From: donsw@cs.cornell.edu (Donald Wihardja)
Subject: Re: What is the problem?
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:58:20 GMT

In article <1jn5voINN71b@calvin.usc.edu> alves@calvin.usc.edu (William Alves) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.164156.10837@cs.cornell.edu> donsw@cs.cornell.edu (Donald Wihardja) writes:
>
>>Well, I just think that the topic is one of those that both side cannot 
>>agree on as it is the fundamental belief in each side. (If Jesus is the
>>Son of God, Islam is bogus, if not, Christianity is bogus.) So there is
>>no point in spending effort discussing it.
>
>..... 
>
>One can try to legislate against religious discrimination, but until the
>fundamental attitudes change, the problems will remain. One can teach
>people that Muslims are normal people, that their religion supports peace
>and tolerance, that they teach the equality of humankind. When people
>get to know Muslims, they will see that they are mostly just as friendly,
>intelligent, and non-violent as most Christians. This cannot happen without
>open discussion and experience of each other's culture, including religion.

I think this can be reach by discussing each religions official stand on
different issues, OR the member of the religions (unofficial but more 
realistic) stand on those. At least in these points both sides will be 
able to see that they have similar views, or when they disagree, both can
come up with a reasonable reasons for disagreeing. As I said before, you
can't do this with dogmas. These are faiths (thus by definition, taken
without much proof) that is the base of the religion, which in some cases
conflict with each other. BUT I think these are trivialities. (As my
humble secular self don't particularly care whether Jesus is better or not
than Mohammed. I just care about what they teach about morality, well, kinda)

I would like to avoid discussion about dogmas and faiths with people of 
another religion, because as I said, we'll never come to any agreement.


>>>Then, to me, the answer is more education and the teaching of religious
>>>tolerance.
>
>>You know, I believe that "religious tolerance" stems out of the fact that
>>many people don't VERY FIRMLY believe in religion anymore.
>
>I have known people of extremely firm convictions who held no prejudices
>towards people of other faiths. In fact, while both Christianity and Islam
>teach prosetylization, they also teach tolerance and friendship. A true
>believer should look upon a non-believer with pity and love, not anger.

Pity, I think, is a form of prejudice. You pity someone who is less fortunate
than you are. Thus you see non-believer as less than yourself. Now how do
you act on this view is up to you. I particularly hate people who try to
drag me to go to their church/temple, but I think this is what you do when
you really love someone. You try to save them. Conflict between tolerance
and love/friendship. 

>>As for the role of education: Education/scientific knowledge makes people
>>believe less in God than in laws of nature.
>
>I can recall nowhere in any body of scientific knowledge where it states
>that God does not exist or offers any evidence to believe in God or not.
>Many great scientists are very firmly religious. One thing that education
>can do is to teach people to think for themselves and respect the fact
>that others may come to different conclusions.
>
>Bill Alves

Oh, I am not saying that Science says that there is no God, but it says or
allow people to say that "There might not be a God". It makes people fear God
less (the merit of this is still up for grab, as "fear" might not be the
correct respond.) Therefore, people feel less inhibited to do wrong things.
(That is one advantage of having/believing in an omnipotent God, you can't
hide anything from him. You can't do bad things behind people's back because
HE knows.) Basically, science lessen the hold of religion on the people.
While it allows more tolerance, it also forces us to be more tolerant to
"evil" (As if you have no God, how do you define evil?) 

My religion teacher in High School (I went to a Catholic school) said that
American believe in a "Personal God". A God that conform to one's own ideals.
What is wrong, therefore, is what you think is wrong. (So if you think 
stealing is not wrong, so you can steal, right?)

Donald

-- 
CS Department, Cornell University
Ithaca, New York.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.indonesia