The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
We are all gay: In praise of Pluralism
Front-Ranger:
I listened to a discussion yesterday on Talk of the Nation with the guest Eboo Patel, which was moving and insightful. Some of his comments seemed to have a place here. He was talking about religions, but any area of the human experience could be substituted, such as gay, straight, and all of the nuances in between. Here are a few of his comments from the transcript, which is here.
"I think that we need to have a different framework going into the 21st century. It's a pluralism versus extremism framework. There are Muslims who believe in pluralism. There are Jews who believe in pluralism. There humanists and Hindus and Buddhist and Baihais who believe in pluralism, and anybody who seeks to destroy pluralism deserves one label only and that label is extremist. And we should not honor them with the label of American or Muslim or Jewish, et cetera. We should just call them extremists and we should treat them as such."
Front-Ranger:
Here is another of his comments:
"...some religious communities have the misfortune of having their public perception characterized by the worst people in their community.... I think that we saw this played out in the previous presidential campaign. I was aghast at the way that people went after Obama because of his Muslim grandfather, but I was equally aghast at the way that people went after Sarah Palin because of her Pentecostal faith and went after Mitt Romney because of his Mormon faith.
In America there is no religious test for office, and in America bigotry or prejudice of any type should not be tolerated. We should be raising a generation of people, as Ryan just said, who have the knowledge base and the courage and the skill set to stand up against religious prejudice and say that's un-American. "
Sheriff Roland:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on December 10, 2009, 11:19:57 am --- and anybody who seeks to destroy pluralism deserves one label only and that label is extremist. We should just call them extremists and we should treat them as such."
--- End quote ---
wow!!
That's what I call an extremist point of view. Can't say I agree with this statement.
Front-Ranger:
Please elaborate. Looking forward to your thoughts.
delalluvia:
I think that we saw this played out in the previous presidential campaign. I was aghast at the way that people went after Obama because of his Muslim grandfather, but I was equally aghast at the way that people went after Sarah Palin because of her Pentecostal faith and went after Mitt Romney because of his Mormon faith
I think some people targeted Sarah and Mitt (I do not include Obama because he was not the target and the people who did target him for 'his' Muslim religion were in error) because their religions are not pluralistic. They are exclusive religions. There is an in-group and an out-group. They are, by their very nature, intolerant. Worship like this, follow these rules or face the consequences. Our country is still struggling under the restrictive laws enforced by similar religious beliefs.
So people who 'went after' Sarah and Mitt did so because they were for pluralism and not for extremists as Patel defines it. You want pluralism in religion, you're only going to find it in eastern, pagan and Unitarian style religions.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version