<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Carter, Mandela, Elders say religion oppresses women</title>
	<link>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 04:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Steven Lewis</title>
		<link>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12152</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:05:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12152</guid>
					<description>I suppose we should be grateful that these old men have, rather late in the game, acknowledged the obvious, and thanks to Dennis for a superb chronicle. However, the oppression of women is but one abhorrent feature of most organized religions. Most religions, and certainly &quot;the big three&quot; of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, explicitly or implicitly exist to oppress both within the fold, and beyond it The root cause of this and a host of related symptoms is absolutism. The core premise of religion is that there is something &quot;out there&quot; that is true, immutable, and externally created. It is up to humanity to apprehend it; it is not a human creation. Such truth is not contingent or fundamentally debatable within the confines of the religion; if it were, it would be philosophy, and while some religions are more theological than others, the foundation is always some sort of bedrock claim about the divine order of things.

Such thinking invariably has two consequences: hierarchy within the sect, and a fundamental belief, unstated of course, that those who have not embraced one's religion are (insert consequence here - unenlightened, damned, etc.). Sophisticated religious thinkers argue that it doesn't have to be this way, but the vast majority of adherents are not looking for a debating club or contingent and existential truths; they are seeking comfort, certainty, and answers. They want things settled; when they say their faith comforts them, they're not talking about their latest encounter with Bonhoefer. Organized religion will always be an incendiary and divisive force - which is not to deny its good works or the intellectual value of some theology - because of its absolutist core. It is hardly a mystery that texts written by MEN thousands of years ago don't read like Simone de Beauvoir or Germaine Greer.

Many will counter that the solution is to modernize these vessels for good by stripping them of their baseless superstitions and replacing them with egalitarianism within and genuine tolerance toward their competitors. That would require downgrading the status of (name your sacred text) and tossing adherents into a sea of existential angst. I'm all for these religions morphing into some form of gentle pantheism, but there is a cold logic behind the conservative resistance to change. The guardians of tradition know that opening up absolutes to debate and change erodes power and risks alienating the true believers.

Dennis replies: Thanks Stephen for your erudite comments regarding world religions, and yet . . . I am reminded of comments made in a magazine article regarding the pundit and writer Christopher Hitchens, author of God is not Great. Hitchens had also been harshly critical of the late Mother Theresa. The magazine writer allowed that there might well be some validity to what Hitchens had to say, but added that if someone were poor, homless, ill or dying that person would be far more likely to receive a compassionate response from Mother Theresa than from Hitchens. Despite the obvious shortcomings of world religions, there is a lot of love and solidarity offered by people whose motivation springs from religious faith.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose we should be grateful that these old men have, rather late in the game, acknowledged the obvious, and thanks to Dennis for a superb chronicle. However, the oppression of women is but one abhorrent feature of most organized religions. Most religions, and certainly &#8220;the big three&#8221; of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, explicitly or implicitly exist to oppress both within the fold, and beyond it The root cause of this and a host of related symptoms is absolutism. The core premise of religion is that there is something &#8220;out there&#8221; that is true, immutable, and externally created. It is up to humanity to apprehend it; it is not a human creation. Such truth is not contingent or fundamentally debatable within the confines of the religion; if it were, it would be philosophy, and while some religions are more theological than others, the foundation is always some sort of bedrock claim about the divine order of things.</p>
<p>Such thinking invariably has two consequences: hierarchy within the sect, and a fundamental belief, unstated of course, that those who have not embraced one&#8217;s religion are (insert consequence here - unenlightened, damned, etc.). Sophisticated religious thinkers argue that it doesn&#8217;t have to be this way, but the vast majority of adherents are not looking for a debating club or contingent and existential truths; they are seeking comfort, certainty, and answers. They want things settled; when they say their faith comforts them, they&#8217;re not talking about their latest encounter with Bonhoefer. Organized religion will always be an incendiary and divisive force - which is not to deny its good works or the intellectual value of some theology - because of its absolutist core. It is hardly a mystery that texts written by MEN thousands of years ago don&#8217;t read like Simone de Beauvoir or Germaine Greer.</p>
<p>Many will counter that the solution is to modernize these vessels for good by stripping them of their baseless superstitions and replacing them with egalitarianism within and genuine tolerance toward their competitors. That would require downgrading the status of (name your sacred text) and tossing adherents into a sea of existential angst. I&#8217;m all for these religions morphing into some form of gentle pantheism, but there is a cold logic behind the conservative resistance to change. The guardians of tradition know that opening up absolutes to debate and change erodes power and risks alienating the true believers.</p>
<p>Dennis replies: Thanks Stephen for your erudite comments regarding world religions, and yet . . . I am reminded of comments made in a magazine article regarding the pundit and writer Christopher Hitchens, author of God is not Great. Hitchens had also been harshly critical of the late Mother Theresa. The magazine writer allowed that there might well be some validity to what Hitchens had to say, but added that if someone were poor, homless, ill or dying that person would be far more likely to receive a compassionate response from Mother Theresa than from Hitchens. Despite the obvious shortcomings of world religions, there is a lot of love and solidarity offered by people whose motivation springs from religious faith.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Melissa McDowell</title>
		<link>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12078</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12078</guid>
					<description>Thanks so much for this posting, Dennis. I hadn't heard of The Elders' campaign and am so pleased, impressed and moved by their efforts, as well as your own, to challenge such a critical source of gender inequality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks so much for this posting, Dennis. I hadn&#8217;t heard of The Elders&#8217; campaign and am so pleased, impressed and moved by their efforts, as well as your own, to challenge such a critical source of gender inequality.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: proctor, Merran</title>
		<link>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12055</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 03:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12055</guid>
					<description>Nice to see this topic under discussion - hope it is given some mainstream coverage.  Can I challenge some  reporters to develop this further.  Thanks Dennis</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice to see this topic under discussion - hope it is given some mainstream coverage.  Can I challenge some  reporters to develop this further.  Thanks Dennis
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: frank saptel</title>
		<link>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12040</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dennisgruending.ca/pulpitandpolitics/2010/01/18/carter-mandela-elders-religion-oppresses-women/#comment-12040</guid>
					<description>A very thoughtful essay Dennis. Thanks for the impeccable research - it will help my arguments on this subject.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very thoughtful essay Dennis. Thanks for the impeccable research - it will help my arguments on this subject.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
