The nation-state as idol

Rod Dreher & Daniel Larison discuss the intersection of religion and patriotism. The issue of course isn’t adherence to a higher law vs. the nation-state; even those without explicitly religious motivations can reject loyalty to a state whose actions they feel to be illegitimate. Rather, the bigger issue are multiple loyalties. Religion is an incredible ideological and institutional system for transcending boundaries of nationality, but the inverse of that is that religious minorities have long been under suspicion. During the Persian-Byzantine wars of the early 7th century Jews notably sided with Persians and exacted revenge for 6th century persecutions in the Levant upon the previously dominant Christians. This was a rational act by a religious minority who aligned with the power which had a history of greater tolerance toward their faith, the Zoroastrian Sassanians.

But the relevance of multiple loyalties varies from group to group. There is for example one majority-Jewish nation. And there are only two majority-Hindu nations. There is only one Cuba. By contrast, there are ~1.5 billion Muslims scattered across the World Island. One reason Islam has bloody borders with other civilizations likely has to do with the fact that it has many borders, period. This means that Muslim populations are likely to be faced with a test of loyalty far more often than Hindu populations, or Sikh populations.

Posted in culture, data | Tagged , | 7 Comments

Dealing with the big colorful lie

The British ruling on “Who is a Jew” seems to have a lot of legs, see The Atlantic Wire for a link round-up. One of the problems with the intersection of religion and policy is that everyone has different standards and perspectives as to issues of fact. As an atheist who adheres to no religion I view all religion as ultimately a product of human history and psychology. Many adherents of a specific religion are atheists when it comes to the claims of other religions. And finally, there are shades of universalism; a liberal Episcopalian may assent that the conservative Muslim has a valid window upon the true sliver of the infinite, but the conservative Muslim may believe that the liberal Episcopalian is going to hell because of the manifest falsity of their beliefs.

In a democratic society which is also pluralist in regards to religion there is always the problem that the manner in which a given religion is accommodated is contingent upon the opinions of other religionists and irreligionists. In fact, this is also the case in a non-democratic society. Jews are an excellent illustration of this dynamic, what we today term “Orthodox Judaism” is a religious tradition which was incubated largely within the civilizational framework of Christianity and Islam. Though Jews within Christian and Muslim polities had a certain level of autonomy, they were strongly shaped implicitly and explicitly by the will and opinions of non-Jews (guess whether European Jews or Yemeni Jews accept polygyny). One thesis for why Jews as a whole adopted matrilineal descent is that it was a Roman legal practice, and most Jews were resident within the Roman Empire, or right beyond the frontiers of Rome (in Mesopotamia, where the population was likely mostly Christian by the 5th century despite rule by Sassanian Zoroastrians). I mooted this thesis to an acquaintance who was an Orthodox Jew. As a point of support I noted that Joseph, the son of Jacob, had two sons by an Egyptian woman, and that these two sons were the ancestors of two tribes of Israel. This fact presented no problem for my friend, she reported that “oral law” held that in fact Asenath, the Egyptian wife of Joseph was adopted by the priest Potipherah, and that she was by origin Jewish. As a non-Jew, and non-believer in the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims at that, I immediately found it more likely that the rabbis simply concocted this story after the fact to “tie up loose ends.”
Continue reading

Posted in culture | Tagged | 7 Comments

Is Britain establishing Protestantism as the state religion?

Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question:

By many standards, the JFS applicant, identified in court papers as “M,” is Jewish. But not in the eyes of the school, which defines Judaism under the Orthodox definition set out by Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. Because M’s mother converted in a progressive, not an Orthodox, synagogue, the school said, she was not a Jew — nor was her son. It turned down his application.

That would have been the end of it. But M’s family sued, saying that the school had discriminated against him. They lost, but the ruling was overturned by the Court of Appeal this summer.

In an explosive decision, the court concluded that basing school admissions on a classic test of Judaism — whether one’s mother is Jewish — was by definition discriminatory. Whether the rationale was “benign or malignant, theological or supremacist,” the court wrote, “makes it no less and no more unlawful.”

The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jewishness was based on religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not. The court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status of M’s mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced Judaism.

It is unclear what effect the ruling, if it is upheld, will have on other religious schools. Some Catholic schools, accustomed to using baptism as a baseline admissions criterion, are worried that they will have to adopt similar practice tests.

“How dare they question our beliefs and our Jewishness?” David Lightman, an observant Jewish father whose daughter was also denied a place at the school because it did not recognize her mother’s conversion, told reporters recently. “I find it offensive and very upsetting.”

The title is tongue-in-cheek, as the Church of England, a Protestant denomination (unless you talk to some obstinate Anglo-Catholics), is the established church of England. My point though is that the British authorities seem to be enforcing a Protestant understanding of religious identity, in fact, a specifically dissenting Protestant conception of religious identity, that what you believe & confess is what “counts”. This is of course not something which is widely agreed upon, and in fact, implicitly it is probably a minority viewpoint, even in other jurisdictions of the United Kingdom. Within Judaism the historical tradition for the past 2,000 years has been upon the necessity of matrilineal descent, or, conversion. Judaism is understood as a nation as well as a religion. The British authorities seem intent on rewriting this understanding, and by doing so are imposing a very sectarian Christian understanding of the nature of religious identity. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s what’s going on.

And these sorts of issues are why the concept of religious “neutrality” is simply incoherent. By the act of definition and demarcation one is engaging in an act of discrimination and preference.

Posted in culture | 23 Comments

We’re not going to catch up

A recent item on New York City’s public radio station announced an award program for local science teachers.  Featured was a teacher who had his students keep journals “reflecting on their scientific thinking,” ” in the tradition of Leonardo.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 16 Comments

Civilizing the young

Many Americans who are indifferent to faith will confess they find themselves challenged as they try to raise good and decent children without the religious confidence their parents had.

writes William McGurn, for whose sagacity I have the utmost respect.  But if I may offer an alternative perspective, while taking Bill fully at his word:  The problem for child-rearing today, if one exists, may stem less from lack of belief in God than from lack of belief in authority.  If parents are unwilling or unable to restrain their children, my guess is that it is their absorption of the 1960s ethic of authenticity, rather than skepticism towards supernatural claims, that is most influencing their practices in the home.  Jesus is not the source of the mandate to say please and thank you; a due respect for civilization is.  Self-restraint, manners, artifice, the ideal of behaving like a gentleman or a lady, these are courtly virtues, not necessarily religious ones, and they were all trashed by the pseudo-cult of “getting back to nature” (i.e., no haircuts, bathing optional, no more suits and ties, no more waiting till marriage, and, from what I observe in some of my peers and their progeny, forks, spoons, and knives expendable).  Religious zeal can in fact trump respect for authority and manners in the pursuit of holy Truth, no less than the baby-boomers’ pursuit of maximal self-expression, which latter quest I suspect is the real child-rearing culprit here (along with a hyper charged multi-billion dollar youth industry). Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 19 Comments

In Congress sex matters on abortion

Below are the mean ratings from an abortion rights group for the year 2007-2008. The number of women in Congress at any given time is small, so the inclusion of two very moderate Republicans such as Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins in the class of Republican women has a large effect, but the contrast with the public still seems noteworthy. Both Republican and Democratic women support abortion rights more forcefully.

National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association Rating
All of Congress 56.2
Female 80.4
Male 51.8
Republican 7.4
Democratic 91.2
Republican & Female 31.6
Republican & Male 4.7
Democratic & Female 99
Democratic & Male 89.3

The data is here.

Posted in culture, data | Tagged | 3 Comments

Abortion, men & women on the same page

Over at The Washington Post Ezra Klein has a post, The gender politics of the abortion “compromise”:

It’s sadly telling that the “compromise” proposal limiting abortion was offered by Bart Stupak, and seconded by a Republican male. The opposition was led by Diana DeGette, and seconded by Rosa DeLauro. Stupak’s proposal has female supporters, to be sure, a decision that will mainly govern women is being made primarily by men. I would bet that the final vote will show a majority of congresswoman vote against this bill.

I’ll have to look at attitudes to abortion of the duly elected representatives of the people at some point, but might be useful to remember that there is really no sex difference when it comes to attitudes toward abortion. Below are some questions from the GSS broken down by sex for the years from 1998-2008.
Continue reading

Posted in culture, data | Tagged | 1 Comment

Torture porn

Liberal and left-wing critics of Bush’s “war on terror” have brandished the word “torture” to refer to every stressful interrogation practice that soldiers in Afghanistan and Guantanamo desperately and clumsily evolved in their effort to gather intelligence on presumed terror networks.   But when an argument requires describing the actual torture practiced by more ruthless regimes, suddenly American interrogation practices are demoted to “abusive interrogation,” say, so as to recover and redeploy the original meaning of the term (officially defined as the intentional infliction of severe mental and physical pain and suffering) heretofore lost in the ecstatic (and sometimes justified) denunciation of Bush’s anti-terror policies.

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Nicholas Wade’s New Book

Nick Wade’s new book The Faith Instinct comes out next week.  I’ve been reading it for review, and it’s excellent.  He seems (I’m only 60 pages in) to plant himself firmly in the religion-is-adaptive camp. This puts him in a minority among people who write about the natural history of religion.  Most take religion to be an accidental by-product of cognitive processes — hair-trigger “agency detection” modules etc.  Nice to see the other point of view (and group selection, too) get an airing.

My review of Nick’s previous book Before the Dawn is here.

Posted in science, Science & Faith | 4 Comments

Infant mortality, here and elsewhere

If you’re a baby, you’ve got a greater chance of surviving into your toddler years if you’re born in godless Europe and other less zealous Western and Asian nations than in religious America.   Premature births, often brought on by drinking, drug use, and smoking, as well as accidents, assaults, and homicides, explain the higher rates of infant mortality in the U.S., with its allegedly superior moral commitment  and “culture of life,” compared to other wealthy countries.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 11 Comments