim lands that have them?

I just found out something about Theocracies who missed the Age of Enlightment...

Which US state constitutions exclude Atheists from holding public office?

Answer: Texas, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Arkansas, Maryland, Pennslyvania.

Here's exactly what Tennessee's constitution says:

ARTICLE I
Declaration of Rights
Section 4. That no political or religious test, other than an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and of this state, shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this state.

BUT then it also says:

ARTICLE IX
Disqualifications
Section 2: No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.

******
Article 19, § 1 of Arkansas's constitution provides:

No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court.

*********
Article VI, § 2 of South Carolina's constitution says this:

No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.
********
North Carolina
"The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...." Constitution Article 6 Section 8

**********
Texas
"No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being." Article 1 - Bill of Rights: Section 4

Double check that last sentence - contradictions ahoy!!
********
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/481749

Texas
"No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being." Article 1 - Bill of Rights: Section 4

Double check that last sentence - contradictions ahoy!!
********
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/481749

Why so surprised, knowing that Bush was the head of this state!  The constitution has to make sense to him, not to you!

Liliana

Liliana,

As you will see from the quote below, Bush (as the governor of Texas) played no role in amendments to the Constitution.

Article 17: "Mode of amending the Constitution of this State"

Article 17 consists of a single section that prescribes the procedure for amending the constitution. The legislature, by a two-thirds vote of the membership of each house, may propose amendments in either regular or special session. Amendments in a special session must relate to one of the purposes for which the governor has called the session. An amendment becomes part of the constitution when approved by a majority of the persons voting in a statewide election. The governor has no role in this process (s/he neither approves nor vetoes them). The constitution does not provide for amendment by initiative or any other means of amendment; only the Legislature may propose them.

The section also prescribes specific details for notifying the public of elections to approve amendment. It requires that the legislature publish a notice in officially approved newspapers that briefly summarizes each amendment and shows how each amendment will be described on the ballot. It also requires that the full text of each amendment be posted at each county courthouse at least 50 days (but no sooner than 60 days) before the election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Constitution

Nanna

Nanna,

That was my feeble attempt to being funny - sorry it didn't work out! I promise I will not try again, ok?

There existed unwritten customary laws in Kenya even before 1890. However, these were not in a structured and systematic manner and varied from custom to custom. Please note that the British laws were instituted because Kenya had been declared part of the british protectorate and was mandated to create its political borders. And yet there is sufficient proof to show that the British laws had serious weaknesses and did not address the conditions of the natives as they leaned towards protecting the welfare of the white settlers.

http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Kenya.htm

Before 1895, when Kenya was declared a British Protectorate, the country had no structured legal system to speak of. The territory had been administered via the Imperial British East Africa Company, which 'had to carry out all the obligations undertaken by the British Government under any treaty or agreement made with another state...'

Pastor Paul Wirth suggests bridging through sex.

To avoid divorce, strengthen their bond and their connection to the Lord, married couples should have sex every day for the next 30 days. Singles should abstain and while doing so think about what they want in a relationship 

http://www.relevantchurch.com/ via http://politiken.dk/udland/article473421.ece

Nanna

Does this include or exclude the worship/the acknowledgement of a Supreme Being under the form of Lucifer/Satan/Belzebub... and allies or copies, or Man Himself being Satan and therefore the Supreme Being?

@ Harry: I guess their impossibility to give a clear answer to this question could somehow explain the problems they have in Iran.

"In these islands people of all faith--Hindus, Muslim, Christians, Sikhs, etc., and of all languages like Hindi, Bengali, Malayalm, Tamil, Telugu, Punjabi, Nicobari, etc., live together in complete peace and harmony. Inter-religion and inter-regional marriages are common. This amazing racial and cultural mix is aptly described as 'Mini-India'."

Jacek (awaiting a flight out of a corner between Myanmar, Bangladesh and Indonesia)

By underlining that religions share amusing commonalities?

Israel lawmaker (from Orthodox religious party) blames earthquake in Israel on homosexuality.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/956423.html Benizri's defense can be described as: "It wasn't me, it was the Gemara!" He was referring to a discussion in the Jerusalem Talmud about the causes of earthquakes and which, in one passage, makes a link between gay sex, God's wrath and earthquakes. In which case, Ophir Pines-Paz (Labor) wittily replied: "Then change the Gemara." Reform Rabbi Gilad Kariv said that the "only organ that shook the Knesset was Benizri's unrestrained tongue."

http://www.hindustantimes.com

Fatwa against terrorism

Darul Uloom of Deoband, one of Islam’s most influential schools of thought to which even Afghanistan’s Taliban owe academic allegiance, will for the first time declare acts of terrorism to be against the religion, a top cleric told the Hindustan Times on Tuesday.

The declaration will come on February 25 at the end of a day-long seminar in Deoband, to be attended by representatives of nearly 6,000 madrasas from across the country, including those from other Muslim sects such as the Barelvi school, and foreign delegates.

“A declaration will be issued to the effect that all acts of terrorism are patently anti-Islamic in light of the Chapter 5 of the Quran (Al-Maidah) which clearly prohibits killing of innocent people,” said cleric and vice-rector of Darul Uloom, Maulana Abdul Khaleque Madrasi.

The Islamic seminary founded in 1866 has always been in the news for its far-reaching “fatwas”. The latest proclamation prepared by the seminary, which Hindustan Times has access to, states: “All acts of terrorism are anti-Islamic.” The declaration also states that anybody involved in acts of terror anywhere will qualify to be called a non-Muslim. Moreover, the declaration will include a hidayat (advice), asking all “Muslims to stay away from terrorists and terror organisations”. …

The Darul Uloom has been in talks with Islamic scholars across the world to arrive at a consensus on issues like terrorism and whether such tools of violence are just, a seminary official said.

The declaration would be similar to a fatwa, or a religious edict. “A fatwa is a legal opinion issued when the seminary is approached by any Muslim. …

Groping for bridges: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/us/25cnd-religion

If shifts among Protestant denominations are included, then it appears that 44 percent of Americans have switched religious affiliations. ...

The report shows, for example, that every religion is losing and gaining members, but that the Roman Catholic Church “has experienced the greatest net losses as a result of affiliation changes.” The survey also indicates that the group that had the greatest net gain was the unaffiliated. More than 16 percent of American adults say they are not part of any organized faith, which makes the unaffiliated the country’s fourth largest “religious group.”

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10754916&fsrc=nwl

IN JUST about every dialogue between the great religions of the world there are points of striking commonality and points of sharp contrast. Both extremes are almost certain to come up whenever Muslims and Jews get together and try talking theology.

This week saw the latest such attempt at an exchange of ideas, as an open letter from leading Muslim scholars to the Jewish community was unveiled in Cambridge, Britain. It follows a somewhat similar initiative that was launched last October, when 138 leading Muslims wrote to the leaders of the Christian world, proposing a formal dialogue based on the commandments of Jesus to love God and one another. The original letter was entitled “A Common Word between Us and You”. At first the Vatican reacted coolly, but Pope Benedict XVI eventually agreed to receive some of the signatories.

The signatories of this week’s letter include Tariq Ramadan, an influential scholar and teacher among Western (especially west European) Muslims; Mustafa Ceric, the grand mufti of Bosnia; and Sari Nusseibeh, a Palestinian professor from al-Quds university in Jerusalem. “As Muslims and Jews we share core doctrinal beliefs, the most important of which is strict monotheism”, the missive states—after explaining that it is being published “as a gesture of goodwill towards rabbinic leaders and the wider Jewish communities of the world.”

The background to the gesture is a broad effort to seek out those points of commonality between religions. For Muslims and Jews there is much to agree upon, but also much to dispute. The Hebrew patriarchs, including Abraham, Moses and Noah, play an important role in the Koran (as does Jesus, the son of Mary); but there are differences in the Muslim and Jewish narratives which are certainly not trivial for anyone who regards these stories as primordial revelations of God. The Koran makes plain that the sacred writings of the Jews offer a valid path to salvation; yet there is also a clear suggestion in the Muslim tradition that the Jews, along with the Christians, misunderstood or even wilfully distorted the messages that they received from God—making a final revelation, that of Mohammed, vitally necessary.

In recent years, theological differences between Muslims and Jews have been complicated (putting it mildly) by geopolitical ones, as both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (and their respective supporters around the world) present their case in ever more explicitly religious terms. However far they are from Jerusalem, Muslims and Jews find their diametrically opposing views of the Middle Eastern conflict get in the way of their attempts to discuss more universal themes, such as revelation or morality.

Even when the two sides are doing their best to be polite to one another, Middle Eastern matters rear up. In 2004, for example, a prominent British Jew and veteran of inter-faith work, Sir Sigmund Sternberg, withdrew an award he had earlier offered to Iqbal Sacranie, who was then head of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB): this was in protest at a statement by the council which denounced Israel’s “murderous” leaders and accused them of “ethnic cleansing”. (Not that all the news in Britain’s inter-faith scene is bad. This year the MCB attended an event on Holocaust Memorial Day, discreetly reversing a boycott which had deeply offended Jews.)

There have been some positive Jewish reactions to the letter this week: Rabbi David Rosen, who advises the chief rabbinate of Israel on inter-faith matters, said the initiative was especially welcome because the “remarkable co-operation and cross-fertilisation” which had often existed between Muslims and Jews had been “tragically overshadowed” by modern politics. The letter was launched in the civilised environment of the Centre for the Study of Muslim-Jewish Relations in Cambridge. How it will play in some of the wilder places where Islam and Judaism stand face to face is a harder question.

Will see later this month whether the Second Amendment supports an absolute right to possess the weapons of one's choice: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120459428907209205.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

Sanity and the Second Amendment

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral argument later this month in a politically charged gun-control case from the District of Columbia. The case involves a city resident who contends that the District is violating his rights under the Second Amendment with a citywide ban on handguns.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/05/religion.israelandthepalestinians

We all know that Moses was high on Mount Sinai when God spoke to him, but were the Ten Commandments a result of divine inspiration alone?

An Israeli researcher is claiming in a study published this week the prophet may have been stoned when he set the Ten Commandments in stone.

According to Benny Shanon, a professor of cognitive psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, psychedelic drugs formed an integral part of the religious rites of Israelites in biblical times.

Sounds like something written by Carlos Castaneda, author of several books on the Yaqui Indians.

"Castaneda wrote twelve books and several academic articles detailing his experiences with a Yaqui Indian from northern Mexico. His first three books, The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge, A Separate Reality and Journey to Ixtlan were written while Castaneda was an anthropology student at UCLA. Castaneda wrote these books as if they were his research log describing his apprenticeship with a traditional "Man of Knowledge" identified as don Juan Matus. Castaneda was awarded his bachelor's and doctoral degrees for the work described in these books." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Castaneda

Nanna