RE: Muslim Child Abuse
July 4, 2011 at 11:34 pm
(This post was last modified: July 5, 2011 at 12:50 am by The Grand Nudger.)
lol, I'm only saying that Julian gave it a go, with regards to attempting some civility towards the christians of his day. It didn't work out, especially for him, obviously. Can you give me that? That this token effort does not stand up to our very much improved concept of civility is obvious, and expected. None the less, it was an effort.
missing words are the bane of my existence btw.
I'm going to rephrase my argument here, not so much for you, but as is my habit, for lurkers (who outnumber us). Religious pluralism, which may not be exemplified in the case of the Roman state, affords one the opportunity to at least decide a position from within it's expanded pantheon. This is a far more civil position than the one offered by monotheism. That a person is not inferior by celestial decree or affiliation (though pagans have often made this claim as well..but not always) is superior to the monotheists position. It is in this regard, and I stress this because this is the only point that I am arguing, that one can view the modern monotheists position as a steady progression of backwards steps. There is nothing inherently un civil about religion. It is a failing of man when he leverages his faith to be uncivil to his neighbor. A civil religion could indeed be imagined. Many faiths have proposed ideas which were an improvement, from the pov of civility, over their predecessors.
I am not arguing that we as a whole have taken steps backwards, only that the faiths that remain in working order today are not necessarily the cream of the crop when it comes to civility or tolerance. I find it to be disappointing that religious traditions such as the ones we are commonly exposed to were the ultimate winners in the conflict between religious ideals, and I take offense to the common contention that these very same religious traditions somehow improved upon our view of what is right and wrong. ...that they rid the world of the scourge of what had come before.
I use the example of Julian only because he is widely considered to be the "last pagan emperor of the world". The Hellenistic tradition that he wished for the people of the roman empire stands as a stark contrast to the monotheistic tradition which claimed the final victory. On the one hand, we have a practice of inclusion. Of course this was politically expedient, and had a great many other benefits to the roman empire. On the other hand, absolute exclusion. I personally believe that the practice of inclusion would have made for a much less bloody history in and of itself, than did the practice of exclusion to which we are all heirs. Those that died due to wars over territory and resources would of course still have died, but many of those who died due to religious affiliation alone would likely have been spared.
missing words are the bane of my existence btw.
I'm going to rephrase my argument here, not so much for you, but as is my habit, for lurkers (who outnumber us). Religious pluralism, which may not be exemplified in the case of the Roman state, affords one the opportunity to at least decide a position from within it's expanded pantheon. This is a far more civil position than the one offered by monotheism. That a person is not inferior by celestial decree or affiliation (though pagans have often made this claim as well..but not always) is superior to the monotheists position. It is in this regard, and I stress this because this is the only point that I am arguing, that one can view the modern monotheists position as a steady progression of backwards steps. There is nothing inherently un civil about religion. It is a failing of man when he leverages his faith to be uncivil to his neighbor. A civil religion could indeed be imagined. Many faiths have proposed ideas which were an improvement, from the pov of civility, over their predecessors.
I am not arguing that we as a whole have taken steps backwards, only that the faiths that remain in working order today are not necessarily the cream of the crop when it comes to civility or tolerance. I find it to be disappointing that religious traditions such as the ones we are commonly exposed to were the ultimate winners in the conflict between religious ideals, and I take offense to the common contention that these very same religious traditions somehow improved upon our view of what is right and wrong. ...that they rid the world of the scourge of what had come before.
I use the example of Julian only because he is widely considered to be the "last pagan emperor of the world". The Hellenistic tradition that he wished for the people of the roman empire stands as a stark contrast to the monotheistic tradition which claimed the final victory. On the one hand, we have a practice of inclusion. Of course this was politically expedient, and had a great many other benefits to the roman empire. On the other hand, absolute exclusion. I personally believe that the practice of inclusion would have made for a much less bloody history in and of itself, than did the practice of exclusion to which we are all heirs. Those that died due to wars over territory and resources would of course still have died, but many of those who died due to religious affiliation alone would likely have been spared.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
