Marci wrote:
It's a great time to have a debate about whether this is a country that believes in inclusion and respect for all beliefs or the imposition on all of a particular religious group's views. If Alito's nomination spurs that kind of debate, it's good for everyone.
Marci,
The only problem with this is that "inclusion and respect for all beliefs" are so often defined in practice as never saying anybody's wrong (unless a person is an evangelical, in which case it's always open season). The fact is, though, that different religions teach things that are mutually exclusive.
For instance, as a Christian, I believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead on the third day. It's the center point of all that my faith teaches.
However, not every religion believes that. For them to be intellectually honest, both with themselves and with me, they need to freely say that they believe Christianity is wrong on this point, and there's no problem with that. Simply believing that Christianity is wrong is not disrespectful. If they went on to say, "And consequently, anybody who thinks Jesus rose from the dead is an idiot", that would be disrespectful, but simply saying, "I think Christianity is wrong" is an honest statement of disagreement.
Similarly, I'm not being disrespectful if I say that I believe that those who deny the resurrection are wrong. If I go farther and say, "And consequently, anybody who doesn't think Jesus rose from the dead is blind fool," that would be disrespectful and quite worthy of condemnation.
This isn't to say that every Christian (or professed Christian, anyway) is respectful. The examples Prof. Finkelman gave of the child who said, "I don't hold the door for Jews" or the person who disrupted their services by hollering that they need to accept Jesus are reprehensible at the very least. There are others who have given equally disturbing examples of utterly unacceptable behavior. But disrespect and disagreement are not the same, and quite often, being honest about our disagreements is the most respectful thing we can do.
That's why, as an example, when I attend Mass with my wife, I don't receive communion, even though I could probably get away with it and few people would know the difference. But because I don't believe in transubstantiation, I'm not going to make believe that I do. That would be disrespectful of those who do believe it is the actual body and blood of Christ. I don't ask to be included in the Eucharist celebration because I disagree, and I respect the Catholic Church too much to go through the motions.
If the debate that spurred by Judge Alito's nomination makes the distinction between genuine disrespect and simple disagreement, so much the better. However, if it fosters the idea that nobody is wrong and every religion is right, that only diminishes respect for all religions by rendering our different understandings of God meaningless.
Brad
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
