Secularism and Religion

Many here are aware that the basis of western civilization is in our Judeo-Christian heritage. Often we merely assert this, since we have known it all our lives, but it can be examined fruitfully.

I admire Melanie Phillips greatly because not only is she a very good writer and speaker, she is fully capable of thinking through things. And she does so here. Yes, this is a long read, but I think you’ll find it valuable to read the whole thing.

It has become the orthodoxy in the West that freedom, human rights and reason all derive from secularism and that the greatest threat to all these good things is religion.

I want to suggest that the opposite is true. In the service of this orthodoxy, the West is undermining and destroying the very values which it holds most dear as the defining characteristics of a civilised society.

In truth, in the United States, we don’t hear it explicitly very often, but in Britain, it is quite common in my experience. Not to mention very strident, not only from the secularists, but from Randians, and other assorted libertine groups.

Some of this hostility is being driven by the perceived threat from Islamic terrorism and the Islamisation of Western culture. However, this animus against religion has far deeper roots and can be traced back to what is considered the birthplace of Western reason, the 18th-century Enlightenment.

Actually, it goes back specifically to the French Enlightenment. In England and Scotland, the Enlightenment developed reason and political liberty within the framework of Biblical belief. In France, by contrast, anti-clericalism morphed into fundamental hostility to Christianity and to religion itself.

“Ecrasez l’infame,” said Voltaire (crush infamy) — the infamy to which he referred being not just the Church but Christianity, which he wanted to replace with the religion of reason, virtue and liberty, “drawn from the bosom of nature”.

[…] Instead of God producing heaven on earth, it would be mankind which would bring that about. Reason would create the perfect society and “progress” was the process by which utopia would be attained.

Far from utopia, however, this thinking resulted in something more akin to hell on earth. For the worship of man through reason led straight to totalitarianism. It was reason that would redeem religious superstition and bring about the kingdom of Man on earth. And just like medieval apocalyptic Christian belief, this secular doctrine would also be unchallengeable and heretics would be punished. This kind of fanaticism infused the three great tyrannical movements that were spun out of Enlightenment thinking: the French Revolution, Communism and Fascism. […]

In the Sixties, the baby-boomer generation bought heavily into the idea propounded by Herbert Marcuse and other Marxist radicals that the way to transform the West lay not through the seizure of political or economic control but through the transformation of the culture. This has been achieved over the past half century through what has been called a “long march through the institutions”, the infiltration into all the institutions of the culture — the universities, media, professions, politics, civil service, churches — of ideas that would then become the orthodoxy.

From multiculturalism to environmentalism, from post-nationalism to “human rights” doctrine, Western progressives have fixated upon universalising ideas which reject values anchored in the particulars of religion or culture. All that matters is a theoretical future in which war, want and prejudice will be abolished: the return of fallen humanity to a lost Eden. And like all utopian projects, which are by definition impossible and unattainable, these dogmas are enforced through coercion: bullying, intimidation, character assassination, professional and social exclusion.

The core doctrine is equality. Not the Biblical doctrine that every human being is owed equal respect because they are formed in the image of God: equality has been redefined as identicality, the insistence that there can be no hierarchy of values of lifestyles or cultures. There can no longer be different outcomes depending on different circumstances or how people behave. To differentiate at all is to be bigoted and on a fast track back to fascism and war.

So the married family was kicked off its perch. Sexual restraint was abolished. The formerly transgressive became normative. Education could no longer transmit a culture down through the generations but had to teach that the Western nation was innately racist and exploitative.

Subjective trumped objective. There was no longer any absolute truth. Everyone could arbitrate their own truth. That way bigotry and prejudice would be excised from the human heart, the oppressed of the developing world would be freed from their Western oppressors and instead of the Western nation there would be the brotherhood of man.

All this was done in name of freedom, reason and enlightenment and in opposition to religion, the supposed source of oppression, irrationality and obscurantism.

At the heart of it was an onslaught against the moral codes of Christianity. Those moral codes are actually the Mosaic laws of the Hebrew Bible.

[…] What they [Western “progressives” and the Islamists] also have in common is hostility to Judaism, Israel or the Jewish people. The genocidal hatred of Israel and the Jews that drives the Islamic jihad against the West is not acknowledged or countered by the West because its most high-minded citizens share at least some of that prejudice. Both Western liberals and Islamists believe in utopias to which the Jews are an obstacle. The State of Israel is an obstacle to both the rule of Islam over the earth and a world where there are no divisions based on religion or creed. The Jews are an obstacle to the unconstrained individualism of Western libertines and to the onslaught against individual human dignity and freedom by the Islamists. Both the liberal utopias of a world without prejudice, divisions or war and the Islamist utopia of a world without unbelievers are universalist ideologies. The people who are always in the way of universalising utopias are the Jews.

Do read it all, and there is a deal more than I have given you. The full title is: Secularism and religion: the onslaught against the West’s moral codes. It is simply a superb examination of where our basic morality came from, and how it has allowed us to exceed former civilizations by orders of magnitude, and how it has come to be endangered.

Crossposted from All along the Watchtower.

Friends, Acquaintances, Interests, Frenemies,& Enemies

العربية: علم إسرائيل (مستطيل ذهبي) English: Th...

Image via Wikipedia

We are going to talk here about categories of friendship. I (like you) have friends that I would willingly give my life for, I have acquaintances that I share interests with, they may be friends but, not like the close friends above, I also have interests; for instance, I might be nice to the idiot clerk in a store to get better service, and I have enemies (or at least adversaries).

This applies to us personally and to our countries as well. It is often quoted (I think it was Bismarck but, can’t seem to find it tonight) that “Great powers have interests, not friends”. That is pretty much true. A Great Power like the United States does have interests all over the world. They range from the cost of production in China to the cost of gasoline in Turkey and involve everything in between (going both ways around the world). We have adversaries and we have what some call frenemies.

But the exception which proves the rule, we also have friends, countries which will throw themselves in front of the train to save us and that we will do the same for them. We (and they) have proved that friendship over and over, usually in war but, in peace also. Who are these friends? You know as well as I. The United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and my point today: Israel.

Why have they become friends? Because more often than not, our interests are at least congruent, if not always the same. Usually it involve individual freedom, non-aggression, equal rights for all, religious freedom and such causes.

Israel has become the United States little sister, democratic, friendly, taking no sh*t from anyone. It doesn’t hurt that we were the very first country to recognize the state of Israel, nor did it hurt  when Nixon, during the Yom Kippur war, resupplied Israel using the US Air Force because nobody in Europe wanted to give us landing rights but, you don’t let friends die because of landing rights, do you? I would have expected this between Jerusalem and the “New Jerusalem”. We have also remained far more cognizant of the difference between good and evil than our European cousins.

Anyway, one of the things I find most troubling about the present administration is their penchant for insulting our friends, from returning the Churchill bust, to bowing to the Saudis, to always considering Israel to be in the wrong. The recent comments of our ambassador to Belgium (link here) blaming Israel for middle eastern anti-Semitism is just appalling.

This is discussion from the former Ambassador to the US from Israel is quite good.

You get a link because I can’t seem to get this to embed, Sorry, check it out.

We need the idiots fired next year, before we run out of our friends patience with our people.

%d bloggers like this: