Pilgrims is the name commonly applied to early settlers of the Plymouth Colony in present-day Massachusetts. Their leadership came from a religious congregation who had fled a volatile political environment in the East Midlands of England for the relative calm of Holland in the Netherlands. Concerned with losing their cultural identity, the group later arranged with English investors to establish a new colony in North America…Their story has become a central theme in United States cultural identity. [wiki]
This country was born because people desired the freedom to worship their God in their own way. To me, that is so American.
To have the freedom to be yourself, to be entitled to respect, to experience tolerance instead of persecution…these are the central themes with which I define my American identity.
What else is American? E pluribus unum. Out of many, one. One cultural identity, comprised of hundreds of influences, origins and traditions. If you take a step back and ponder it, America seems like a miraculous idea; you start to respect the safeguards put in place to protect people. One of the most significant? The separation between church and state. This is where things get complicated, but that’s not a bad thing. Everyone is complicated, why should we expect our nations not to be? Yes, there are religious words on money and everyone knows that there is a Judeo-Christian foundation to a lot of what is considered American…but there is also respect for other ideas. Or at least, there should be. At the very least, there should be the freedom for others to worship their God, in their own way, no matter what you or I think about it. There should be mutual respect. There should be.
A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate’s morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors’ gallery.
Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day’s Senate session. As he stood at the chamber’s podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting ”this is an abomination” and other complaints from the gallery.
Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, ”we are Christians and patriots” before police handcuffed them and led them away. [NYT]
No, you are Christians and fools. Way to make Team Jesus look awful, as you misrepresent everything that the man stood for and preached.
For several days, the Mississippi-based American Family Association has urged its members to object to the prayer because Zed would be ”seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god.” [NYT]
Yes, because the prayer he offered was SO offensive to actual Christians, agnostics or those who have been touched by a noodly appendage:
Zed, the first Hindu to offer the Senate prayer, began: ”We meditate on the transcendental glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of the heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds.”
As the Senate prepared for another day of debate over the Iraq war, Zed closed with, ”Peace, peace, peace be unto all.” [NYT]
Let me tell you something about what that Uncle said– it was far kinder and more welcoming than a lot of what I heard in Catholic school, especially if the Pope was involved. For shame. Perhaps the most offensive aspect of his spiritual offering was its emphasis on peace?
Zed, who was born in India, was invited by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Speaking in the chamber shortly after the prayer, Reid defended the choice and linked it to the war debate.
”If people have any misunderstanding about Indians and Hindus,” Reid said, ”all they have to do is think of Gandhi,” a man ”who gave his life for peace.”
”I think it speaks well of our country that someone representing the faith of about a billion people comes here and can speak in communication with our heavenly Father regarding peace,” said Reid, a Mormon and sharp critic of President Bush’s Iraq policies. [NYT]
As several of you pointed out via email, news tab and flaming arrow, THIS is the money quote:
Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the protest ”shows the intolerance of many religious right activists. They say they want more religion in the public square, but it’s clear they mean only their religion.” [NYT]
What these Jesus-freaks are forgetting is that Christ was a man of peace. He didn’t surround himself with the pious and faux-righteous; he called those people out, as he deliberately and controversially chose to befriend the lowest of the low, tax collectors, prostitutes and the like. Was there ever a better example of tolerance in the Christian faith?
As I bitterly read the articles about this troubling, hurtful incident, I am reminded of those who persecuted Jesus, for what they perceived as his “blasphemy”. Two thousand years later, some of his so-called followers have become so drunk off of hate and fundamentalism, they cannot see straight, they cannot grasp that if this were two millenia ago, Jesus would be the man in the orange robe and they, they would be the hypocrites who attacked him and then cheered at his suffering.
Razib, what happened to the firebrand atheist of yore? Who has been brainwashing you? You’re almost beginning to sound a little like me.
It would have been great if Zed had lifted up his dhoti on the dais and threatened the protesters with his giant saffron balls.
From the look on Zed’s face in that picture, and the position of his hands, it looks like he may very well have been considering that. Good thing Bob Casey was there to restrain him.
“Scuse me while I whip this Hindu prayer out…”
the case to which i was referring is lee v. weisman, and it was a big case partly because kennedy changed his vote during deliberations and came out against school prayer in the given circumstances. of course, the current court is probably more conservative than the rehnquist court, so nothing is for sure if the POA issue comes up now. also, the EC issue is a bit muddied because there are three (i think) tests floating around, one of which was delineated by o’connor. also, it’s sometimes suprising how even minute details can change even a ‘predictable’ decision – but in this sense, it also allows justices the freedom to manipulate the situation so as to deviate from precedent without really rejecting it.
razib, certainly. I have a positive view of religion, and would prefer a society that is mildly religious. As you point out, it channels our pro-social instincts, acts as a soft justice system, and gives people a sense of purpose.
Some of the debate on this here and in other forums debate “how the founding fathers would have reacted”.
Some have pointed how many early presidents were involved in several liberal theological strands. These strands are represented today in part by Unitarian Universalism.
More to the point, Thomas Jefferson has this great quote, which seems relevant: “Our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscious we never submitted, we could never submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Ah, didn’t know that kennedy changed his vote at the last minute on that one. The EC tests remind me of this piece on the lemon that is Lemon by Dahlia Lithwick. In another article of hers on the eminent domain case, she says the following in an unrelated context:
all four prongs of the Lemon test; color-code the three levels of constitutional scrutiny. (Clarification, Feb. 22: The original Lemon test had only three prongs; this was an attempt to humorously allude to subsequent glosses on that test by Justices O’Connor and Kennedy.)
America has a lot to learn from India.
Every day in class we are forced to say that the US is “under God”. On all US currency notes the phrase “In God we trust” is written. Could you imagine in India if our notes said “In Vishnu we trust”? There would be national uproar. While India’s first PM was an atheist, and it currently has a Sikh PM and a Muslim President, the US would implode in violence if it had a non-Christian president. The US had trouble accepting it’s only Catholic president in the 1960s, and hasn’t had one since. That’s how rigid it is.
Hello from a new fan of your site.
One thing that has struck me about the various religious traditions and their struggles for acceptance in America is the relationship to place and what happens to it on contact with the putative “tabula rasa” of the New World experience. Historically this first played out between the “deracinated” sects of Protestantism and the (allegedly) place-boundedness of Catholicism, embodied in the long representation of Catholics in American public life as being sinister servants of Rome — openly as late as John Kennedy’s campaign in 1960, and even visible in the 2004 national election. The idea of Catholic life as being mystically centered around an Old World city of venerable tradition is probably more compelling among non-Catholics than among Catholics themselves, but there is no denying that Protestants at least in the US have had a profoundly different relationship to land, place, and physical history than have Catholics or even the Jewish diaspora (“next year in Jerusalem!”).
… and it’s probably true that this Protestant characteristic has set the bar, so to speak, for other religious traditions in the US — you’re “okay” once you achieve the same degree of placelessness, and you’re “not there yet” to the extent that devotion based around external and especially Old World land, tradition, and history is still a part of your religious practice.
So whither Hinduism in America? I have (as a white American of riotously mixed Judeo-Christian lineage) encountered both American Hindus and ex-Hindu converts to Christianity who share a frustration with Hinduism as being so fundamentally — geographically, historically, theologically, institutionally — tied to India that it’s hard (for them) to see how it can be “naturalized” in the same way — and by extension, how much harder for “Jayzus feelin'” fundamentalists to ever regard Hindus even just with the same grudging, suspicious acceptance with which they have so painstakingly come to regard Catholics and Jews?
America has a lot to learn from India… …the US would implode in violence if it had a non-Christian president… …That’s how rigid it is.
namantra: not that this has anything to do with the religion of the PM, but do you mean violence like this?
How rigid is it?
kusala #159, my fingers were itching, itching, itching, but this time my restraint beat yours out.
Or disciplined the protesters with a rapidly manifested vibuthi cluster bomb to the face
namantra, why can’t you say “in God we trust” and interpret that God as Vishnu? There is nothing in that text which says God=Jesus. Unlike, say, for India’s national song.
muralimannered, if my aunt ever sees that comment from you, she will fix you with a stare so fierce your photographs will start bleeding red.
I have multiple aunties who have attempted this before, not to mention my mother, grandmother, etc. Quite often, my brave debunkings of his parlor tricks have produced glares so intense, and words so fiercely truncated before the final syllable, that I’ve grown a bit superstitious and expect Sai Baba himself to preside over whatever calamities may befall an atheist who ‘should have known better’ from his Ashram youth.
in any event, saffron balls and vibuthi bombs will, sadly, never raise my credit rating nor assist me in becoming a pro at Wii Boxing.
Firstly, I thank you for posting this, really.
As a Christian woman, and an American, I am greatly saddened over such happenings. I love to learn about world cultures and religion, and I think faith itself is something to be cherished and respected, no matter what title it comes under, hinduism,christianity,islam, buddism, whatever. Jesus asked us to love our neighbors, and it should never matter what creed or color our neighbors are, for they are our brothers and sisters, in the end no matter what you believe, we ALL had to come from the same place, and we were all in turn placed on this Earth.
Sadly the history of America, and the world in general, has always been one where differnt religons clash. It just seems to me like a giant neverending circle…of pin the tail on the ‘weird religion of the moment’ game. Iit’s really happened to everyone, at some point in time, including Christians, however I think we christians need to swallow the fact that OUR suffering has been alot less than ever other religion that has come to America. It seems everytime I tried to talk about the strains of the otherside, pastors and whoever I was speaking with would comment on ” Oh but back in Rome…Nero burned us alive!” Yes, yes he did. But that was THEN this is NOW. And I think with love, and acceptence, and teaching people so they are no longer ignorant about other religions, our generation can help in the fight for the commen good of human-kind, which is for us to let eachother live, and love, in freedom. Annnnd I am done with my rant!
One thing that does make me wonder about his miraculous powers is his truly imposing all dark haired Afro even at the age of 80. Which sleeve does he conjure that out of?
I don’t think this is true in all localities. I live in a fairly red state, went to a wealthy public high-school in a fairly red county, but never once had to recite the pledge of allegiance (and by recite, i mean mumble through it and look around for others doing the same). In fact, i remember one english teacher vowing to quit if the school board ever decided to institute mandatory recitations of the pledge.
oh anna, give me a break. i can agree with you, that the people you label as “Jesus Freaks” were intolerant. But have you ever witnessed the religious intolerance that they have in India for a Christian. Let me give you a sneak preview, “Churches are burned, nuns are raped, believers are tortured. This is a far greater case of intolerance that needs to be fixed.
I don’t know, but in a parallel universe somewhere, Sai Baba is slinging leather-covered balls at 90+ mph whilst toting an aggrieved metro poodle on his head.
muralimannered, that was GENIUS.
sorry i couldn’t work the word “saffron” in there. And also sorry about being such a shit earlier in the year. I was on a cycle and feeling quite nippy.
monaydinesha? D’Souza in da house?
muralimannered, no worries. It happens to all of us, and I didn’t hold back either 🙂
It is my secret desire that such a luminary as Dinesh, or perhaps Ramesh, would grace our forum. Perhaps then we could ask them if they actually believe that registering as a Democrat means you are a de facto murderer or that Reagan’s moneyed trickles actually constituted sound economic policy.
Any time somebody says supply-side I am reminded of John Kenneth Galbraith’s description of the trickle down effect as a “horse and sparrow theory”.
If you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows.
Somewhere in the middle of the 20th century, blacks were rounded up for walking (“protesting”) in public in Birmingham by a racist commissioner and at the same time black kids were beaten up for having “sit ins” at restaurants or whatever throughout the south eastern region of the US. But two things A) the situation was geographically isolated to a small portion of the nation B) the amount of people involved in proportion to the total populations of the nation was minuscule. The white citizens beating up black kids in eateries, the police ignoring this, Yankee civil rights workers being killed by southerners, southern government’s overt racism, and all that stuff is not representative of anything since they were such isolated incidents in an isolated time frame. People didn’t go around saying America was racist, only a few cities in a small conservative region were racist. Likewise the Gujarat riots involved (let’s assume) 5000 people, out of 1.2 billion people. It was isolated to certain metropolitan regions of a certain state. It is not representative of anything, just like the case of the US in the 50s and 60s. And this is especially so in the case of India since the country has suddenly seen changes in this decade alone that most countries took half a century to see (like the emergence of a sizeable liberal middle class, the emergence of outspoken liberal media, etc, all of which happened after 2002).
Ok.
I agree that the situation is offensive for atheists, I was addressing your specific point of God vs. Vishnu. I mentioned this article on another thread, but it is relevant here.
namantra, 1984 anti Sikh violence, 1992 Babri Masjid demolition, 1993 Bombay riots, 2002 Godhra violence – you think these are all isolated incidents? Want to talk about the armed caste based violence in Bihar and UP? The class based Naxal violence in Andhra Pradesh and the north east? As for America, people did go around saying America was racist. Presidential candidates ran proudly on platforms of segregation.
my friend refused to say under god in high school. i refused the pledge all together. we were sent to the principals office and made our 1st ammendment case and won. my friends about to become a billionaire once his hedge fund goes public. but that’s irrelevant. or maybe not. i should’ve said the pledge like him.
don’t be hatin on the precepts of my religion yo. I have breakfast every morning to the sound of Milton Friedman’s Supramarketum.
Said Razib(i suspect most atheists are part of the minority in the human race who are psychologically a little aberrant, i don’t think it is a coincidence that most atheists are men and have a reputation for anti-social nonconformity).
Good thing you prefaced it with most, but I agree on the psychologically aberrant point…:)
American Christians (especially of the Baptist variety) are some of the most intolerant fanatics one could ever hope to meet on this planet. I’ll take a Muslim fundie over them any day.
I grew up around them and they even followed me to India!
You would not believe the sermon I heard in a New Delhi church one Sunday delivered by an American Southern Baptist. It was so typically tacky, corny, John Wayne style. I could see that the Indian Christians could not relate to the vibe at all, thank goddess!
Basically, instead of preaching “christianity” the guy was preaching outdated “Americanism”, in a militaristic way (he was an army boy at that too!)
I was embarrassed to be a US citizen that day.
The true test would be if you woke up ever morning to this 6’x 8′ framed photograph.
To clarify, I don’t think economics by epigram is appropriate, appealing though it might be. I just quote it because it puts supply-side and horseshit in the same sentence, but only by implication 🙂
ROFL.. I googled for prayers of other religions in the US Senate and chanced upon this site.. Look at the comments there..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1860898/posts?page=165
“In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” -1968 candidate, George Wallace.
Rahul,
You are being daft.
First,
1) Vande Mataram is a National Song, not a National Anthem. Big, big difference. I hope you know the background history – Why it was not chosen National Anthem, and also it is also was “rallying cry for freedom, and became unifying thread” for nearly a century. It is very closely linked to freedom struggle and goes beyond religious connotations. That aside…….
Second,
2) 1992 Babri Masjid had no killed – Only later in Bombay, in December-March, huge violence erupted – that is also very complicated with Bombay mafia, ISI, Shiv Sena, VHP and all the usual suspects actively involved. All the riots you mention are/ were not as cut and dry as you made them. They need to condemned but not thrown around some fashionable words along with your low fat frappucino and your Powerbook. Naxal violence is not religion based but a class warfare that deeply rooted in disparity of wealth and ownership, and some trouble making by China during Mao days.
No doubt, a billion people strong, still with ravaging poverty and disparity has a long way to go before it becomes a mature, Jeffersonian, liberal democracy – so be little more sophisticated in discourse is expected unless you want to be court jester.
Razib, what happened to the firebrand atheist of yore? Who has been brainwashing you?
i’m still a “firebrand” when it comes to disputing assumptions by religious people that everyone shares their views when those views are patently ludicrous. that doesn’t mean i think religion is going to disappear. i just think it needs to be put in its place, as i think to a great extent it has in the west.
I have (as a white American of riotously mixed Judeo-Christian lineage) encountered both American Hindus and ex-Hindu converts to Christianity who share a frustration with Hinduism as being so fundamentally — geographically, historically, theologically, institutionally — tied to India that it’s hard (for them) to see how it can be “naturalized” in the same way — and by extension, how much harder for “Jayzus feelin'” fundamentalists to ever regard Hindus even just with the same grudging, suspicious acceptance with which they have so painstakingly come to regard Catholics and Jews?
probably not fundamentally, or least not problematically. judaism is tied to israel, but it has been americanized. catholicism has also been americanized. to a great extent that has involved being ‘protestanized.’ that seems to be happening to islam & hinduism (it has already happened to buddhism to a great extent).
Isolated cases.
India had a Christian president (or was it even the prime minister?). Can you see America at this point in time having a Hindu president or secretary of state when Hindu prayers cannot even be recited for 30 seconds at a gathering? Come on!
Indian Hindus are some of the most tolerant people in the world – with regards to respecting other people’s rights to their own religion and practices.
I’ve never had a problem in India with that. Ever, anywhere.
Even Indian muslims will give you space in their home to worship an idol if that’s what you are into, as a guest, you are treated with the upmost respect.
India may have problems tolerating alot, but RELIGION is not one of them. Any religion.
I don’t know. History is non-linear and jagged in terms of attitudinal shifts. Too many events, dealbreakers, etc. which can affect public perceptions. 9/11 and subsequent terrorist attacks will affect many Americans’ view of Islam for years to come; maybe a generational shift will help, but who knows what the future holds? Especially with the first Indian Muslim being involved in an international terrorist plot, and the burgeoning role of India in the global arena, who’s to say that the increased “relevance” of India won’t also lead towards an increase in bigotry towards Hinduism? If you are talking about by the sheer size of the South Asian community in the US and its increased public roles, maybe, but population sizes are affected by immigration quotas, birth rates, and the increase in other populations.
I don’t think you can treat religious acceptance like racial tolerance…anti-racism is based on the concept of the essential nature of the individual i.e. the skin color’s value is not up for debate. With religion, it’s all about group identity and conceptual differences which lead to fundamental disagreement. I agree with you in that there are great variances in Christian identity and practice…but in regards to what was shouted out in Senate today, it may have been extremists doing the shouting…but there was something there which I think many Christians across the line believe in.
I don’t mean to twist what you are saying, Simran, since you mention attitudes…BUT…I am seeing a lot of talk about how these three rabble rousers “aren’t really Christian.” I don’t buy that. I think they are. Religious traditions morph and change throughout time, and will always be tied to the local political system. Meaning, extremists (whether Christian or Muslim) may be self-selecting bastardizers of all things good about their respective religions, but in all circumstances they can’t be cast off merely as fringe crazies. The three hecklers today represent a broader attitude that is permeating American Christianity today, and therefore Christianity worldwide (if only b/c they exist in the richest country in the world and use that wealth to “spread the word” in the “savage” parts of the world). Same for Islamists. I understand the urge to want to disassociate them from the religious tenets and scriptures which they are bastardizing, but I don’t think it’s useful to separate them from the religion as it acts as a social and functioning group.
Dude, Kush, did you even read my comment before responding? I said national song (which you could maybe compare to Pledge of Allegiance), I said class based violence (as an analogy to namantra’s remark about racism).
Do you want me to spell out the government connivance behind Babri Masjid? Yes, riots are never cut and dried, but do you want to talk about the forcible whitewash that was the Justice Srikrishna report on the Bombay riots? The coercion of witness in Godhra? Otherwise, I will be content to be court jester (minus definitive article).
I didn’t bring up the comparison of India to America, I was just rebutting another commenter who did.
Oh, and by the way, I don’t drink frappuccinos (low-fat or otherwise), and I use a Thinkpad T60p (great laptop by the way, in case you’re looking).
That was so sad to watch, but in a strange way I’m also happy it happened. Some people tend to think extremists exist only is Islam, this help dispel that myth. Sad it had to happen like that thou.
i’m no Malkin fanboy, but I did notice a rather ‘nuanced’ discussion on this incident over at hotair.
bet you almost spit out your latte when you read that, huh rahul?
Whaaaaaaaaat????
Onto my Ralph Lauren polo shirt!
I agree, Murali, and do not mean to imply that nuanced, productive, non-defensive discussions within all modes of Christianity do not exist. This is, after all, a majority Christian country and as someone remarked earlier in maybe another post, it is a wonderful thing that despite thinking that your non-Christian neighbor may be going to hell in a handbasket, most Americans don’t live amidst outbursts of religious violence.
I guess I’m not referring to people who participate in online discussions/blogging, who, I’m assuming, will be more likely to engage in more nuanced debates. I’m referring to your average Joe who doesn’t watch multiple news sources with varying views and who prefers to surround him/herself with people who agree with what he/she is thinking. Damn, I know that makes me sound like an elitist. 🙂
Oh, and I love the use of fanboy/fangirl 🙂
gosh razib, i thought i’d never have a “The chicken!” moment, a la Dave Chapelle, but now it’s in the history books.
Salam:
Indian Hindus are some of the most tolerant people in the world – with regards to respecting other people’s rights to their own religion and practices.
I’ve never had a problem in India with that. Ever, anywhere.
My experience too. Still, RSS is scary… This Senate protest is quite disturbing–but, better 3 freaks than 300!
Ha! Hopefully you were able to salvage the bacon triple cheesburger 🙂
He also shared this joke with the Senate, appropriate only for CSPAN after-hours.
Q: What’s the difference between a candle and curry? A: A candle burns only at one end.
Apparently, it cracked Cheney up.