The recent elections, coupled with the prevalent concept of morality in law and politics, has spurned quite a conundrum in my head. I’m trying to figure out why our country is so puritanical, why gnosis is such a requirement in our society, and why, in many people’s minds, “conservative” means “Christian”, and not, for example, “frugal” or “moral”.
To start, I believe the problem lies in the foundation of these “Western” religions, which of course, is a misnomer. The underlying concept is that if you don’t believe and act in certain ways specific to each belief, then you are going to some form of hell or eternal suffering. This threat, in itself, forces one to take careful consideration of not only their own future, but the future of those they love.
This, in itself, is not a bad thing. The very concept of “winning converts” or “evangelism” is based off of the fact that people don’t want their loved ones to suffer. At face value, this is a noble mindset, to want to help others out of a perceived or real threat, is only natural in any belief based at least partially off of the love of all people.
The problem becomes more apparent when the issue turns to sin or evil. Suddenly, the goal to win converts must also include the goal of helping them not to sin. This slippery slope quickly degrades into removing the temptation to sin, which in many cases, produces more temptation than was there in the first place.
Alcohol is one of these particular instances. A perfect example of how a higher drinking age and more restrictive alcohol laws don’t necessarily help is evident in countries that don’t have a minimum drinking age, and yet educate children in the family unit at a young age about the responsibility of drinking. In many of these countries, alcohol is served with dinner simply because it is a natural part of dining, and it is not a mystery to people once they reach some vague age of majority or enlightenment, therefore the concept of a DUI or public intoxication is relatively unheard of. Instead of hiding something just out of reach and trying to “scare” people about the evils of chemicals, actions, or mindsets, if people are provided all the information they need, and the decision to allow or disallow these items is made at the family level, people are less likely to make destructive decisions and more likely to act in moderation.
The reasons for removing temptation are numerous, including the desire to help others, the desire to build a tighter, less evil community, and the desire to protect one’s family from the potential for evil around them.
What I tend to disagree with is that the removal of temptation is not only completely impossible, but creates a vacuum for more temptation, thus magnifying the problem exponentially.
Suddenly, the downward spiral can shift, and these same individuals can start labeling others who disagree with them are evil themselves. The goal of “saving” people, or winning converts has turned into a statistics and numbers game. It’s now about passing laws that meet ones agenda in the false hopes of attacking the overall problem to save the largest number of people, protect the children, and build a community in which such actions do not take place, instead of befriending and helping individuals into a religion that they believe is for the best good.
This mindset, in turn, and fortunately in only a small percentage, is what creates hard-line, right-wing fundamentalist extremists. The very concept of a Muslim jihad against the West is fueled by the fire of attacking the evil of American society, when, ultimately, in the Koran, much of it reads similar to the New Testament. Pages and pages of “Allah is beautiful, Allah is love…” and the hardliners are only won over by obscure, outdated historical information that is not dogma or mandate, but merely background information and historical context about a past society and its antiquated laws
But, what is the answer? I believe ultimately that Western religions (and in this context I’m including pretty much any of the major monotheistic religions with a supreme divine being as a central figure), could take a cue from Eastern religions, such as Buddhism, Daoism, Hinduism, etc. Most of these beliefs are not just a religion, but an entire philosophy, geared towards guiding an individual in their day to day activities, and not just in the concept of spiritual warfare. Additionally, there is really only a focus on the enlightenment of oneself, and not scare tactics of eternal damnation that build the foundations for forced conversion of entire communities through politics and war. After all, when was the last time you heard of a Hindu “fundamentalist” strapping a pound of C-4 to his chest and detonating it on a crowded street corner? Or a Taoist
“extremist” gunning people down in a shopping mall? Or better yet, a “hard-line” Zen Buddhist monk crashing a plane into a building
This doesn’t happen, ever, because none of these people exist. The beliefs inherent to these systems preclude the entire possibility of this ever occurring. A Buddhist or a Taoist can’t, in any mindset, act in this extreme a manner, because their religions are based off of the belief that, one, they might be wrong; two, if they are, then it’s their problem and nobody else’s; and three, if they’re right, then others will find out at their own times, on their own paths.
So, ultimately, what does this mean? So-called “Western” religions can take a page out of Eastern religions and concentrate on the personal growth aspects of their beliefs. In effect, the religion would be personalized, the scope would be narrowed and not pressured onto anyone, made into public policy, and centered at the individual and family level. If the individual effect of religion is the concept that is being taught and practiced, instead of believing in attempting to affect society as a whole, then this small, rogue percentage of the population practicing fundamentalism can finally disappear.
Originally printed in the Daily O’Collegian, December 1st, 2004
Comment on this post below
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.