Martha Nussbaum: "The New Religious Intolerance"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-04-24/martha-nussbaum-new-religious-intolerance
C Jill Reed via Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mulmatsherm/
Some Rights Reserved: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mulmatsherm/2221223106/sizes/z/in/photostream/
Fear of others based on their religion has a long history. It is a problem that continues today. A professor of law and ethics at the University of Chicago talks about overcoming the politics of fear in an anxious age.
Guests
Martha Nussbaum
professor of law and ethics at the University of Chicago.
Program Highlights
In a new book "The New Religious Intolerance," Martha Nussbaum explores a long history in Europe and the United States of fear and discrimination against those of other religions. In recent years, much of this has been directed at Muslims. By understanding the sources of these fears, she writes we can overcome them and extend the rights we demand for ourselves to others.
Constitutional Principles of Religious Tolerance
Since the colonial period, Nussbaum said, we've been concerned with two big things - the exercise of free religion and non-establishment of religion. One clause that applied, the so-called "free exercise" clause, protects people in the exercise of their religion, even when it involves them in asking for dispensation from some law that applies generally to other people. As an example, people from pacifist religions are exempt from the military draft. But there are always ongoing questions about how much accommodation authorities are required to make for someone's religion.
Which Religions Glorify Martyrdom?
A caller asked which religions glorify martyrdom, and Nussbaum said Christianity has a long tradition of it. "I think what often happens is that people are so familiar with the scriptures of their own religion and they make selective use of it and selective use of the history. But when it's Islam that they don't know much about then certain things jump out at them and they think, oh this glorifies martyrdom," Nussbaum said.
The Question of Atheism
Guest host Susan Page said she had heard that Americans would rather elect a Muslim to office than an atheist. "Certainly we do have a very long and unfortunate tradition of demonizing atheists," Nussbaum said. It's hard for some people to believe someone else is an honest person if they don't believe in God, she said, and this is not necessarily a new phenomenon - John Locke thought that atheists shouldn't be tolerated because they can't swear an oath.
You can read the full transcript here.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Religious intolerance is a two-way street - intolerance OF religions and intolerance BY religions.
My dad was Catholic.My mom was Lutheran. I was baptized Lutheran and raised Catholic.My brother and sister were baptized Catholic and raised Lutheran. What and act of cruelty. Our parents wanted us to decide for ourselves.What I decided is,NO MIDDLE MAN NEEDED ! Churches have become the playground of political extremism.That just plain sucks. The message of Jesus has been completely lost in churches.If you want your children raised as racist intolerant bigots,stay in church. If not,teach them the message and goal of Jesus.
Apart, perhaps, from a notional porn actress bound to a 'suitcase pimp', no woman is in danger of being killed by a relative for not having plastic surgery.
Make no mistake: I am against sumptuary codes enforced by State violence---but I am also against their enforcement by familial violence. I'd feel easier about the whole thing if we had better public services for women needing to flee their families, but the ideology of privatisation has degraded our society to the point where many people really must depend on their families to live, especially if they have been kept (or keep themselves) isolated from the general society.
Less specifically:
A close reading of the opinions of luminaries such as H.G. Wells on the unsuitability of 'Hebrews' and 'Celestials' (Chinese) to residence in and contribution to the U.S., but an hundred years past, is very instructive in considering the general question.
And on the third hand, of course all the truth-claims of all the religions should have no weight in civil society, neither my people's claim that adultery should be a crime for all peoples nor some other fanatic's contention that a zygote were an human being.
I recently took a tour of Turkey. Our guide told us that the president of Turkey has said his daughters go to university in the United States because they can wear their head scarves in US classrooms while in Turkey it is not allowed.
Wearing of the head scarf and other coverings is a sign of the subjugation of women. A doctor wearing a uniform to distinguish him/herself is different from women being forced to cover themselves in ways that men don't have to do as part of a religious viewpoint that says women are unclean or too tempting for men to deal with unless they are all covered up. To talk about plastic surgery and other western ways of objectifying women is a side issue--are women objectified in society? Absolutely, and men are too. But having one doesn't make the other one okay. The head scarf and burka is a whole different issue--it's about who has the power, and who wants to keep it. While touring a mosque in China with an African-American friend, who defended the Islamic separation on religious grounds (she was not Muslim), I asked my friend if separation worked in the pre-Civil Rights days. Separate is not equal.
A martyr is a person who dies for a higher cause. If that person also deliberately causes the deaths of other innocent persons, then that person is a murderer; not a martyr.
the point should be made: we should be wary of all religions and all intolerant people. both want to control others.
I wonder if Ms. Nussbaum also defends slavery in the name of cultural difference or religious freedom. It is simply revolting to hear a woman who has always enjoyed every possible freedom wax lyrical about the life of women in burqas. To get a more sensible and less career-serving view, it is worth listening to Mona Eltahawi, author of "Why they hate us," who was interviewed this morning in "Morning Edition."
I'm sorry but rarely and I heard such a biased view. Bias can be come from a liberal view as much as it can from the right. One can not 'embrace' diversity of culture (as in allowing the waring of the bhurka) and not recognize the diversity of the European countries and their entitlement to maintain their particular culture. The Europeans are not countries built on a tradition of immigrants or diversity nor do they necessary have a constitution of equality. They are therefore totally entitled to say 'you can not ware a bhurka'
We should also make sure fact are stated not the opinion of one academic. 1) the bhurka is not a requirement of the Muslim religion, it a purely a middle-eastern tradition and 2) Christian martyrdom has never endorsed martyrdom through suicide bombing.
It's funny to consider the US as religiously intolerant given the number of regions which practice here. Relatively speaking the intolerance of Muslim countries far outstrips any ignorance or intolerance we find here.
As a nation, we are certainly culturally insulated with gaping ignorance of other cultures. However, we are more aware of Muslims because of 9/11, the ongoing wars and the Arab Spring. Among the many things we've discovered is that persecution of women and religious minorities by those nations who are living in a 7th century-like civilizations of the middle east is truly barbaric.
Sorry to say that I sense that Dr Nussbam is an apologist ignoring the practices of these anti-women, and intolerant cultures dominated by the Muslim faith and which seeks to spread their religion in a way dissimilar only in technique (terrorism vs armed conquest) to the aggressive way that Christianity acted over the centuries with Conquistadors and Crusaders oppressing other cultures.
We should be wary of anyone who makes claims that cannot be backed up by evidence and logical argument, because in the absence of those the only way to have your argument prevail is force or its threat.
And raising your voice is a clear sign that you're on shaky ground.
I think the problem with any religion, but particularly with the Islamic religion, is people's perceptions that extremists are trying to replace secular law with religious law. Radical right wing Christians are attempting to do that in the U.S. In France, the strong showing by Marie Le Pen is understandable when she says people of all religions are welcome to live in our secular society. It is a reasonable position to take.
Even more nauseating is her equating martyrdom in the service of freedom and preventing or limiting repression and atrocities with martyrdom for the purpose of imposing a medieval misogynist faith (myth) based ideology BY committing atrocities.
I would like to know what Mrs. Nussbaum would recomend to the jewish people in Israel regarding religious intolerance when they are surrounded by people who wish them to be wiped out in name of religion and far outnumber them.
People in Europe and elswhere are weary of Islam because it does not or is hijacked not to tolerate other religion.
Europe is culturaly rich continent because her people devloped cultures based on what they have in common which includes ethnicity. If we all decide to "multiculturize" we will loose the diversity. Jews understand this better than most.
I was raised by two parents with very strong christian beliefs. I consider our history as christians: the Crusades, modern missionaries sneaking into foreign countries to bring about religious conversions and many other psychologies taught in the christian church. I have to say that when I first heard about the mass-murder of 77 people, I did think that the christian faith is responsible to a significant degree.
It is very ignorant for someone to equate islamic martyrdom, aka Jihad, with christian martyrdom. To put it in simplest terms, islamic martyrs, e.g. suicide bombers, have the intent of killing others with them, those who they consider to be worthy of death only because they are not muslim, who they call "infidels"; this is what is in the Koran. Christian martyrs are those who die by the hands of those who persecute them only because of their religious beliefs and who die singularly with no intent for taking others with them by murder. Please speak with facts or don't comment on a subject that is not your area of expertise; it is very embarrassing for you and very ignorant and disrespectful.
mmb wrote:
"Even more nauseating is her equating martyrdom in the service of freedom and preventing or limiting repression and atrocities with martyrdom for the purpose of imposing a medieval misogynist faith (myth) based ideology BY committing atrocities."
Yes, this was REPREHENSIBLE! She lost all credibility after that one!
I'd also like to know what Ms. Nussbaum would recommend to the Jewish people when they choke off land for both Muslim and Christian people in the illegally settled lands of the West Bank. Why can't the Jewish leadership recognize this is a long term strategic liability for them, and totally against everything we believe in America? Unquestionable backing of Israel by the US is why it is so relevant to all of us here in the US.
The secular laws are based on Christian laws. So, you can't say that they are independent of religion.
thank you for commenting on this. it is my point exactly as well.
I am an Indian where several major religions lived together for many years and therefore I feel I am familiar with the topic that your guest raises. Your guest seem to oversimplify the issue of religious discrimination by comparing it with racial discrimination ignoring the fact that religious identity comes with a strong set of beliefs and convictions that lend themselves to certain kind of predefined opinion about someone. And these opinions often are supported by history.
I am an Indian where several major religions lived together for many years and therefore I feel I am familiar with the topic that your guest raises. Your guest seem to oversimplify the issue of religious discrimination by comparing it with racial discrimination ignoring the fact that religious identity comes with a strong set of beliefs and convictions that lend themselves to certain kind of predefined opinion about someone. And these opinions often are supported by history.
when we speak of religions, it is very imperative that we compare religions, not people who hold those religions. Islamic law and the Koran are full of violence, Christianity calls for peace. We should not judge a religion by its people, we should judge a religion by its beliefs. There are very wonderful muslim people and very bad christian people and vice versa. We shouldn't misjudge a religion by its people.
"Reply" option doesn't seem to work.
Many Jehovah's Witnesses, who are pacifist, also died in the death camps because they refused to fight in Hitler's army.
@timify10
Martha Nussbaum professor of law and ethics at the University of Chicago.......god(s) help us!
Kate Van Houdt wrote:
Many Jehovah's Witnesses, who are pacifist, also died in the death camps because they refused to fight in Hitler's army.
I agree with you! There were 12.5 million people who died in the Holocaust. All through high-school the number taught was six million. It wasn't until I went to University that I found out that this was just the number of Jews. The 6.5 million of non-Jews who went to the death-camps included: Black People, Homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Roma (gypsies).
I don't know how many high-schools teach the correct number, but I am guessing that few do. All of these different groups should be remembered and respected - including the Jewish victims, but not limited to those victims.
sm wrote:
when we speak of religions, it is very imperative that we compare religions, not people who hold those religions. Islamic law and the Koran are full of violence, Christianity calls for peace. We should not judge a religion by its people, we should judge a religion by its beliefs. There are very wonderful muslim people and very bad christian people and vice versa. We shouldn't misjudge a religion by its people.
************************************************************
Can we look at the Pope and come to conclusions about Christianity because of what he promotes, as the leader of the Catholic Church and as the defacto world leader for many in the Protestant faith? I think the leaders of a church can be held as examples of what the religion means. The relgious leaders offer their interpretation of the Bible. I realize that many american Catholics follow their own conscience over the directive of the Church. However, religious leaders are telling their flock what to believe and what not to believe; they offer an interpretation of the written Gospels.
My point is that the texts are one thing, what the leaders say is another. What is more important is how people act in response. It is the actions that are most important. Nothing that you said is contrary to this opinion, but I wanted to articulate it anyway.
In the 100's of hours of holocaust documentaries that have or sooner or later run on pbs or elsewhere, if you blinked or got up to get a drink or go to the loo, you'll miss the mention (grudging summary listing) of non Jewish victims.
The most suffering sufferers of the world™ would rather not have this title diluted by having to share it with others. Even less with homosexuals.
When do WE realize WE invaded Muslim countries. When do WE realize WE occupy Muslim countries.
If armed Muslim troops were patrolling our streets,wouldn`t it be OUR patriotic duty to resist,defy,and expel the invaders?
Google the Crusades.I thought Christians only invaded a couple of times.Dozens of invasions.Not counting today`s.