On the Crown-of-Thorns of a Dilemma
How does one hate hatred without being guilty of hatred? How does one oppose prejudice without being prejudiced against the prejudiced? How does one fight against violence when fighting is a violent act? How does one stop religious intolerance when those that are guilty of it are the religious and to stop them is to not tolerate them?
I was reading an article just now in The Progressive about a young man who was not allowed to wait tables at a presidential dinner of some kind, simply because his name was Mohammed. I was outraged of course, knee-jerk liberal that I am, but it got me thinking: I'm not a big Islam fan myself. I hate the idea that Muslims are constantly and automatically scrutinized as potential terrorists, but to be honest, while I think Christianity is infantile, primitive, and dangerous to everyone involve or even nearby, I'd be lying if I said Islam isn't just as bad. The struggles in the Middle East are inevitably characterized as Muslims vs. Jews, or Christians vs. Muslims, but from my perspective, and I would imagine the perspective of most people who are neither Christian, Jew, nor Muslim, it always seems like Christians/Jews/Muslims versus the normal (not insane) people. The fact is, (my previous post on Antisemitism aside), all three of the big Middle Eastern monotheistic religions have caused more pain, suffering, intolerance, torture, ignorance, fear, and violent death than any other force in human history. That's not opinion either; a cursory glance at religious history will confirm that without a doubt. "Religious fanaticism should be treated as mental illness and most religious people are morons" is an opinion. One I hold, but one that is backed up by nothing more than the lack of evidence for the veracity of these religious delusions coupled with my 36 years watching people kill each other (on the news) and leading unhappy, unfulfilled, jaw-clenchingly dull lives (in person) based on this nonsense; no stats though.
So, on to the dilemma. I love my fellow humans (although I suspect it may just be Stockholm Syndrome), and I want them to be happy. One of the biggest changes that needs to happen in order for them to be happy is to dispose of Yahweh, Allah, Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, Joseph Smith, John Calvin, Martin Luther, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, the Apostle Paul, and all the other historical holy rollers of literalist monotheism (emphasis on "literalist"). Coldly, methodically and without anger, amputate them from the popular consciousness like a gangrenous limb, because that's exactly what they are. But the problem is [dramatic musical declension] that is 100% religious intolerance. Oops. So here I am stuck at an impasse on the moral high ground. I want humans to stop being monsters, and the only solution I can come up with involves becoming a monster.
Now the wise person, when counseling me on my passionate desire to make the world a happy, healthy, fulfilled, advanced, evolved place, by getting everyone to be happy, healthy, fulfilled, advanced, evolved people, will inevitably use a word that I never really learned properly: "can't". You can't force people to think. You can't drag people towards enlightenment if they are not ready. You can't enforce compassion. You can't make people happy if they are predisposed to be unhappy.
Can't, can't can't.
I hate can't. Makes me feel like I didn't try hard enough.
I was reading an article just now in The Progressive about a young man who was not allowed to wait tables at a presidential dinner of some kind, simply because his name was Mohammed. I was outraged of course, knee-jerk liberal that I am, but it got me thinking: I'm not a big Islam fan myself. I hate the idea that Muslims are constantly and automatically scrutinized as potential terrorists, but to be honest, while I think Christianity is infantile, primitive, and dangerous to everyone involve or even nearby, I'd be lying if I said Islam isn't just as bad. The struggles in the Middle East are inevitably characterized as Muslims vs. Jews, or Christians vs. Muslims, but from my perspective, and I would imagine the perspective of most people who are neither Christian, Jew, nor Muslim, it always seems like Christians/Jews/Muslims versus the normal (not insane) people. The fact is, (my previous post on Antisemitism aside), all three of the big Middle Eastern monotheistic religions have caused more pain, suffering, intolerance, torture, ignorance, fear, and violent death than any other force in human history. That's not opinion either; a cursory glance at religious history will confirm that without a doubt. "Religious fanaticism should be treated as mental illness and most religious people are morons" is an opinion. One I hold, but one that is backed up by nothing more than the lack of evidence for the veracity of these religious delusions coupled with my 36 years watching people kill each other (on the news) and leading unhappy, unfulfilled, jaw-clenchingly dull lives (in person) based on this nonsense; no stats though.
So, on to the dilemma. I love my fellow humans (although I suspect it may just be Stockholm Syndrome), and I want them to be happy. One of the biggest changes that needs to happen in order for them to be happy is to dispose of Yahweh, Allah, Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, Joseph Smith, John Calvin, Martin Luther, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, the Apostle Paul, and all the other historical holy rollers of literalist monotheism (emphasis on "literalist"). Coldly, methodically and without anger, amputate them from the popular consciousness like a gangrenous limb, because that's exactly what they are. But the problem is [dramatic musical declension] that is 100% religious intolerance. Oops. So here I am stuck at an impasse on the moral high ground. I want humans to stop being monsters, and the only solution I can come up with involves becoming a monster.
Now the wise person, when counseling me on my passionate desire to make the world a happy, healthy, fulfilled, advanced, evolved place, by getting everyone to be happy, healthy, fulfilled, advanced, evolved people, will inevitably use a word that I never really learned properly: "can't". You can't force people to think. You can't drag people towards enlightenment if they are not ready. You can't enforce compassion. You can't make people happy if they are predisposed to be unhappy.
Can't, can't can't.
I hate can't. Makes me feel like I didn't try hard enough.
posted by John McKenna at 11:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home