May I say that these views seem biased against the position of a monotheistic religion, even though I do not subscribe to one.
2008/10/3 Cecil Pinto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > "I guess it depends on how they ask questions. But I don't see why > they will because I will not question them on theirs," I said. > "Are you truly grounded in your faith?" he asked. > "I am as grounded as you are in yours," I said shortly. Secularism (at least in the Indian context which we have come to commonly accept here) doesn't mean that one can't have religious views or a religious identity. Our is not an atheist State, but one which recognises the plurality of the religions of its citizens. The problem comes when Indianness is equated with religion (or, more specifically, the origin of that religion)! > "Would you be able to take criticism of your religion from anyone of a > different denomination?" he asked. > "I don't think he would like to take my criticism of his religion," I said. While the ability to take criticism is today promoted as a virtue, the fact is that certain religions are loose in what they accept (one can be a Hindu and atheist at the same time), while others define the 'acceptable' in more stark terms. I think it is bigoted to see one type of religions as superior to the other. This is just how they evolved. Do we accept such differences? > "Why not," he said, "If you are truly secular you should learn about > the other's religion and of course ask them questions about it." Learning about someone else's religion is not something that can be thrust on me. This is an attitude that smacks of intolerance (and perhaps majoritarianism). What we need is tolerance to one another, specially at times like these. > "Suppose one of them is from your religion; will you give the job to > him or one of the other two from different religions," he asked. > "Obviously I will help my own," I said, "what has that got to do with > secularism?" I might also offer a job to someone from my religious group, my taluka, my State, my gender, my geography, my sub-continent ... depending on these circumstances. Does this make me a bigot? Or, to use the term here, pseudo-secularist? > "Do you ever question the tenets of your own religion?" he asked. Some religions allow for more questioning, others don't. As the Pope is wont to say, there is no "cafetariat Catholicism". (Apologies if this term came from someone else other than the Pope.) To be secular doesn't mean questioning the "tenets of your own religion". > "If you have a maid servant in your employ, who is new to the place > and needs to go to a temple, will you take her to the temple?" he > asked. "Or will you make some excuse and hint that it is better if she > stays at home?" If I had a maid servant at home, I would probably not bother to take her to the market, to the village library or to the hairdresser's. This reflects just my smug middle-class approach. It has nothing with me being a "pseudo secularist". She ought to be able to find her own way to the place she needs to! Come on, who's employing whom here? You could call me selfish and uncaring. Nothing more! > "If you have guardianship of a small child from a different religion, > would you teach him your religion or would you teach him his?" he > asked. Well, I teach my own kids about other religions. Both my kids thing Ganesh is a fun-guy and Chaturthi is a lovely festival. Does that make me enlightened or secular? I hardly think so... now who is someone to go about defining such religiosity-based "secularism"? Is this just another attempt at shifting the agenda? > "If your son or daughter wants to marry someone from a different > faith, would you agree wholeheartedly?" he asked. As Goans have migrated to the globe, they've had problems with their sons and daughters marrying people of another country, another colour, another class. Why that? We in Goa had even had problems with our sons and daughters marring people from another caste! What is this attempt at placing at centrestage religion if it's the only identity we have? It's normal for people to want to be with "their own". However insufficiently "own" gets defined. No need to attempt to build a complex over this. Times are changing. Inter-community marriages are taking place. The Catholic Church accepts these (with some proviso about the faith of the resultant kids). I hardly think this is cause to say the Church is liberal or progressive. It's just changing its rules to meet the needs of the day. > "If you neighbour asked your advice about selling his house or > apartment to someone from the minority community, would you encourage > him to sell to the individual?" he asked. There are places where Muslims find it difficult to buy/rent homes in parts of India. If the fathers of "pseudo-secularism" had their way, they'd like the Goan Catholic to take a similarly "enlightened" approach to Muslims in Goa too, instead of letting the market decide its own rules. Now, could someone please give us a column on pseudo-nationalists too! FN -- FN * Independent Journalist http://fn.goa-india.org M: +91-9822122436 P: +91-832-2409490
