A friend of mine was surprised that Hindu religionists were keeping silent when Rushdie was being splattered around JLF. He was surprised that the fundamentalists, of whatever hue, did not find common cause. I calmly told him that while all fundamentalists are the same, each fundamentalist is a different species, biding its own time under the sun. As though on cue, that is how seminar-Kashmir-Padgaonkar-Symbiosis happened!
Going back to JLF, what did surprise me was Richard Dawkins was allowed on the stage. Here is a man who called teaching religion to children child abuse, nothing less. He was not talking about teaching the Bible, the Koran, the Gita or any of the other specific so-called scripture. He put a blanket covering all of them. He also said that believing in god is a waste of time, because god does not exist. Yet, at JLF he was allowed to go scot-free. I would have imagined that there would have been a charge of consolidated religious brigade and Dawkins would have done well to have escaped being trampled under the onslaught. And, that did not happen. Why?
Insult to any particular religion will not be tolerated. But, insult to ALL religions would fly beneath the you-offended-MY-religious-sentiment radar. Funny this.
Raghuram Ekambaram
Going back to JLF, what did surprise me was Richard Dawkins was allowed on the stage. Here is a man who called teaching religion to children child abuse, nothing less. He was not talking about teaching the Bible, the Koran, the Gita or any of the other specific so-called scripture. He put a blanket covering all of them. He also said that believing in god is a waste of time, because god does not exist. Yet, at JLF he was allowed to go scot-free. I would have imagined that there would have been a charge of consolidated religious brigade and Dawkins would have done well to have escaped being trampled under the onslaught. And, that did not happen. Why?
Insult to any particular religion will not be tolerated. But, insult to ALL religions would fly beneath the you-offended-MY-religious-sentiment radar. Funny this.
Raghuram Ekambaram
6 comments:
You are absolutely right, Raghuram. Insult to religion in general doesn't matter to the believers. The reason: religion is a matter of identity, self-esteem, self-image... not of spirituality!
I think it has to do with how each group interpreted what Dawkins said.For example - "“There shouldn’t be any privileges given to the religion by the state, no tax exemption,”.
But Amrit, there were no differentiations in what Dawkins said: religious teaching is child abuse! The amount of tax exemptions available to religious groups is astounding, in aggregate and of each group.
RE
Matheikal, then only the PARTICULARS of ANY RELIGION can carry meaning! It is PRECISELY on this count I denied that religion as a concept can ever be universal (in a post in the the other space sometime ago) as it exists only when particularized.
RE
I agree with Matheikal..
and of course i do not know how they allowed him to speak..
Thanks DS sir ... the explanation is probably that Dawkins was just too cerebral for the crowd of litterateurs!
RE
Post a Comment