by Terry Sanderson
Going to extremes
Engaging with religious liberals will not help to undermine extremists; it will only enable and protect them.
There's an argument in religious circles that goes: in order to undermine the fanatics we have to encourage the liberal elements of religion. If you want to stop suicide bombers, you have to encourage the more moderate voices in Islam to speak up. The same argument surfaces regularly in Christian circles - yes, there are fundamentalists out there doing horrible things, but you can't judge all Christians by the activities of the minority at the extremes, it goes. Why not support the good guys who are doing their best and being ever so nice?
It's a seductive argument and I used to subscribe to it myself. But I've changed my mind.
As president of the National Secular Society I am are constantly approached by religious groups wanting to engage us in their pursuit of "interfaith dialogue". They want, they say, to "break down barriers", and who doesn't?
But once involved in these groups, it soon becomes clear that they are all from the liberal tradition. One set of moderates talking to another. The people who really need to engage - the jihadis and the literalists - are off practising the sectarian warfare they are so fond of. Let's talk? No, let's abuse human rights, persecute infidels and preach hate.
I've come to realise that the delusions of the liberals are not qualitatively different from those entertained by the Pat Robertsons or Abu Hamzas of this world.
The danger that these apparently harmless liberals pose is that of enabling the fanatics, who happily use them as human shields. Just as the terrorists of the Middle East will hide out in schools and hospitals to avoid being targeted by enemy bombs, so the ideological terrorists hide behind the liberals and the good-natured in order to spread their doctrine of intimidation and terror.
The poor, bleating liberals who are constantly complaining that their faith is not only misunderstood by its non-adherents, but also perverted by the fanatics who share it. There they stand, having spent a lifetime reinforcing in their heads the childhood brainwashing that they will never overcome, and making excuses for the same beliefs that motivate bombers and theocrats, misogynists and homophobes. This hinders the rest of us getting a clear run at the villains.
The liberals pave the way, open the doors and give succour to the very people they say bring their faith into disrepute. But it's no good the liberals trying to dissociate themselves from their wilder compatriots in faith. They promote and praise the same holy books that the fanatics use as justification for their murderous activities. "But the terrorists and the bigots are not true Christians/Muslims" say the liberals, while the bigots and the terrorists say exactly the same thing about them.
Or, as Sam Harris said in a recent essay:
"The problem is that wherever one stands on this continuum, one inadvertently shelters those who are more fanatical than oneself from criticism. Ordinary fundamentalist Christians, by maintaining that the Bible is the perfect word of God, inadvertently support the Dominionists, men and women who, by the millions, are quietly working to turn our country into a totalitarian theocracy reminiscent of John Calvin's Geneva. Christian moderates, by their lingering attachment to the unique divinity of Jesus, protect the faith of fundamentalists from public scorn. Christian liberals 'who aren't sure what they believe but just love the experience of going to church occasionally' deny the moderates a proper collision with scientific rationality. And in this way centuries have come and gone without an honest word being spoken about God in our society."
I am now accustomed to being accused of practising "fundamentalist secularism" and "atheist extremism" by religious reactionaries, but now the terms are being eagerly embraced by liberals. But a moment's thought would tell the liberals that democratic secularism is their best friend. Not only does it protect those of no belief from being persecuted by over-mighty and ruthless religious regimes, but it offers protection to the smaller religious groups who have become used to being stamped on by their holier-than-thou big brothers (try being a Christian in Saudi Arabia, for instance).
Liberals in religious traditions may not have evil intentions towards their fellow men, but they provide cover for their fellow believers who do.
reposted from: CIF
my: highlights / emphasis / key points / comments
No comments:
Post a Comment