These people tend to arbitrarily, prejudicially, place my thinking in their self-defined 'religious' category wherein go all things fundamentalist, ignorant, based on blind faith in others, traditional, anti-scientific, unreasonable, backward, obscurantist, irrational, etc., as opposed to their own ‘free’ thinking, which is allegedly open-minded, intelligent, based on personal experience, modern, scientific, reasonable, progressive, enlightened, and rational.
This can be seen behind a question that was posted: “Is the solution to be found in religion, or politics, or perhaps a new economic system? Or, said differently, can we agree because we see the truth from God, or can we logically resolve differences through law and discourse, or will a new approach to global competition and human and commercial growth do it?”
This dicotomic tendency to box, label and limit the scope of different facets of life is as counterproductive as it is gratuitous. My 'religion' actually has as much to say about politics and economics, law and discourse, global competition and human / commercial growth, and many other issues, as it does about God, which you can easily see by typing "statement" as the keyword at http://www.bic-un.bahai.org and just glancing over the titles of some of the statements presented to the United Nations by the Bahá'í World Community.
A case in point is a recent response to a similar link I referenced, when someone said: "If anyone sends me some ideas and says go to www.popeisgodsgift.com for more information, I am unlikely to pursue it further... I am interested in discussing the ideas but have zero interest in them in relationship to any religion and therefore haven't and probably won’t follow your link." There is an abysmal difference between remitting someone to something like www.thepopeisgodsgift.com and posting a link to a serious proposal submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary by one of the largest and most highly regarded NGOs with consultative status before that Organization.
My point is that an unprejudiced mind would not write something off simply because it comes from a source that has been labeled 'religious', any more than you would expect someone to write off a posting simply because it came from a source that was labeled 'political'. A biased mind, though, would jump irreflexively to the conclusion that if it is 'religious' it is automatically proselytizing, and if 'political', then activism, 'getting involved'. I am not trying to twist anybody's arm into following my links; I am just trying to level off the playing field.
One reason given for this prejudice against religion is that it is "often used to manipulate people, sometimes in seemingly good ways, and other times in horrible ways. It is the source of as much evil as it is good in this world." I agree entirely, although you could say the same of party politics, advertising, hammers, or just about anything else, which notwithstanding have not subsequently been rejected by so many and with such vehemence as 'religion' has.
I think that if anyone were to seriously look into the Baha'i Faith with an unbiased mind, they would find – as I have – that it goes 180 degrees against most of the popular stereotypes about religion. In April 1992, Judge Douglas Martin, then Director-General of the Baha'i World Center Office of Public Information, stated:
"... the Cause of Baha'u'llah goes far beyond anything that humanity understands by the word ‘religion’. If the ecclesiastical systems of our world are religion, then the Cause is not; if it is religion, then they really are not. It does a disservice to the mission of Baha'u'llah, to the World Order which He has come to establish, to focus our public message in religious categories."
Note: The opinions and views expressed in this article are those of the author only and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of VirtualBahai or any institution of the Baha’i Faith.
No comments:
Post a Comment