From: ghassoun@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (George Hassoun)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon
Subject: Re: Religious Ed. is an answer not a Dracula
Date: 31 Aug 92 02:19:26 GMT
Organization: Electrical & Electronic Eng., The University of Adelaide

In article <1992Aug26.132803.8679@ccsun.strath.ac.uk>
ccav38@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ("I.Ballouz") writes:


>Mr. Hassoun, I am one of those people who feel uneasy about discussing religions
>on the net.

Mr. Ballouz,
I think you are raising a very important issue here: *uneasiness of
talking publically about one's religion*. However, let me first
emphasise that what is in stake is not *any* religious talk, but *the
religion issue in the context of the Lebanese conflict*.

[...]
>I believe however that not many of us know much about religions and any discussion
>would inevitably lead to exchanging some "street talks" (as you had put it).
>Here, the truth would be the first casuality in such discussions.
>We will be engaging in spreading fictions and distorted facts no matter how
>hard one tries to sweeten the wording.

The "many of us who don't know much about religions" would purposely be
the targets and authors of such religio-cultural talk. Each one of us
has an average *perception*, i believe, of what his/her religion
represents to him/her. Those at the origin of many of our problems in
Lebanon carry a similar type of perception, and not a perfect knowledge of
religious matters. The net with what it provides of public exposure would be
a good place to filter the fictions and distorted facts. Communicating
our ideas under the light of the premise stated previously will
inevitably lead to the improvement of our attitudes.

Needless to say we are not seeking perfection, but one objective of
the talk would be to understand a little bit more the nature of the
relationship between the two religions, seen by an average person, not
a clergyman. It is important to know more whether these two religions
are *socially* compatible in any way, or whether any attempt to
"match" them would necessarily lead to an "unstable equilibrium" (the
sort of equilibrium we had, in Lebanon, over the last few decades).

>Secondly, I believe that while many people, in good faith and with the best of
>intention, get drawn into exchanging distorted stories, some people would
>seize the opportunity to purposely flood the net with some sarcastic and
>mocking remarks that would upset a lot of us. You only have to go back a
>little and revise some of the articles  to find out the truth in what I'm
>saying.

I am aware of that. But i think that better for us and them to flood
the net with distorted remarks (that get corrected as appropriately as
possible), than to wait until those people return back to Lebanon and
flood the system with distorted ideologies. The sooner we act the
better.

>Thirdly, we all know that many non-lebanese participate in the discussions.
>I feel that not many of them are aware of our particular sensitivity to these
>topics. Can you guarantee that those fellow netters would give the required
>care when dealing with these subjects?

As a matter of fact, i noticed that non-Lebanese are, in average, far
more sensitive than the Lebanese themselves when addressing
religiously related issues connected to the Lebanese conflict. You
only have to look at the current (and past) postings of "foreign"
individuals.

>Last, I'm not really sure whether discussing this topic on the net. is the
>best available way to increase our knowledge about our religions. Here, I
>can think of three islamic centres and dozens of christian centres in which
>the peolpe are more than willing to discuss these matters, face to face, and
>to the length and to the degree of details required. I am sure similar centres
>exist everywhere.

At one stage i was a member of a similar centre myself. My experience
tells me that the possibility of a Muslim person coming to discuss
religious matters in a Christian centre is quite minimal. The same is
most certainly true for the opposite case. Also, i don't expect
religious centres to willingly open an interactive, fairly diverse and
physically safe Islamo-Christian debate in the context of the Lebanese
conflict. At any rate, we just can't rely on the religious centres
around the world to resolve our problems.

>I believe the australian society is different than ours as far as religion is
>concerned. There, Christians do not feel threatened as our fellow christians
>feel in Lebanon. Moslems there are not in the same situation as our moslems
>in Lebanon. I am not surprised if they discuss religions in a more open fashion.
>I feel we can not. Our situation is totally different.

Of course our situation is different. Not totally though. There is
currently a debate going on between the Muslim community in Australia
and the government attempting to integrate Muslim traditions within
the nationally adopted system. The difficulties are evident. these
difficulties are basically the same existing anywhere between a
religiously centered community and a non-religiously based system (or
any other system leaning towards unbiasness). It is not the situation
that's very different, my friend, it is our attitudes. Thanks, by the
way for identifying one of our attitude problems.

>At the end, I would like to say that many participants in this group are
>responsible people and are aware of the sensitivity of the subject. However,
>it only takes one offensive article to cause a storm and spoil a serious and
>informative discussion. Do you remember M.G. from Cardiff and what had his
>offensive article lead to? I am not sure that many would like to see that
>again.

A network storm is nothing but the surface of the hurricane boiling in
the inner depth of those who cause it. Let these people explode on the
net. I would prefer a hundred times more a net explosion that i could
do something about, than seeing my children suffering from another
social explosion in my country 30 years down the line, and not being
able to do anything about it.

Street talkers and street activists have dominated for so long in our
country. They could afford to do so because the law, there, is theirs.
Are we going to allow them to dominate our thinking even when we have
the opportunity to express our ideas far from their intimidation
practices? And are we going to step aside simply saying: "We feel
uneasy talking about it"?

We're supposed to be the educated ones!

>I. Ballouz.

All the best,
George Hassoun                  |".. I love my country with part of my love
                                |for the earth, all of which is my country;
                                |and  I love  the  earth with all of myself
                                |because  it is the haven of  humanity, the
                                |manifest spirit of God"
ghassoun@eleceng.adelaide.edu.au|                      Gibran Khalil Gibran
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon,soc.culture.arabic,talk.politics.mideast