Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Ed Cook
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000197B
|
00:06 Welcome back to the "Liberty Insider."
00:08 Before the break with my guest 00:11 we were talking about separation of church and state 00:15 from the point of view of the modern-- 00:18 threat is the wrong word but the challenge of Islam, 00:21 a religion that consciously rejects 00:24 the separation of church and state 00:26 and arguably because of the Quran. 00:29 Yeah, what I think, you know, one of the ideas 00:32 that I wanted to flush out a little bit more 00:35 is it if we flip the question around just a little bit. 00:37 Instead of looking at it about Islam 00:40 and how it might impact into the western society, 00:44 looking at it from the perspective of saying 00:46 that for Islam their-- the foundational principles 00:50 that they operate off of is they believe 00:52 that their religion is such a part of their life 00:55 that it should be interwoven in society. 00:57 Okay, having understand-- Christian should believe too. 01:00 Yes. Well, here's the point-- 01:01 You shouldn't separate your faith and your attitudes 01:05 as a Christian from anything you do. 01:07 Correct. 01:08 For the Islamic society there is-- 01:11 in essence it argues for a confessional state. 01:14 Because they've reached the point 01:15 that not only should they be allowed to practice 01:17 their faith in society but it's also something 01:20 that government should be lined up with that. 01:23 Now looking at it from a Christian perspective 01:25 and I could even narrow it down just a little bit 01:27 more specifically to Roman Catholicism 01:29 and Evangelical Protestant churches. 01:32 When they start arguing much the same way--for example, 01:36 that government should not adopt a separationist position 01:39 but instead government should proactively support religion-- 01:42 I believe that's where they are heading. 01:44 Well, see what we find is that all of a sudden 01:46 there is an alignment of Islam and generally 01:49 most of Christianity to argue that government should actually 01:53 be united with religion to support it in society. 01:56 And I'll tell you the latest evidence of 01:58 where I think this is going and it's not good. 02:02 The coalition of mostly Islamic states 02:05 for probably at least a decade or more 02:07 now have been pushing in the United Nations 02:10 for an international covenant, for want of a better word, 02:15 against defamation of religion. 02:19 And the US and many western countries 02:21 have pushed back against that. 02:23 But of late, the Roman Catholic Church 02:26 most notably but not the only one 02:28 has been suggesting something similar, 02:32 that there should be prohibitions 02:35 against defaming of the religions. 02:40 Sounds good on the face of it but I just think that 02:43 it heads us straight back to the Middle Ages. 02:45 Yeah--And right now Christians, generally 02:49 and Roman Catholics themselves are on the receiving end 02:53 of the laws along those lines in Pakistan 02:55 and elsewhere where Christians 02:57 are being put on trial for their life 02:59 because they made some slighting comment 03:01 about Muhammad or whatever or maybe not. 03:04 Maybe they didn't even actually say it 03:05 but it's presumed by the society 03:07 and then Pakistani law will condemn them 03:10 because they-- by being a Christian 03:13 have insulted the prophet. 03:15 So, you know, it looks two ways 03:17 but I have to think that the Roman Catholic Church 03:20 in particular see some final pay off, for getting the-- 03:24 for piggybacking under this trend 03:27 to restrict the ability of somebody 03:29 not to grossly insult but to speak negatively 03:33 in the sense of religion by saying 03:35 "I believe this, I don't believe that." 03:37 See, the problem with that kind of a law 03:40 is that number one, one could arguably-- 03:42 You have a chilling effect on religious expression. 03:45 One could see that it would be 03:47 a restriction of free speech obviously. 03:49 But whenever we narrow it down 03:51 to the aspect of religious speech, 03:53 the problem, biggest problem with that kind of law is that 03:56 it is completely depended upon 03:58 which religious body is the dominant one. 04:01 Because obviously for example, 04:02 if religion 'A' is the dominant one 04:04 and they say we have this law 04:06 that we've encouraged government to pass, 04:08 that is, let's say a law against blasphemy. 04:10 You know, we shouldn't denigrate any religion. 04:12 Well, if they are the one in the dominance group 04:15 nobody can speak against that and it will automatically force 04:18 those that are smaller religions to remain such. 04:21 But when one recognizes that there should be in society 04:24 the free speech, free religious expression 04:27 then it allows any religious group 04:29 to express their views and sharing those to proselytize 04:33 and basically grow their congregations 04:35 as they are blessed by the Lord. 04:36 You know, we need to tell our viewers 04:37 it seems self evident although they could allow another viewer 04:41 listening to our freewheeling discussion. 04:43 But nobody in religious liberty work 04:45 I think would even dare to suggest that 04:48 as a matter of course we should insult, 04:51 malign or speak profanely of other people's faith. 04:57 That's in the extreme but the free speech issue 05:00 requires that you allow even that sort of behavior 05:04 under the rubric of the rights of religious expression. 05:08 Where it becomes very dangerous is not those extreme people. 05:13 Most people can sort of judge someone that's just, 05:15 you know--well, the Bible says like the tongue is like, 05:18 you know, a burning brand. 05:20 You know, just creating me mayhem everywhere they go. 05:22 But where it's dangerous is 05:24 where you're advancing your faith 05:26 and maybe you believe something that's different from the other. 05:28 And that dominant religion says that it's offensive to them 05:32 for you even to suggest your faith. 05:34 So they lower the threshold of what's insulting it. 05:38 Maybe you've lowered it so far you don't even know before 05:40 you speak your comment that this is an insult 05:42 to another faith and that's very dangerous. 05:44 But the only way to stay clear 05:46 that I think is like free speech generally. 05:49 Allow all religious speech and then, 05:52 then as far as social pressure decry it 05:54 when it's just over the top. Correct. 05:57 It's not--it's not polite and you'll need to change. 06:02 I think most people recognize when something is, 06:04 you know, where they are spitting hatred, 06:06 you know, someone's just spewing hatred 06:08 and malevolence and dislike of another group. 06:10 That's not--that shouldn't be socially acceptable 06:13 but we have to allow it to be legally acceptable 06:16 as long as we want religious liberty, right? 06:18 And see it's something like 06:20 creating an environment like that, 06:22 much like what we find here in the United States, 06:24 allows for the free expression of religion 06:28 even if there's different viewpoints. 06:29 And the moment that we start trying 06:31 to establish some kind of a gauge 06:34 to say this is acceptable and this is not-- 06:36 We're in trouble. Yeah. 06:37 The danger is, is that who's going 06:39 to be the dominant authority to say--to define that. 06:42 And once religion takes on that role, 06:44 all of a sudden you find some group ostracized 06:46 and persecuted, marginalized and others favored. 06:50 And I think we're already into enchanted ground in my view. 06:54 You know, there was this big fuss 06:56 recently on a film that I haven't yet seen. 06:59 And I'll accept that it was pretty low life, 07:01 this film about Muhammad. 07:05 The cause rioting-- cause in quotes, 07:08 rioting all over the Middle East. 07:10 But I noticed that this guy is now in jail 07:14 on a parole violation. 07:17 I do believe in coincidences in life 07:19 but I've noticed the pattern. 07:21 He did something that was offensive, not illegal. 07:24 And pressure has brought to bear 07:26 in this case they called in... his prior life 07:30 and he's bearing a penalty suddenly. 07:32 He might not have otherwise. 07:33 This is not Religious Liberty but a sign of 07:36 this Australian freewheeling tattletal 07:43 spilled a lot of secrets. 07:44 The US would love to have him in court and try him 07:47 on espionage charges or something like that. 07:51 But I noticed that a charge 07:53 came out of the woodwork of sexual abuse. 07:58 And he's still fighting his deportation 08:00 fearing that he'll be deported to the US. 08:02 I think we've already seen that some of these things 08:06 even though they may not narrowly speaking be illegal 08:08 but great legal pressure is brought to bear against you. 08:11 And they have a hugely chilling effect on free speech 08:14 and religious speech as the case might be. 08:18 Now coming back, putting all of that-- 08:20 And so the rioting. 08:22 While we think that just unhinged crowds 08:25 within the Muslim community can't represent all of Islam 08:28 but it happens in all Muslim countries. 08:30 When they run, people die. 08:32 That has a chilling effect on religious expression. 08:35 There's no question already 08:36 though that's happened in the worst. 08:38 And I think, you know, kind of putting it 08:40 within the context of this idea of the Islamic states 08:44 pushing for some kind of legislation 08:47 that one could look at and say, okay, 08:49 they're not wanting one group to defame another group. 08:53 Even though the language of blasphemy laws are not used 08:57 I think that one can gather the input of such laws 09:01 if they were passed is basically a reversion back 09:04 to a time period when the dominant religion 09:07 basically had such a control over society that they said 09:10 what could be expressed and what could not be expressed. 09:13 And that's the danger that in the international arena 09:17 that we run into if laws like that were passed. 09:19 It's a past administration but I remember 09:22 under the previous US presidency they went-- 09:27 they didn't take too kindly the people demonstrating 09:29 against the administration. 09:30 So it got to the point 09:33 where yes, you could speak against them 09:35 but not in the presence of the president. 09:38 And if he was coming through town-- 09:39 I remember on one occasion the cavalcade was here 09:42 and 2 miles away was a roped off area 09:45 that was called the "free speech zone." 09:48 You could say you're appeased too. 09:50 I think we're getting close to that with religious speech 09:53 that's offensive to others, particularly Islam. 09:56 Yes, within narrow and narrow constrains 09:58 you can say less and less. 10:00 They won't stop you totally but if you-- 10:03 certainly if you made a film that cause rioting, 10:06 you could find yourself in jail for maligning that religion. 10:09 And you know, I think that with that, Lincoln, 10:11 that one would have to recognize that 10:13 while modern Islam is trying through their scholars, 10:17 trying to find ways to integrate with democracy, 10:20 trying to accommodate religious pluralism, 10:23 there's still the challenge that one finds 10:25 where there's core principles and beliefs of Islam 10:29 that unless they rewrite the Quran, 10:32 unless they rewrite some of their history 10:34 they are still at a great perplexity 10:37 to find how can they accommodate 10:39 and embrace completely democracy-- 10:42 Yeah, and we express it as between 10:44 the--the moderates and the radicals. 10:48 And unfortunately, I think too often 10:50 when you relate that to our experience 10:52 that's between the fundamentalists 10:55 and the nominalists and within a religion to depend on those 11:00 that are not strongly committed to the religion 11:02 to solve the problem is illusion I think at best. 11:06 But we're all committed to seeking 11:08 some sort of religious harmony such as that it's not violence 11:11 and there's freedom to advance a religion. 11:13 Sure. Correct. 11:14 And I think that, you know, that would be the central thing 11:16 that we would need to try and focus on 11:18 in the modern context from an international perspective 11:21 is trying to find a way where different religions 11:24 can live together in society in peace, 11:27 where they can find expression of their religious views 11:30 and where they can also basically feel 11:33 that they have society established in a way 11:35 to guarantee and protect societal peace and freedom. 11:40 I've had several very satisfying discussions 11:43 with an Imam from a mosque over on the west coast of the US. 11:48 He happens to be a member of the Ahmadiyya sect, 11:51 a sect that most westerners don't hear about. 11:53 We hear Shiites and Sunnis, 11:55 the two main divisions within Islam 11:58 but there are others including the Ahmadiyyas 12:00 who in their own way accept Christ 12:02 and have a slightly more enlightened view 12:05 of interacting with other religions. 12:07 And it's been very satisfying 12:09 to share some of their common concerns 12:11 about truth and integrity of, 12:14 in my case, the Bible and his case the Quran 12:18 and then a common interest in Jesus Christ. 12:21 But it strikes me every time I talk to this man 12:24 and each article that I printed from him 12:27 that there is a need within his faith tradition 12:31 to work toward if not direct pluralism in an understanding 12:36 and acceptance of a slight divergence of opinion. 12:39 When we talk about Islam we must remember 12:41 it is not a monolithic religion. 12:45 There are different views. 12:47 And there's Ellen White speaking to Adventist said 12:49 there are many people looking wistfully to heaven. 12:53 It's my prayer that there may be many more of those 12:56 as we work toward accommodation and dialogue with such faiths. 13:01 For "Liberty Insider" this is Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2014-12-17