Is there such a thing as a moral right to a piece of land?

[Gangerolf]

They gained Sicily too

Normans

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Odin
No, that notion of an ethnicity having a "moral right" to a soverignty over a piece of land is based on nationalistic ideology.

But I suspect also derives in part from the idea that land was or is irredeemably 'Christian' or 'Muslim' or 'Jewish' or 'Hindu' or 'Buddhist'.


I had the (mis)fortune to watch a documentary about various religious fundamentalist movements stretching from the American heartland (where this 'Christian' woman opined that if 'Christian' Americans wanted to, they could stop towns and cities granting building permits to mosques or gurdwaras or mandirs, and also make whole towns Protestant) to a Buddhist (!) monk-politician in Sir Lanka who justified the use of violence against Christian missionaries and Hindus and non-Sinhalese.


What came across most strongly in all the groups, whether Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist, was this fear of 'modernity', a fear of a multiplicity of choices or identities, a rejection of many aspects of the modern world (except the technologies which proved most useful for spreading their message and for accruing funds), and a rejection of any kind of continuum, in favour of rigid black and white certainties.

And, depressingly, the 'god-given' certainty that only they were right, and that they were under constant attack.

Of course when you get nationalism cuddling up with religion, then you tend to get the worst of both worlds.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/fundamentalists.html

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom



But I suspect also derives in part from the idea that land was or is irredeemably 'Christian' or 'Muslim' or 'Jewish' or 'Hindu' or 'Buddhist'.


I had the (mis)fortune to watch a documentary about various religious fundamentalist movements stretching from the American heartland (where this 'Christian' woman opined that if 'Christian' Americans wanted to, they could stop towns and cities granting building permits to mosques or gurdwaras or mandirs, and also make whole towns Protestant) to a Buddhist (!) monk-politician in Sir Lanka who justified the use of violence against Christian missionaries and Hindus and non-Sinhalese.


What came across most strongly in all the groups, whether Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist, was this fear of 'modernity', a fear of a multiplicity of choices or identities, a rejection of many aspects of the modern world (except the technologies which proved most useful for spreading their message and for accruing funds), and a rejection of any kind of continuum, in favour of rigid black and white certainties.

And, depressingly, the 'god-given' certainty that only they were right, and that they were under constant attack.

Of course when you get nationalism cuddling up with religion, then you tend to get the worst of both worlds.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/micr...entalists.html

The interrelation of nationalism and religious identity in general, and fundamentalist religion in particular, is historically complex. In Ireland, religion and national identity are highly interwoven, and at least on the loyalist side fundamentalism is tied in with political extremism. But generally not on the republican side. In 19th Germany OTOH, nationalism tended to unite Catholics and Protestants, and at least the more moderate forms of German nationalism appealed to many Jews as well. IIUC Pan-Slavism tended to appeal to secularists, since it crossed over denominational lines within "slavdom". OTOH it was deeply antisemitic - as were the more extreme forms of German nationalism.

In general, Christianity and Islam are religions that, in theory at least, divorce religious identity from ethnicity, and so the identifications of ethn with rel id in those civilizations tend to have more to do with local circumstances. I suspect thats the case with Buddism as well, though i need to learn more about it.

Fundamentalism, tech, modernity and nationalism - Well thats a HUGE question - I will say wrt Judaism, that in fact the groups most resistant to modernity (though they accept most technology that isnt specifically counter to ancient Jewish law, OR that they see as directly threatening to their survival ) IE the hasidim are generally NOT A. Nationalist in any conventional sense (yeah, they believe the land of Israel belongs to the Jews, but they think its up to G-d to accomplish that, not man) B. interested in spreading their message (the Lubavitch hasidim are exceptions to the Hasidic position on both counts) In fact the Orthodox Jews who are most strongly "nationalist" are generally drawn from the "modern Orthodox" who follow POVs that accepted some compromise with modernity even before they accepted nationalism (ie the thought of SR Hirsch) NOw it IS true that some non-Hasidic ultraorthdox have moved to a hardline Greater Israel position but thats a relatively recent phenomemon (IE largely since the early 1980's).

Certainly the basic Jewish assertion of a national right to land was historically made in the early 20th c by secularists, including no few atheists. This has presented a range of complications for the Jewish religious response to Zionism. For a review of some of the key issues, see David Hartmann, Conflicting Visions: Spiritual Possibilities of Modern Israel (Shocken Books, New York, 1990).

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom

from the American heartland (where this 'Christian' woman opined that if 'Christian' Americans wanted to, they could stop towns and cities granting building permits to mosques or gurdwaras or mandirs, and also make whole towns Protestant)

Considering that the leaders of the fundie Protestant religious right in the US in recent years, have tended to reach out to conservative Roman Catholics, and (some would say disingenously) to Orthodox Jews, and that this has filtered down to a considerable degree. I suspect this shows how hard your TV network worked to find evidence to support its thesis.

Some of the nicest people we know are evangelical Protestants. When my wife and daughter were on getting a ride to a local activity this summer with mom and her son, and the son started talking about Jesus, the mom made a point of discouraging her son from doing that. My daughter has another good friend from middle school, a church going Baptist family, who has been to our house on Friday nights, and loves our shabbat rituals. She and her parents attended my daughters bat Mitzvah, and they were very respectful at our shul, and I think they learned a great deal.


Im not posting this as on attack on you MB - Im just trying to give you a fuller picture of on the ground realities here in the US, which some of the TV you get may not reflect. Just as Im sure you can give us a picture of the vibrancy of multicultural London that our right wing press harping on "Londonistan" misses.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



Considering that the leaders of the fundie Protestant religious right in the US in recent years, have tended to reach out to conservative Roman Catholics, and (some would say disingenously) to Orthodox Jews, and that this has filtered down to a considerable degree. I suspect this shows how hard your TV network worked to find evidence to support its thesis.

I don't. The reporter (a Catholic ex-monk) went to Dayton and interviewed this kook.


It's not like she was hiding her views, or represented an extreme wing fo her community- she held regular meetings at her local McDonalds and preached at her local church.

He also interviewed Falwell, and the programme showed footage of Frist and Robertson, and included a visit to the Scopes' Trial Museum and a Bible printing factory.

In any case, did you miss the title of the programme ?

'The Fundmentalists'- not all fundamentalists, or the fundamentalists who take a charitable view of other faiths, Christian or otherwise.

Some of the nicest people we know are evangelical Protestants.

Surprisingly, we have those here too!

Except here they tend not to have the same kind of political power they have in the United States, nor do they sew holsters for guns onto their aprons.


They also wouldn't get far in trying to ban the new building of a religious building or the conversion of an existing building to religious use, simply on the grounds they just didn't like the adherents of that faith.

[C0ckney]

i saw that c4 show too, interesting stuff.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by molly bloom



"I don't. The reporter (a Catholic ex-monk) went to Dayton and interviewed this kook.


It's not like she was hiding her views, or represented an extreme wing fo her community- she held regular meetings at her local McDonalds and preached at her local church. "

I didnt say she was hiding her views, merely that they are totally atypical of Evangelicals here.


In any case, did you miss the title of the programme ?

"'The Fundmentalists'- not all fundamentalists, or the fundamentalists who take a charitable view of other faiths, Christian or otherwise."

So if someone does a show entitled "The Muslims" and excludes moderate muslims, and focuses only on the most extreme 1% of that faith, youd find that fair?

How about a show called "The Jews" that focused only on investment bankers and pawnshop owners?.

"Surprisingly, we have those here too!

Except here they tend not to have the same kind of political power they have in the United States, nor do they sew holsters for guns onto their aprons."

I dont think Evangelical I know has sewn a holster for guns into their apron.


"They also wouldn't get far in trying to ban the new building of a religious building or the conversion of an existing building to religious use, simply on the grounds they just didn't like the adherents of that faith."


I doubt those were the grounds brought forward legally, as opposed to the motives. Here in the US we have local zoning, which of course can be manipulated. Having served on the boards of religious institutions that have had zoning issues, I think I know a thing or two about this.

From what I can gather theres been no small amount of contorversy about the building of mosques in various places in the continent. Not UK I guess - there you just have folks vote for a nice group like the British National Party.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
[

So if someone does a show entitled "The Muslims" and excludes moderate muslims, and focuses only on the most extreme 1% of that faith, youd find that fair?

Youy haven't seen the programme, nor I suspect read a transcript. Suffice to say, the aim of the programme was clearly laid out, and the reporter interviewed moderates as well as extremists.

So yes, the programme was (to my mind) both fair and balanced, which is more than you can say about Fundie Annie Get Your Gun.


In any case, it's not like there isn't a tradition of anti-Catholicism within certain fundmentalist Protestant sects, in North America and in the United Kingdom. What surprised me was her ecumenical approach to religious intolerance, including Islam and other faiths.

Your personal experience of Evangelicals is lovely for you, but alas has no bearing on whether or not the woman interviewd did or did not sew a holster onto her apron.

Not only did she do so, but she quite happily demonstrated the purpose of the odd pouch of material (of the same colour as the rest of her apron) to the reporter.

Very quaint.


She was quite explicit about the reasons for wanting to ban the houses of worship of other faiths- really, you should just stop commentating now because you haven't seen the programme, nor have you read the script, and I'm not of the mind to regurgitate whole chunks of it for you, so that you can continue arguing out of a position of ignorance.

Especially when it leads you to make yet more defensive sarcastic quips...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Straybow
The Normans began somewhere in Scandanavia.

No, the Norsemen originated there. The Norsemen were the precursors to the Normans, who were the product of the intermarriage of the French and Norse.

They eventually abandoned claims to Normandy and other possessions in France and adopted England as their True Homeland™.

Errr... England was an a very rich country. Many Normans knew a good thing when they saw it- which accounts also for the Norman kingdom of Sicily and the Norman Principality of Antioch.

I don't think there's any evidence that either the Normans of Sicily or Antioch ever viewed England as their true homeland.

[lord of the mark]

No, I did not see the show and would not comment on it, were it not being implied that this particular woman was representative of life in the United States.

"Except here they tend not to have the same kind of political power they have in the United States, nor do they sew holsters for guns onto their aprons."


Here they tend not to sew holsters for guns into their aprons either.

AFAICT, precisely one does. Are you sure, that in the entire length and breadth of the UK of GB and NI, there isnt ONE fundie who has sewn a holster for a gun into her apron? And even if there is not, wtf difference does it make?

Mark Twain, a great American (and no fundie) said there are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics. He didnt mean people quoting statistics are giving false info - but, IIUC, that a stat out of context can be so misleading as to be a lie. The same can be said about anecdotes. My personal experience of American evangelicals certainly has no bearing on whether or not one woman sewed a holster into her apron, but it gives a far more represenative picture of evangelicals in the US and how they relate to others than Ms. Apron does. Just as there are true, but misleading, anecdotes floating around the US about the British Muslims, and their relationship tp non-Muslims in the UK.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
No, I did not see the show and would not comment on it, were it not being implied that this particular woman was representative of life in the United States.

It's not stated either in the programme nor in my posts, nor is it in any way implied.

She is interviewed as part of wide ranging look at various strands of 'religious fundamentalism' across the world, as I made perfectly clear in my original post, and as is made crystal clear in the link to the Channel 4 website which I posted.

She is not being shown as representative of 'life in the United States' as 'life in the United States' is not the point of the programme.

AFAICT, precisely one does. Are you sure, that in the entire length and breadth of the UK of GB and NI, there isnt ONE fundie who has sewn a holster for a gun into her apron? And even if there is not, wtf difference does it make?

Oh dear.

I had imagined that you might be familiar with some basic tenets or dogmas of the Christian faith. It is often represented as being a more peaceful 'alternative'or successor to Judaism, with Jesus Christ being portrayed as the bringer of peace and love:

26:51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.

26:52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

The Gospel According to Matthew, King James Bible, Authorized Version

How about a show called "The Jews" that focused only on investment bankers and pawnshop owners?.

As someone who has seen the programme, I can state that it had a wide ecumenical remit with regard to 'fundamentalism'- Muslims in the U.K. and Palestine, Jewish settlers in Israel, Sinhalese Buddhists, Hindu politicians, and of course the utterly captivating woman fundamentalist in the U.S. .

In fact, as these examples from five major world religions show, fundamentalism is a recent phenomenon that has as much to do with today's global politics and economics as with the religious sources.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/fundamentalists.html

My personal experience of American evangelicals certainly has no bearing on whether or not one woman sewed a holster into her apron, but it gives a far more represenative picture of evangelicals in the US and how they relate to others than Ms. Apron does.

No, it doesn't; it gives us a picture of your experience of one family of Evangelical Christians, whereas the programme set the Christian fundamentalist movements in the U.S. in context and provided us with more than one viewpoint and more than one interviewee.

As I said, you're misinterpreting what I have said and what the programme's remit was and what the programme did.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom



It's not stated either in the programme nor in my posts, nor is it in any way implied.

She is interviewed as part of wide ranging look at various strands of 'religious fundamentalism' across the world, as I made perfectly clear in my original post, and as is made crystal clear in the link to the Channel 4 website which I posted.

She is not being shown as representative of 'life in the United States' as 'life in the United States' is not the point of the programme.




Oh dear.

I had imagined that you might be familiar with some basic tenets or dogmas of the Christian faith. It is often represented as being a more peaceful 'alternative'or successor to Judaism, with Jesus Christ being portrayed as the bringer of peace and love:




The Gospel According to Matthew, King James Bible, Authorized Version






As someone who has seen the programme, I can state that it had a wide ecumenical remit with regard to 'fundamentalism'- Muslims in the U.K. and Palestine, Jewish settlers in Israel, Sinhalese Buddhists, Hindu politicians, and of course the utterly captivating woman fundamentalist in the U.S. .

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/fundamentalists.html

No, it doesn't; it gives us a picture of your experience of one family of Evangelical Christians, whereas the programme set the Christian fundamentalist movements in the U.S. in context and provided us with more than one viewpoint and more than one interviewee.




As I said, you're misinterpreting what I have said and what the programme's remit was and what the programme did.

From what I can gather from what you have said, the show provided a "diverse" picture by showing fundies from a range of different religious traditions, all of whom were hateful. AFAICT from what ytou have posted, all the American Protestant evangelicals were either people like this woman, right wing TV preachers, or politicians. I gather that the impression it left of life in these United States was of a nation were most evangelicals are filled with hate for other religious traditions.

I gave not one but two examples, and I have known others as well. And Id say that my examples give a better overall impression of life and intergroup relations here (and not just in Washington DC, but in Jacksonville, FL were Ive also lived) than your posts do.

Dammmit, Molly, I LIVE here, dont you think I have some idea of whats going on?


A story from Jacksonville. A woman at work, a Catholic was being married in a Catholic church, and her coworkers were all invited. At some point in the service folks knealed (which let me no what those funny cushion thingies attached to the backs of the rows in front of us were for - Jews interpret "bowing" differently) This was a little awkward for me - but I noted that my Baptist coworkers didnt bow, so I figured I didnt have to either. We all enjoyed the wedding, and congratulated the bride and groom.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom

Oh dear.

I had imagined that you might be familiar with some basic tenets or dogmas of the Christian faith. It is often represented as being a more peaceful 'alternative'or successor to Judaism, with Jesus Christ being portrayed as the bringer of peace and love:

It is so represented, but I find that false both because it presents a profoundly misleading picture of Judaism, and because there are alternate views of Christianity, not only the entire history from the time Christianity actually gained political power, but in proof texts from the NT as well. Its not really my business how particular sects of Christianity reconcile apparently conflicting texts. There is no more or less authentic form of Christianity, to me, theres just empirically observable phenomena.

But lets say I DID beleive that this woman was wrong in interpretation of Christianity - apart from her ability to use zoning to enforce her prejudices (something that happens all the time, and of which Orthodox Jews are often the victims, sometimes at the hands of secular Jews) this is a big WTF.

[Blaupanzer]

Is zoning somehow an issue related to the moral right to a piece of land? Arguing over the content of a show only one of you has seen seems somewhat futile.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Dammmit, Molly, I LIVE here, dont you think I have some idea of whats going on?

See ? There's the defensive posture yet again.


Whether you do or don't live in the United States has nothing to do with a programme you haven't seen, a transcript you haven't read, and a woman you haven't met.

From what I can gather from what you have said, the show provided a "diverse" picture by showing fundies from a range of different religious traditions, all of whom were hateful.

It showed 'fundamentalists' from different countries with different faiths, who for differing reasons and with differing degrees of 'justification', exhibited the same kinds of paranoia and sense of self-righteousness.

I gather that the impression it left of life in these United States was of a nation were most evangelicals are filled with hate for other religious traditions.

That's your reading of a show you haven't seen and your misinterpretation of my posts.

And Id say that my examples give a better overall impression of life and intergroup relations here (and not just in Washington DC, but in Jacksonville, FL were Ive also lived) than your posts do.

Well, you would, wouldn't you ?

Good grief, my posts aren't about an overview of the whole Protestant Evangelical movement in the United States, nor are they about life in general in the United States.

What are you doing- channeling the paranoid style of American politics into your misreadings of my posts ? It certainly seems that way.

A story from Jacksonville. A woman at work, a Catholic was being married in a Catholic church, et cetera

How lovely for you. I've been to a Muslim wedding, but somehow that doesn't cancel out the presence of Muslim fundamentalism in this country, and doesn't make me feel that the programme was trying to portray an unbalanced picture of this country, or Muslims in this country.

But lets say I DID beleive that this woman was wrong in interpretation of Christianity - apart from her ability to use zoning to enforce her prejudices (something that happens all the time, and of which Orthodox Jews are often the victims, sometimes at the hands of secular Jews) this is a big WTF.

No, it's yet again a demonstration of how you can't see the wood for the trees.