It was not always this way. (Nothing ever was.) The state of Israel was carved out of the ancient territory 60 years ago that is the birthplace, not only of Judaism, but of Christianity and Islam.
The establishment of Israel was a direct consequence of the holocaust during World War II, and the collective guilt felt by Western governments that were complicit, if only by their silence, in the genocidal extermination of millions of innocent Jews by the Nazis.
First: No one can question Israel's essential right to exist. But, as is the case with any religion-based nation state in this era, why should any of us support this concept?
We live in a global political economy that is not based in any idea of religious law but in the concept of democracy and justice, free trade and tolerance. At the end of the current military drama, and its according humanitarian tragedy, what will have to emerge, not only in Israel, but in Iran and many other religious-based states, will have to be a willingness to compromise in order to be full members of the new world community.
To be blunt: It is time for all people to put aside their religion in matters of governance. There is no place for any private biases in our public business. Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and all other faithful adherents to some faith or another must come to realize that their beliefs are simply private, not public matters.
When I think about Israelis, I cannot help but wonder whether they feel that just because they currently happen to have the upper hand, in pure military strength, courtesy of the U.S., do they therefore feel the horrible suffering they are inflicting on the Palestinians is justified in the eyes of God?
If so, who exactly is that God?
Perhaps the same one Adolph Hitler would have worshiped?
Think about it.
-30-
6 comments:
Well said.
You're right – to the extent that (any) religious extremism is used to deprive the individual of his/her natural right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – there ought to be a law.
Come to think of it, there is such law... If not yet perfect, at least then the most perfected so far; The United States Constitution.
Peace in the Middle East will not come until unconditional victory is won – meaning either the utter destruction of Israel, or submission of the Palestinian people and Arab states to a rule of law which recognizes the aforementioned natural rights.
“Peace” has been brokered through how many agreements so far?... Carter through Dubya... none thus far worth the breath of their utterance.
The Palestinians are a miserable people hijacked through hatred spawned by Radical Islam. A few thousand Hamas terrorists, as long as the world tolerates them, will continue to secure the suffering of these people by institutionalizing the hatred.
Hamas must be destroyed, just as Radical Islam must be destroyed. The Egyptians know this now. The Jordanians know this now. Much of the Middle East understands this now.
Because they use Palestinian men, women, and children as shields, Hamas will secure the deaths of many innocent Palestinians. This will be in spite of the best efforts of Israeli forces – and those efforts will, by the way, cost additional Israeli soldiers' lives.
To proffer again a solution defined, in part, by Israeli guilt and Palestinian innocence is to ignore reality. To cling to the belief that Radical Islam will be mollified by surrendering before it is folly, a most dangerous folly.
David, Just a little point of historical clarification that you may not really understand. Israel is not a Jewish state in the sense that it is a state of the Jewish religion. It is a Jewish state in that it is a state of the Jewish people. It is sort of an ethnic, cultural thing with deep roots and religion as sometimes yes, sometimes no, one room in the home.
Hope you understand my point.
Can anyone show me a culture, nation, or civilization that was not built on religious beliefs?
Are the "truths" spoken of by the founding fathers not the same in any major religion, when (and this is important) viewed through the eyes of love, compassion, and understanding?
I'll take that bait. Yes and no. All the founders of major religions were sincere, or crazy, and/or both. Those of us who have come along much later -- in the case of all the major religions, many centuries later -- can easily agree with the precepts if not the modern implementation of these principles.
What I mean to say is that it doesn't get any better than the Golden Rule.
The problems with all religions, in my view, is not with their books but with their legacy systems. This is not an age to be lazy, i.e., repeating the wisdom of our elders.
Rather, IMHO, this is an age when we need to challenge our churches, temples, and mosques to update their practices and prayers to this new world, one their founders never could have imagined.
If they can't handle that, they no longer are relevant. Sorry to seem to be so mean. But I know that I speak the truth.
It is a fine line between sanity and insanity, faith and fanaticism.
The Golden Rule...it is the ignorance of this one truth that is at the root of all conflicts internal and external, in individuals and society.
As (a) human being, we have a responsibility to AND for human beings. No one is an island.
Thank you for your humble opinion.
Post a Comment