``I'm no fan of religion, but I don't see much point in bringing it up everyday.'' Doug
------
Not in the way the it is usually brought up---belief or non-belief. But there is serious point to considering the impact that the religions of the book are profoundly incroching into the political space of discourse and deforming our concepts of liberalism, the polity, rights, tolerance and the rest of it.
I am slowly coming the conclusion that these religions are wholly incompatible with political liberalism and in fact pose both a challenge and a threat. They are a threat not just in the concrete political realities of the day, but also in a principled or philosophical or conceptual fashion that promises to last far beyond any immediate ad hoc political resolutions that we might come to at the moment.
In order to understand what I am trying to quickly sketch, its important to actually the damned bible, the OT particulary and as much of the Qu'ran as you can stand. It's there that you find the enormous difference of mentality between a secular state and a theocracy.
Just about all the basic ways of thinking, acting, and effecting the larger society through religion or a secular liberal state are in direct conflict with each other. The two hundred and fifty year Euro history between say 1500 and 1750s where filled with these conflicts and struggles to reconcile them.
I think we should now be able to see that history anew and conclude these two systems are irreconcilable and incompatible, and we had better start figuring out how to sequester religion---put it back in the quiet and private congregation mode where it belongs.
There is more to the Western tradition of separation between church and state than just the enlightenment essayists ridicule and the intuitive wisdom of the US founding fathers.
I'll try to outline some of it tonight---mostly from reading Strauss on the Theological-Political problem. Too much detail to deal with from my work terminal....
CG