On intolerance and bigotry

The insightful editorial The Pastor’s Folly And A Lesson In Tolerance (September 20) raises a series of alarmingly complex issues; among them the evils of intolerance, the folly of radicalism, the question of identity and the consequences of religious apartheid. Indeed history is peppered with events relating to this uniquely quintessential human characteristic that has been the catalyst of untold human suffering that in the fullness of time has proven the absurdity of such actions and reactions.

The story is now well known. As the ninth anniversary of 9/11 approached, Americans were becoming increasingly vocal about the possibility of building an Islamic centre very close to Ground Zero. Tempers flared! Things came to a boil when out of nowhere an insignificant congregation in the US released a statement. The Dove World Outreach Centre, a congregation of about 50 members and its fiery pastor announced the intention to desecrate the Koran by burning on September 9. In a matter of hours the small town of Gainesville, Florida became the stage of a media circus and its attendant and probable collateral damage.

Pastor Terry Jones was well known in his community for his anti-Islamic and anti-homosexual position. Only last year, members of the Dove congregation sent their children to school in T-shirts proclaiming “Islam is the Devil”. Of course they got unceremoniously ejected with limited media attention. Earlier this year, Pastor Jones campaigned ferociously against a candidate in Gainesville under the theme “No homo for mayor”. All this should put into perspective the character of Pastor Jones.

The reaction on a national and international level almost beggars belief. Clearly the action was considered both unacceptable and embarrassing. Yet the action, and the media coverage it received, bolstered the reaction of Islamic countries around the globe. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Iraq became hot spots of violent protest. This event was a kick to the brittle inter-faith dialogue and the safety of Christian enclaves in some countries threatened as they already are. This senseless burning would, as it did, strengthen the hand of radicals on both sides who will use any excuse to stir more ill feeling between two unfortunately contra-opposing realities. The condemnation of religious leaders was unequivocal!

The editorial made me re-visit an article I had read a couple of Sundays ago in The Sunday Times of London entitled Denounce This Nut-Job Or The World Will Burn, penned by English author and editor Andrew Sullivan. Mr Sullivan makes a series of striking points about this whole story. Firstly that history has proved that the forces of war and conflict become unstoppable if, as Edmund Burke once famously said “all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”. Indeed Mr Sullivan writes “nothing is ever inevitable”. In this sense he believes that in any context fanatical behaviour such as that of Pastor Jones will lead to more conflict and strife.

Mr Sullivan’s argument takes a twist when he re-visits American history and its Constitution. In a sense Pastor Jones’s actions could not strictly speaking be considered a crime. America was founded on the knowledge that religion should not at any time become the harbinger of conflict. The first amendment clearly forbids the American government to sanction any particular faith. Clearly there is a definite separation of state and Church. Hence how are the actions of Pastor Jones, and others who will most likely follow, to be stopped?

Mr Sullivan puts it succinctly when he writes “nothing un-American is represented by Pastor Jones and it is vital to defend his right to burn Korans, as it is to condemn him for it. The question is whether this American experience is solely American anymore and therefore whether America’s historical ex­ceptionalism is sustainable in a new age of religious global conflict”.

Many have blamed the media for stirring up this senseless behaviour of a solitary man and a tiny congregation of religious members. I am not quite sure that this is so. In any event, more such rash conduct will most likely possibly occur and this on both sides of the religious spectrum. In this sense religious and political leaders must continue to strive to choke off this fundamentalist radicalism that is really at the fringes of mainstream societies around the world but commands not only media but political attention.

In a way I fully agree with Mr Sullivan when he writes that maybe this is not a religious war of one religion against another. Maybe this is really and truly a struggle of freedom of religion against those who will resort to anything to destroy it with tyranny and violence. It would be folly if mankind were to succumb to forces that may take us over in the name of one creed or belief. The consequences could be tragic.

info@carolinegalea.com