Religion and the free marketplace of ideas
In the second half of the 20th Century, beginning in the 1950's,
American Christians were forced to confront racial discrimination within
their church congregations; particularly in the South where Ku
Klux Klan members held
influential positions within local communities and churches.
Why would this be a subject for a website dedicated to American Energy
Independence?
Because of oil — oil wealth in the Middle East — and the rise
of Islamic militancy, which has been linked directly to Middle
East oil wealth.
Imagine what the world might have become if, in the 1950's, the Ku Klux Klan
had been given billions of dollars, with unlimited access to international
media, and a safe haven (a protected foreign state) where they could recruit
and train their followers without interference.
Well, we know what would have happened, because it was played out in
the 1930's — in Europe, where it was called Nazism.
Fortunately, Islamic militants today do not have the technology, military
organization, or national support that Adolf Hitler had at his disposal.
But Islamic militants can be compared to the American Ku Klux Klan during
the early 20th
Century, where Southern white preachers openly disdained black people and,
under hooded robes, participated in violent acts against blacks, Jews
and anyone who was not like them.
Today, we are witnessing similar behavior by Muslim clerics (preachers).
And, we are also witnessing a similar acceptance of this behavior
by “mainstream” Muslims who
are allowing it to continue, much like the 20th century mainstream American
Christians who allowed the Ku Klux Klan to terrorize the “infidels” of
their day. Of course, most Muslims will publicly say they disapprove of
the behavior of Islamic militants, but then most Christians publicly
disapproved of the KKK.
The history of the civil rights movement in America demonstrates that it
will not be easy for Muslims to change their behavior. But, perhaps they
can learn from the history of Christianity in America.
America's Christian history is a story of intolerance and violence. A dark
story transformed by democracy, individual freedom, non-violent
civil disobedience,
the rule of law — and
preachers who had the courage to lead their congregations away
from intolerance and violence, toward God's love, mercy and redemption.
To help understand Islamic fundamentalism today, Americans need only look
to their own history and the dark struggle of Christianity's past—its
political ties with European Monarchies, the Inquisitions,
the Salem
witch trials, the Ku Klux Klan.
There is no reason why Muslim countries, today, cannot do what historically
Christian countries have already done—free themselves
from the constrains of retrograde religious authority by establishing a
modern legal system governed by the
rule of law.
Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa are Islamic Republics.
An Islamic Republic is a Theocracy, a nation ruled by religious clerics
[Although many Muslim countries claim to have various degrees of freedom,
they continue to submit to the will of their religious leaders, resulting
in a legal system that is equal
to a Theocracy]. In contrast, the
historically Christian
countries of Europe and America have separated
the religious
authority
of the
church from the legal system that governs the people, thereby ending
Christian Theocracy in the western world.
The nations comprising the western world are no longer defined by
religious beliefs—citizens of western societies are free to
individually choose and practice their own beliefs without fear of
state censorship. Islamic fundamentalists, supporters of Islamic
Republics, view western nations as a threat to their theocratic rule.
The religious customs practiced by extreme
Muslim fundamentalists today can be compared to Christianity
during the Medieval Inquisition, where religion was forced on the
people, women were regarded as property, dissidents were burned
at the
stake, and theocratic leaders ruled. Much like the world that Osama
Bin Laden
and al-Qaeda
call Islam.
Religious intolerance has its roots in cultural identity
When religion is accepted as an ethnic or cultural heritage it creates an “us
vs. them” group identity. Within the group identity, personal identity
becomes dominated by the collective thoughts, feelings and behaviors of
the religious group. If it is a peaceful group, then the resulting conformity
can be a good
thing, but if it is an intolerant, violent group then the results can be
terrifying.
Islamic terrorism exists today because the modern
world buys oil unconditionally from countries that deny their citizens
religious freedom—suppressing the right to openly question and debate
religious customs, doctrine and authority.
Religion should not be something a person is born to, or belongs to because
of their ethnic or cultural identity. Religious belief should
be something a person
chooses when he, or she, individually begins thinking deeply and spiritually
about life.
Religion is not the same as Spiritual.
Religion is a repository of belief—an organized system of
spiritual knowledge derived from the personal thoughts and individual creativity
of men and
women believed to be prophets or messengers of Divine revelation.
Spiritual
is the essence of consciousness—the intangible layer of being
where personal thoughts and individual creativity
originate. Spiritual individuality is awakened and shaped by the personal
act of subjectively exploring and contemplating knowledge, values, experiences,
relationships, emotions, thoughts, and creativity—an exercise of
the soul that culminates in the formation and acceptance of personal
belief. Belief, religious or otherwise, acquired by any other means is
merely the
acceptance or expression of cultural or group identity; resulting in
the suppression or absence of spiritual individuality.
Hard-line religious fundamentalists will always try to force their beliefs
on others, if they can get away with it. That is why the right of individuals
to explore and choose their own beliefs should be a condition of foreign
aid and international trade.
The free marketplace of ideas
The burden of proof of the truth or goodness of
a religion should be on the believer: in other words, the proof
required to persuade anyone to accept a Religious belief should be found
in the example demonstrated by the social and private behavior of
the followers of such beliefs.
If a religion fails to cause its followers to become better
persons and citizens, then what good is it? But, who decides when a believer
(or follower) is a “better” person — the government or
the individual? Let the free “marketplace of ideas” decide!
Let the people be consumers of ideas. When people are given freedom to
choose, they won’t “buy” into a belief unless they
see its value demonstrated in the lives of other people.
The Right or Wrong of any religious belief should not be
upheld by a government. All religious authority should be separated from
the legal system of every nation. Every nation should offer to its citizens
the legal protection of individual religious belief—as well as the
right to question, debate and reject religious belief.
A religion that is forced—or in anyway protected or endorsed by
government—has already failed the test of proof in the
lives of believers, because such a religion has not been allowed to be
tested in
the free marketplace of ideas. It has not proven that it can exist on
its own, without coercion, or exist successfully in competition with
other beliefs (atheism is also a belief — atheism was a coerced
belief in the Soviet Union).
Governments
should not support, promote or give preference to any specific religion,
or any belief system, including atheism.
All governments throughout the world should protect the personal right
of every individual to freely practice the religion—or belief system—of
their choice; limited only by public health regulations based on modern
science, and by public safety and decency statutes that apply equally
to both men and women.
Those who view religion primarily as an ethnic equivalence, or cultural
identity, might not like the free
marketplace of ideas.
It is important to acknowledge
that Religion does have an external social organization and cultural
identity, but it is also important to view religion as a personal
state of mind originating from an individual's
subjective perception* (personal belief); because
that way offers a path to change.
Individuals will more readily accept and explore the opportunity for change
than would organizations and cultures; especially with the development
and expanding reach of modern personalized communication technology. Whereas
the political structure of religion (the external social organization
and cultural
identity) will not yield to change easily, because it offers too
much power to the religious leaders and politicians that align themselves
with religious authority.
*Individual subjective
perceptions give each human personality his or her uniqueness—without
individual subjective perceptions and experiences a personality
would be like a robot.
The free marketplace of ideas will provide young minds with access to new
ideas where they can “buy” them, try them out, and perhaps exchange
what they already possess for other ideas and beliefs.
In order
for a religious belief or cosmology of any kind, including atheism,
to be alive and
growing (not
rigid), it must exist in the mind as an individual choice, protected
and nurtured by open and free discourse, rather than as a product
of ethnic, political or cultural legacy.
Imagine the possibilities that modern civilization could achieve if the
world was truly a free marketplace of ideas.
Capitalism <—— Back to the Previous Page
|
