This morning I woke up with a strong sense of determination to write a post for my blog. Yet I did not know what to write. Everything I'm reading is a little too esoteric (meaning I can't understand what I am reading), and I haven't seen enough to grab my attention. Luckily I came across the following article on the NPR website:
Wow! It is like an answer to my prayers, if I ever really found myself praying to God for a blog post inspiration There are so many things to say about this story.
First, the dentist and anti-Shariah law activist Lee Douglas points to a Muslim woman being hired by the governor as evidence of an "infiltration" of Islam into the Tennessee government. Douglas claims that Islam is directly opposed to his faith (which I am assuming is Christian). Here is the kicker quote from Douglas:
"I don't want anybody to persecute any religion including Islam, but we have a duty as Americans to understand that they intend to take us over and compel us to become Islamic."
Douglas claims that, "government is showing a deference and is accommodating one single religion - Islam, Shariah." According to the NPR article, Douglas continued to say that deference should be shown to the religion of the country's Founding Fathers.
Wow. And again I say, Wow. There are so many things to say about just this one person's thoughts and ideas. First, I would never want him to be my dentist. Not because he is Christian or conservative, but mostly because he is an idiot.
Let's start with the constitution and the idea of deference. Just in case you weren't aware the First Amendment states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" (for the full text see the following link)
I may be missing something, but I don't see anything in there about showing "deference" to any religion. The point of the clause is that the government will not favor one religion over another. Thus the government should not be showing deference to the "religion of the country's Founding Fathers." For this post I'm not going to get into the question of the what the Founding Fathers faith might be considering the diversity of the religious backgrounds of the Founding Fathers (Quaker, Catholic, Baptist, Anglican, Diest, Methodist, etc., along with a strong backing of a Jewish congregation).
Second, allowing someone to build a place of worship is not showing deference to that group.
Third is the gem of the quote that Douglass made, "I don't want anybody to persecute any religions…" and at the same time criticize the governor just because he hired a Muslim woman. So Douglass is ok with Muslims as long as they do not have a place to worship and they are not allowed to hold any government jobs. Seems rational, right?
Douglas also believe that Islam is "diametrically opposed to his faith." Islam, a Monotheistic faith finding its roots in the Hebrew scriptures, specifically Abraham is diametrically opposed to Christianity, a monotheistic faith finding its roots in the Hebrew scriptures, including Abraham.
Maybe Douglas doesn't understanding the meaning of words like "diametrically opposed," and "persecution."
One other reflection from the article. Further on in the article we read how Rep. Diane Black was pressured to show her toughness against Shariah law. She states:
"I understand the devastation that Shariah law could mean here in our country, and I'm a sponsor of a bill that will once again say that the United States Constitution is our law and that it is the supreme law." It is that phrase, "supreme law," that bothers me.
If you are not a religious person, then such a phrase should not cause any problems, but if you are a believer of some kind and practice with some kind of tradition then you should be a worried about such a statement. The phrase "supreme law" suggests that it is above any and all other laws. This means it is above any religious laws including scripture. If you are really a Christian, and I wonder if these people who make such claims really are, then you would want at least the two great commandments to be the "supreme law"
Love the Lord you God with all your heart, mind, and soul
Love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:29-31)
Secular, constitutional law is good to have as a law of the land but not the "supreme law." Constitutional law is a law that people of various faith traditions can find agreement, but it is not the "supreme law."
I think I might push for a law that states that all people who push a law against Shariah law be forced to take lessons in grammar, world religions, and vocabulary.
And they can't be dentists.
No comments:
Post a Comment