Column:
Open the forum to religious discussion
Published Nov. 10, 2009
I never understood why discussions of religion were always considered taboo. Then again, my experience with religion is also a lot different than most — I was raised by a Catholic father and a Shinto-Buddhist mother, and they decided to raise me without religion. This was partly due to their differences and partly due to their desire for me to choose my own path, be it eight-fold or otherwise.
So far, I have had no real religion in my life. At most, I could say I am Shinto, which is the indigenous religion of Japan, but even most Japanese do not consider Shinto a religion. I hesitate to say I am agnostic, but by definition, I probably am.
It has always been a point of confusion to me that agnostics and atheists in the United States are virtually invisible. The U.S. Census Bureau 2009 Statistical Abstract estimates more than 16 percent of Americans identify themselves as "unaffiliated," and 51 percent are Protestant, the division of Christianity considered the norm and the standard. There are as many "unaffiliated" Americans as there are black Americans, Asian Americans and American Indians combined. When one thinks of a minority, one usually imagines someone of what is traditionally considered an underrepresented race, not someone of an underrepresented religion (or a person with a lack of religion entirely).
Despite the significant number of unaffiliated Americans, religion is still found everywhere in our society and government. Our dollar bills are printed with the words "in God we trust" emblazoned on them and our president was criticized throughout the election for possibly being something other than Christian. Our elected officials are sworn in on the Bible (not the Constitution, which would be the logical choice since that is the document they are sworn to uphold), and our pledge of allegiance includes the phrase "under God."
The under representation of agnostics and atheists within our country worries and concerns me. When there are approximately 51 million Americans being disregarded, something needs to change.
I know what I am saying might rile some readers. But I am not writing despite that, I am writing because of it. Frank conversations about religion are far too few and unfortunately, rarely contain discussion of the concept of no religion. I am in no way saying people should not participate in religions, nor am I saying religion is bad. I am merely saying given how the United States prides itself as being a country in which people of all backgrounds can live comfortably together, we should continue to strive to achieve this point of inclusion and acceptance.
I am in no means asking you to forsake your religion in order to make others comfortable. Whether you are Catholic or Pagan or whatever, it is my firm belief you should exercise your religious rights as far as reason allows. But I am asking the American populace to rethink religion's place in our society. Although it definitely has a place in homes, churches, temples, mosques, synagogues, shrines and other locations of personal religious importance, having the president of the United States pledge to uphold the Constitution while his hand is firmly pressed against the cover of a Bible is inherently exclusionary. I am, though, asking we stop assuming everyone has made religion a part of his or her life.
There is no way with the 600 words I am allotted for this column I will be able to convince everyone my perspective is one which deserves consideration. Many will call me oversensitive or even sinful. And according to your faith, that might be true. But let me ask you this: Have you not also sinned?
4:55 p.m., Nov. 14, 2009
Brandon said:
I feel you, Sami. Religion should be more open to discussion, especially the actual point of religion. If you ask me, there is none. A lot of them are a bane on civilization, namely the Abrahamic ones with their extreme openness to interpretation, ultraconservative doctrines, and unwillingness to adapt to the modern era. Others, like Buddhism, are more unnecessary rather than evil or bad. Sure, Buddhism teaches a lot of good values, but it's not like I can't be a good person without it. Plus, some of the morals espoused by Buddhism seem a bit too rigid, such as "not harming any living thing" (or something to that effect). Does this mean the death penalty is off the table in Buddhism for violent criminals whose punishment should fit the crime (at least, to me)? Does that make it wrong to use pesticides to kill bugs that are infesting your home? Is abortion ok or not ok under this? And lastly, does this preclude self-defense? That's one of my main beefs in religion: it's too hard to interpret. A million diff. people of the same faith can come up with a million diff. explanations for a specific verse. Let's just be good without God or gods. I'm an agnostic, but I'd consider myself plenty good. If a person needs Jesus to tell them to give to charity and help the poor, I'd say they're pretty weak-minded and really need to look in the mirror. Helping the disadvantaged should be its own reward, not a ticket to heaven or an order from a deity. Finally, some of the religions' morals are just silly. Supposedly it's wrong to have sex before marriage. But how? Will I become "impure", even if I had sex with a girlfriend I was in love with for a long time and only her? They say masturbation is a sin, even. But doesn't "self-love" prevent things like pregnancy and keep your urges under control, to an extent? Some say homosexuality is wrong. I think that's just rooted in the whole "you fear what you don't understand" complex as well as ultraconservative men who has masculinity issues. They think "loving another man" somehow makes one a sissy, when I'm sure I could point to plenty of manly gay men. And feminine lesbians. In their minds, a manly man hooks up with as many women in his youth as he can and bangs their brains out and then settles down and gets married to a good woman. ook... Of course, if I were to say any of this in public, I'd probably be persecuted, or at the very least get a lot of angry comments launched my way, esp. if I were a politician. Goodbye 2nd term. All my views on the issues and life combined would probably make me a VERY unorthodox candidate and probably a one-term one as well.