Bydio

In the article ““Muslim Feminists” in NY want to start Qur’an council“, Jihad Watch quotes from Reuters:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Muslim feminists from around the world vowed to create the first women’s council to interpret the Koran and overcome two stereotypes about their religion: Muslims are terrorists and Islam oppresses women.

The United States of America has a proud tradition of freedom from religious persecution as a tenet of our society.  No matter if you worship trees or fairies or imaginary men in the sky, it’s your choice, and no one can harm you on your basis of belief.

A secular government allows people to make their own choice — to self-determine — on how or who to worship, if you worship at all.  A secular government is freedom from religious persecution because it allows anyone to step away from a religion if they find it doesn’t agree with their sensibilities any more, and to not fear reprisals from others of the religion one leaves.  The force of the faithful will be met with the force of the government, set up to protect its citizens from unwarranted harm (can’t insulate people, after all; risk is part of living).

So what happens when the belief of one religion goes against the supposed norms of the society one lives in?  Here is where secular government needs to step aside; it’s that freedom of religion thing.

If a woman wants to be led by a man in Shari’a fashion, she should be allowed to determine that course herself.  If she doesn’t want it, she should be allowed to step away from the religion and go free.  The choice is hers.

Further, if that woman chooses the path of Jihad, and chooses to agress against others based on their religious beliefs, or lack thereof, then she should expect to meet Allah sooner than she may’ve wanted to, based on the accuracy of the aim of a citizen of the secular society.

So, if you want to wear your burkha or nijab, go right ahead.  Don’t expect people to treat you with openness, though, since you’re covering yourself according to your faith.  And if you raise your children to worship the Jihadi way, expect to be heartbroken when someone kills that child — following your teachings — who doesn’t think they should be attacked because they don’t believe what you believe.

The sword is double-edged and very sharp.  While a government might equivocate, its individual citizens aren’t usually very tolerant of being attacked and killed.

**********************

Speaking of raising children in a religious manner, this has become a very tricky subject to broach in this society.  Saying or doing anything that might be construed as “harm” to a child is something that can land a person in jail.

I guess I’ll dare the wrath of the masses and try to — as best as possible — speak my mind.

Instead of diving into the sexual aspect brought up in the Jihad Watch article and the Qur’an, I’ll try to focus on more general issues.  One issue that comes to mind is the faith healing aspect that surfaced a few years ago.  If I recall, a child — or some children — died because the parents believed in faith healing and not taking medication or surgery.

Many people were troubled by this, and I can understand their frustration and shock at someone not trying to help their child the best way they know possible.  But that’s the crux of religion, and family in particular: it’s not up to you to decide what’s best for one family, or how they practice their religion.  Even if their children die, even if they kill themselves, as long as they don’t harm you or your family, then you have no say in the matter.  Their children are theirs to raise as good or as bad as they see fit.

I know, it’s harsh.  You scream and rail inside, wanting to save those poor children from a life not as good as what you think they deserve.  Doesn’t everyone have the right to life?

Sure, they have the right to life by being born.  They also have the right to death because they will die, sooner or later.  They have the right to live as they choose, or how their parents choose until they reach the age of majority.

Let’s flip the scrip and have them impose their will on your children.  You want to take your children to a doctor because they’re sick, but you will have to do it clandestinely or you will be put in jail and your children will be taken away, or you can call upon your faith — the accepted course of action — and hope things turn out okay.  Now, if your child dies on the operating table, the faith healers are vindicated in their beliefs, expounding about how dangerous such a practice can be, and not only do you lose your child by trying to help them the best way you thought you should, but you now have to go to jail for it.  If your child lives through the operation, and it’s found out that the child was indeed secretly whisked away to a doctor *gasp* for help, then your child is safe, you feel good in that you did the right thing, but you still go to jail.  Sure, your child is alive, but your family is broken because someone else didn’t like your personal course of action, and you imposed that sacreligious action upon your children (how DARE you?!).

Sure, it sounds ridiculous to most people, but if you can impose your will on someone else, but they can’t impose their will on you, then there’s something inherently wrong with your philosophy.  Sometimes, you just shouldn’t meddle.  Individual wills should not be imposed on others based on personal belief.  Try to convince them with dialogue, certainly, but using physical force on someone so they conform to your beliefs is anathema.  This philosophy should be in your heart: leave me alone.

So while we can consider how the treatment of other people’s children may be a tragedy, if you aren’t willing to have them impose their will on you and your children, then you need to leave them alone.

The only time you should get involved is when something physically affects you.  There are plenty of issues out there affecting you right now that you should be involved in, but how the Joneses — or Abdullahs — raise their children isn’t one of them.

Now go hug your kid(s) if you’re glad you have them.

Update 20061201: I may be using poor examples or analogies here… something’s eating at me about this for days and I can’t put my finger on it… will have to revisit later.