Religious and secular entitlement plus stupidity in the Middle East

"something whispered in the big ears of georgio and told him to invade iraq and accomplish the liberation job,the job accomplished on the skulls of more than 5 million people ,
much more than what the secular communist sadam killed in his entire life system."

Oh. So G.W. didn't credit the decision to invade to "a higher father?"

"haveaheart, sorry for misspelling your pseudonym. For some reason Mr. Gibson entered my head, I guess. In any case what are your thoughts on the post itself?
Posted by: Secular | June 14, 2010 9:13 AM"

Ouch! Secular, I hope you're not suggesting that anything I've posted reeks of MG's religiosity.

As to my thoughts on your post, I don't really have any. As I said, your comments were unrelated to my point, which was that organized religions, in general, have the perspective that theirs is the Only True Way.

The question of whether a religion is genuinely monotheistic is less interesting to me than how the religion views itself -- and represents itself.

haveaheart, sorry for misspelling your pseudonym. For some reason Mr. Gibson entered my head, I guess. In any case what are your thoughts on the post itself?

tale of 2 secularism.

sadam and georgio,

sadam is muslim but secular in state and government,(secular communist).

georgio is christian but secular in state and government,(secular capatalist).

something whispered in the big ears of georgio and told him to invade iraq and accomplish the liberation job,the job accomplished on the skulls of more than 5 million people ,
much more than what the secular communist sadam killed in his entire life system.

nothing failed not only the mid east but the entire world like the savage and stupid secularism.

secular hypocrtical heads need to study the bloody secular russia (secular communism),and compare it to the bloody secular united states of america(secular capatalism).

nothing fail mankind and nations like hypocrisy .

Walter,

I don't know what happened to Schaum. He last posted on April 13th, which was also when he last emailed me. He said he'd had a headache for days that he couldn't shake. He also said he had a doctors' appointment.

At all events, some of us have emailed him--DITLD, yours truly. In fact, I try to email him once a week.

DITLD and I combed the obits, found nothing, thank Non.

Hopefully, Schaum is off with Christian in Austria entertaining Elizabeth Taylor.

F

Secular,

I've no objection to your using something I've said as the jumping-off point for a completely unrelated post. But could you please get my name right?

It's not "Brave Heart." It's "haveaheart."

Secular,

I've no objection to your using something I've said as the jumping-off point for a completely unrelated post. But could you please get my name right?

It's not "Brave Heart." It's "haveaheart."

farnaz,
whence schaum? last i remember he was mia.

hi farnaz, long time no dispute....

haveaheart,
you are correct. farnaz is indeed hypersensitive to anything jewish... one of her charmingly crazy characteristics... she's really pretty rational in other respects...

Brave heart you wrote:
"Everything I said applies to all organized religion, with an emphasis on Islam, Judaism, and Christianity (the primary monotheistic religions of our time)."

I do not wish to make this into a critique or get into a heated battle about theology. However, I would like to pursue this as a simple academic discussion of the contents of the so called holy books.

Of these three religions, I really consider that Islam is the only one which is monotheistic. Both Judaism, & Christianity do concede the existence of other gods. My reasons being the old testament is replete with the citations of gods of other peoples, such as Egyptian, Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines, Greeks, Romans, etc, etc. It does not say they are false gods, it mentions those other gods as if they exist. Only thing the OT god of the Hebrews claims is that he is their only god and that he would be very p*&&ed off if the hebrews stop worshiping him and preferring the other gods. Also he does not care much for the others to start worshiping him either. In my book mono-theism implies that there is but one and only one god in the entire universe. The OT god is a explicitly a very parochial god. Who concedes that others have their gods and the Hebrews have him as their god. He is jealously possessive of his people, and does not desire other gods' people, to worship him.

In case of Christians with the trinity and the fact that they loudly protest that their god is Abraham's god, there need be no more justification that it is also not a monotheistic religion.

In case of Islam, it proclaims loudly that there is only one god and that is allah. Altough they too claim clearly that their god is Abraham's god, they also proclaim that the Hebrews and Christians had corrupted the revelation almost immediately. Purely taking the claims of these three religions i come to the conclusion that only Islam is a true monotheistic religion, by definition. The other two are indeed polytheistic religions. I would like to hear from folks on this blog if my analysis is wrong.

Next issue always bugs me is about the Muslims, who claim that the god is perfect. Then again claim that the revelation was immediately corrupted by the Hebrews and Christians. How do they square that with their perfect god concept. Here is the perfect go had revealed something not once but twice and got corrupted. What kind of perfect god is this guy? Islamists on this blog can you try to rationalize this?

because of their respective aggrieved histories, or because Yahweh and Allah have have singled them out. Fat chance. It is simply nauseating to hear politicians talk mellifluously about "this land sacred to three great religions," That, gentle readers, is the problem--not the solution. Until we all give up these delusions about specialness, sanctity and entitlement, there will be no peace settlement. Now, with the rise of international Islamic

Farnaz,

What makes you think I'm non-Jewish?

Nowhere in my post is there a specific reference to Judaism, either overt or implied. Everything I said applies to all organized religion, with an emphasis on Islam, Judaism, and Christianity (the primary monotheistic religions of our time).

When I use the term "chosen people," I'm not using it in regard to Jewish people. Instead, I'm making the point that every religion thinks it has the only direct and correct line to communion with its deity.

For Muslims, theirs is the only way. For Christians, theirs is the only way. For Jews, theirs is the only way -- although, interestingly, they don't make that claim to non-Jews and are by and large not enthusiastic about gaining converts. (In other words, I'm saying that Jews are the least pushy and self-righteous of the "Big Three.")

Your response suggests that you are on hyper-alert for any tidbit of anti-semitism that you can glean from others' posts. Perhaps you could reread my original post in its proper perspective -- as a response to the comments of an atheist author.

I think you'll see clearly -- if you're willing to be open-minded -- that I was commenting on organized religion in general.

there is no solution to this problem, there is no high ground to be had.

it took over 3,000 years for the jews to get the way they are, over 2000 for the christians to get the way they are, and over 1400 for the muslims to get the way they are.

There isn't a chance in any of their hells for these people to solve their problems because to agree with the "other" on any issue is to admit being wrong yourself.

That's how religion works. it may not be the ultimate cause of these wars, but it sure is the carrier wave.

Susan_Jacoby Wrote:
"Assertions of group intellectual superiority and moral entitlement are designed as conversation stoppers, and that is exactly how they operate in the world."

I agree completely with you on both counts. A good friend of mine a liberal to the boot, once over a few cold ones told me that people from my old country (my country now is US) were the smartest he knows of. He was expecting me to be very elated with that characterization, instead I accused him of being a bit of a racist, just to reorient his consciousness. He was quite offended by my remark an demanded explanation. I pointed to him that bestowing any special intellectual or other skills based on geography, ethnic background, etc, etc. is just the flip-side of denigrating. If one seems plausible then the other is equally plausible. I cringe when people handout compliments like that.

That said, my view on middle-east is all the groups there seem to think, they have legitimate right that damn piece of real-estate. Israel think, their dog gave it to them some 30 centuries ago. Muslims feel they cannot subject themselves to a dhimmi rule. Guess what the total population there is most definitely less than 10 million, which less than 1/750 of the world population. The rest of the world must move on, leave them to their resources and ask them tell us when they are done with destroying each other.

IMHO you Palestinians/Arabs for past 63 years you have been humiliated, time and time again, take a deep breath and negotiate. Your political, cultural & social framework is still stuck in 12th century. As far as Israelis go they need to kick some butts of the their fundie brethren, who seem to have this death-wish engendering all the racist stereotypes. I for one would advise all world leaders that they are not interested what happens in that part of the world politically, economically we are open for business with everyone. Then and then only they will figure a way out.

Helen Thomas to the contrary, it is sixty years too late to found a Jewish state in Poland and Germany. But it's not too late to give the suffering Palestinians in Gaza a fair break. That is the only moral high ground in Gaza.

haveaheart:

I am fascinated by your expertise in Judaism(s), particularly as even the most populous branches pluralize.

However, new syncretic developments in Africa, and new contact with the Yemeni, slowly finding its way into the religion journals are particularly interesting.

I am always curious when nonJews use the phrase "chosen people," since it is only they who use it.

I would like to be informed as to how the views you ascribe to Judaism express themselves in the religious practices of the worlds practitioners.

At the moment, I am in between Yemeni Kabbalah (Persiflage, take note) and Reconstructionism! Alas, that is how my brain works.

Still, perhaps you will edify us on Reconstructionism in light of your post.

It would be easy to give up on Israel and the Palestinians - time and time again, both sides have shown gross stupidity. The first thing that came into my mind when this happened was, "What could they have been thinking?!" Both groups could easily qualify for the Darwin Awards (given annually to those who, for the benefit of all humanity, remove themselves from the gene pool).

My understanding, over they years, has come t be that wars are never fought over religion. Religion is always a cover (if the BIG GUY is on our side, we must be right and we just can't lose!). People are always driven by more "earthly" motives, like land and economics. In Israel, that includes water rights as well. If w begin o see it in those terms, and dismiss all the idiotic religious nonsense, we might begin to approach the truth, and the not-so-high ideals that inspire both sides.

Ed,

Thanks for the link! But, yes, I've known for a while about the political elements. That is the problem for me with religion. It inevitably intertwines with politics (and, unusually, patriarchy).

If religion and politics could be separated, if peace could reign on earth, if I could fly, etc.

farnaz,
Try this:
http://pages.prodigy.net/fljustice/hypatia.html

It's not that the killers were not Christian but the motivation was a mixture of politics, bad faith and misogyny.

"What is needed for a Middle East peace settlement is the abandonment of illusions that Jews or Muslims, Israelis or their Arab neighbors, are entitled to something they want because of their respective aggrieved histories, or because Yahweh and Allah have have singled them out."

The problem with all organized religions is that their adherents consider themselves "the chosen people." Their way is the only right way, and their God communes only with them and those who would adopt their beliefs and practices.

And, of course, they are the only ones who have correctly interpreted what the god made in their own image is saying.

This is not, of course, the mainstream view, and it's particularly unpopular with members of the "Big Three" (monotheistic religions). But as long as these faithful continue to insist that theirs is the only right way, there will be no peace among neighbors.

double hypocrisy of secularism.

palestine is sacred to jews as well as to christians as well as to muslims,

islam and muslims kept mecca,madena and palestine sacred for more than 1500 years.

how secularism kept palestine?how jews and christians kept palestine ?

its not a conflict for a piece of land ,its what has been revealed in that particular peace of land.

secularism should ,v demilitarize palestine and keept it sacred as practiceing what preaching of religion freedom and human right sacredness but as usual nothing will fail nations as hypocrisy and delusional ignorant think tank heads .

secularism died for your sin!

Edbyronadams,

Hello, Ed. On the previous thread, you mentioned alternative accounts of Hypathia's killing. I found a couple on the web, but they weren't substantive. I also emailed a historian, but haven't heard back from him yet.

Do you have a source you could recommend?

Thanks!

Farnaz

Instead of getting all in a lather about Jehovah or Allah and claims on land, the more basic fact is that it is a case of two tribes claiming the same territory, disputes of which abound in history and prehistory and settled in blood. There is no pretty ending.

Now, we have the more settled part of the planet looking at the nasty pictures of defeat or defeat denied as the Palestinians continue their Black Knight act.

halozcel1,

Continued from previous post:

I don't want to discuss Ocalan or şçi Partisi
at this point--Want your take on Blumberg's post, my comments, and Abdullah Gul, first.

H,

I remain annoyed at you. However, see Blumberg's essay and my comment. Do you think Abdullah Gul can help with Turkey, or is it a lost cause?

See Blumberg's essay, and see my reply.

Farnaz

In order to help Healty and Correct Discussion,let me write something;

1-IHH(Literally translation:Humanitarian Rights and Freedoms)Organization which organized Gaza/Hamas Aid Flotilla.Although this Organization recognised by Ruling Islamist Government as Charity/Private Voluntary Org.,it's absolutely founded by Hamas minded islamist men.
2-Blue Marmara,Admiral Ship of Convoy.Many people may suppose it's a Turkish Flagged Ship.No,no,it's not.It's Comoro Islands Flagged Ship,namely,it is not Turkish Territory.
3-Very interesting and important,Pay Attention;
At least 15 AKP(Ruling Islamist Party) Lawmakers would board ship,but,at the last minute,they abandoned to board ship.
4-International Laws give you Right of Intervantion to a ship,in International Waters,if it carries illegal weapons,ammunition or Heroin/Narcotic.Lucky-S,the ship which carried Heroin from Pakistan was raided by Turkish Policemen/Navy in International Waters.
5-Destination(keep in mind,destination should be noticed before ship departs) was declared to Egypt,but,ship went to Gaza,not Egypt.Deputy PM said *I'm told,ship would go to Egypt,not Gaza*
If it's Real Humanitarian Aid,it would send by Red Cross or UN auspice.

Conclusion;
Hamas/Gaza Aid Flotilla is a well designed Manipulation aiming Israel-Turkey Confrontation and relatively succeeded.
Ruling Islamist Government in Turkey has been intending,since long time,to cut relations with Israel.This Manipulaion causes Good Excuse to cut ties.

Susan-

See also, Jurgen Habermas

Michael Warner, "Publics and Counterpublics"

My, my, how every group does cherish the idea of its own moral and/or intellectual superiority! I do remember the nuns telling us that the most irrefutable answer you could give to anyone who challenged you was, "I am a Catholic." Sound stupid to you? It sounded stupid to me, which is one of the myriad reasons why I am not a Catholic. Assertions of group intellectual superiority and moral entitlement are designed as conversation stoppers, and that is exactly how they operate in the world.

test~!

Susan,

Last on this: Michael Chabon took the them of his article from a column that appeared earlier in WaPo. The author was inspired by a book by Sandor Gilman (the incomparable) titled "Smart Jews," which the author had not read.

To comprehend Gilman's slim work it is necessary to first read that of his that precedes it.

Again, though, see my comments on your other essay. I can never say enough to my journalism students about research. They get it, but God knows what happens to them when they move on.

Susan,

On age not being the problem--I partially take it back. Although age was not the only problem leading to Helen Thomas's offensive remarks, it was, I believe, a factor.

It may be a factor in yours--but only one.

Susan, Old Girl,

"He takes on nothing less than the myth of superior Jewish intelligence, which has, of course, been used by anti-Semites as well as by those Jews who have an exalted opinion of themselves."

I don't like to say it, I honestly don't, but it might be time for you to retire from this blog.

You will not like yourself a few weeks from today, not when you reread your post.

Or, then again, you may. One can take the White Catholic girl out of the Church but not vice versa.

Or, at least, not often.

For another kind of response, see my comments on your essay.

I'm sorry for you, Susan. As I've said before, you have a good mind, but about some things, you just don't get it. And age is not the problem.

I can't add anything better than your article. Well said.