All theocracy is equal?

Dean Esmay shares an observation about "theocracy:"

.....[A]lmost no one who talks in sweaty, jittery terms about "separation of church and state" and "theocracy" ever complains about religious figures who take political positions they agree with; they reserve it for religious people they disagree with.
I've noticed the same thing, and I've also noticed that the vast majority of the feverishly anti-theocracy rhetoric (including web sites devoted to fighting theocracy) is concerned only with Christian theocracy.

Why are they silent about Islamic theocracy? If this omission doesn't indicate actual agreement with Islamic theocracy, I don't know what it means. I hope it doesn't evince a preference for one form of theocracy over another.

That would be religious discrimination.

posted by Eric on 05.06.05 at 01:41 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2291






Comments

They're complaining about Christian theocrats because they're discussing domestic policies and issues. We're not an Islamic country, and Islamic theocrats have very little influence on our courts, schools, civil rights, public institutions, and other domestic issues. If our culture suddenly turns Islamic, I'm sure we'll hear plenty of complaints about the Islamic theocrats.

Anonymous   ·  May 7, 2005 02:33 AM

The above commenter, well, nailed it. Really, given your usual cogent analysis, surely you can see the flaw in this logic.


"Well, why aren't they talking about __________ at this very moment? Clearly, there is something (sinister, malevolent, odious) to be learned from their choice of priorities!" is a common refrain from those who ought to know better.


For instance, some of us might not have commented on the Ward Churchill affair not because we're on his side (I don't think much of anyone is), but because we consider the issue minor enough so as not to rankle our attention.


As a pro-war dem, I don't really see the big issue between speaking up against creeping theocracy at home and fighting extremist Wahhabist theocracy abroad.

However, you gotta admit - the Caliphate ain't starting up in Topeka, Kansas anytime soon.


Those of us who (despite being religious ourselves, oftentimes) nonetheless worry about the grip of religion on the public life, a group which includes such flaming liberals as George Will and Andrew Sullivan, will see whichever perversion of whichever faith (And I do consider the current Republican pseudo-faith-politicking as to some extent a perversion of faith) is most prevalent at the moment as target number one.


If there's anyone's priorities we need to worry about, it's those who are only willing to stand up against the intertwining of religion and state when it happens outside our borders.


I don't just get, as my generation is so wont to say, "all up in the grill" of those who use religion to take positions that are conservative -- The justification that one should support the Living Wage Campaign going across the nation because it's part of the Catholic social justice tradition strikes me as equally odious.

I really think there's been something lost in our country, a piece of our civic education, about teaching that the goal of government isn't to impose your will over every aspect of your neighbor's life, and that the left and right merely dicker over which will to impose.

Joe   ·  May 7, 2005 04:05 AM

I think you missed my point -- which is that most of the talk of Christian "theocracy" is political hyperbole. While there are some Christian theocrats, they will never be able to establish religious rule, and everyone knows it. Islamic theocratic rule is an existing reality, and is the essence of theocracy. I'd be willing to bet that Muslims worldwide who believe in theocracy far outnumber theocratically inclined Christians. There's no Caliphate in Kansas, but there are certainly a number of American Muslims who believe in theocracy. Yet they don't count. It's as if they don't exist.

Eric Scheie   ·  May 8, 2005 08:30 PM

The issue is power. When evangelicals stack the courts with the intention of usurping the Constitution, it's theocracy. When MLK used religion to support a political position, it is not theocracy.

Power is the issue that you choose to ignore.

Who gives a crap if Muslim theocrats outnumber Christian theocrats worldwide? Does that mean that Christian theocrats in the USA have to get a pass? You realize that they mean to reinstate sodomy laws and execute you, right?

Instafaggot   ·  May 9, 2005 07:34 AM

You said:
"Why are they silent about Islamic theocracy? If this omission doesn't indicate actual agreement with Islamic theocracy, I don't know what it means. I hope it doesn't evince a preference for one form of theocracy over another."

Whose silent about Islamic theocracy? Illustrate for us where exactly you found this silence. Your assumption that liberals therefore agree with Islamic theocracy is based on a faulty premise.

I really don't appreciate your assumptive propaganda. Exercise some Classical Values and respect evidence, logic, and integrity.

Instafaggot   ·  May 9, 2005 07:36 AM

Is it lack of common sense in trusting responsibility to woman or stupidity of the supervisor?

Cynthia Hall was willing to accept a job as a Sheriff Deputy. She was aware and conscious of the dangers that the position entails. Deputies work everyday with dangerous criminals.

It was her personal choice to work in that environment and the state did well in giving her the equal opportunity to compete for the job regardless of her gender and age.

Unplanned events, as tragic as they may seem occur daily in all professions. What happened to Ms. Cynthia Hall was a tragic event due to happened under the poor management and planning of the supervisors.

Based upon what I read, I honestly believe that she was put in a no win situation by her supervisor the moment that she is faced to confront a dangerous criminal, determine to kill, with nothing else but her muscles.

Although it is fair to asses that a stronger deputy might have resisted better the attack, it is a bad policy to rely on muscle power to control an inmate that is indented ok killing the judge.

The lack of common sense here is not in paring a grandmother 51, and 5' against a 33, 6'1" and 210 pounds but expecting that muscle power is enough to thwart a determined vicious killer.

It is the lack of imagination, incompetence and negligence on the part of the supervisors that failed to protect Cynthia Hall and not her gender, age and grandmother status.

Juan Jimenez

Anonymous   ·  May 10, 2005 04:58 PM


March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits