Tues. – Fri., Apr. 13-16: Religion, the Presidency, and Public Opinion
UPDATED ASSIGNMENT
New Due Date: Friday, April 16, 5:00 p.m.
Read
- Religion, Rhetoric, and the Presidency: A Conversation with Michael Gerson :: The Pew Forum, 2004 UPDATED LINK
- If the above link is broken, try this one instead:
Alternate link to “Religion, Rhetoric, and the Presidency: A Conversation with Michael Gerson”
- If the above link is broken, try this one instead:
- Franklin Graham, “My View of Islam” :: Wall Street Journal
- “Top Evangelicals Critical of Colleagues over Islam” :: NYTimes.com
- “The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other” :: Pew Research Center
Highlights from the Conversation with Gerson
On the use of religion in historical presidential discourse:
On D-Day, most of you probably know, FDR did his announcement to the nation entirely in the form of a prayer. He said, “In the poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer.” He asked for victory, for renewed faith, and said, “with Thy blessing we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogance.”
Or FDR’s State of the Union address a month after Pearl Harbor:
“They know that victory for us means victory for religion, and they could not tolerate that. The world is too small to provide adequate living room for both Hitler and God. In proof of this, the Nazis have now announced their plan for enforcing their new, German pagan religion all over the world, a plan by which the Holy Bible and the cross of mercy would be displaced by ‘Mein Kampf’ and the swastika and the naked sword.
“We are inspired by a faith that goes back through all the years to the first chapter of Genesis: God created man in his own image. We on our side are striving to be true to that divine heritage. That is the conflict that day and night now pervades our lives. No compromise can end that conflict. There never has been, there never will be successful compromise between good and evil.”
On George W. Bush’s rhetoric regarding other faiths:
We’ve attempted to apply a set of rules that I’ve done my best to keep. We’ve tried to apply a principled pluralism; we have set out to welcome all religions, not favoring any religions in a sectarian way. I think that the president is the first president to mention mosques and Islam in his inaugural address. The president has consistently urged tolerance and respect for other faiths and traditions, and has received some criticism for it.
We often in our presentations make specific reference to people who are not religious; we’ve done that right from the beginning. In our first prayer breakfast in February of 2001, we said an American president serves people of every faith and serves some of no faith at all. And there are plenty of other examples.
Reply in a Comment Below
By Friday at 5:00, post a comment below, responding to the following questions. NOTES:
- Late responders: You must include references to one-third of the comments made prior to yours.
- First responders: You will receive points for providing sufficient quality of content that others choose to respond to you.
Questions:
- Highlight 3 interesting insights you noted in the discussion with Gerson. (No more than one can come from the highlights quoted above). Write a 3-5 sentence comment about the third. (Thus, save your favorite for last!)
- Highlight a portion of each of the other three articles by summarizing an interesting point and giving a brief comment on it. (BONUS POINT OPPORTUNITY: Add another piece of research to the mix, and provide a link and summary.)
- Finally, answer: What does this research lead you to think about President Bush’s public references to Islam — compared to, say, Franklin Graham’s? What should the responsibility of a political leader be in this regard? Of a religious leader?
15 Comments
April 13th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
The first category in which we use these things is comfort in grief and mourning, and we’ve had too many of those opportunities: in the space shuttle disaster, 9/11, other things where people are faced with completely unfair suffering. And in that circumstance, a president generally can’t say that death is final, and separation is endless, and the universe is an echoing, empty void. (Laughter.)
A president offers hope – the hope of reunions and a love stronger than death, and justice beyond our understanding. And let me just read a portion of what he said at the National Cathedral on September 14 in 2001 – just an example of how we use religious language.
“God’s signs are not always the ones we look for. We learn in tragedy that his purposes are not always our own. Yet the prayers of private suffering, whether in our homes or in this great cathedral, are known and heard and understood.
“There are prayers that help us last through the day or endure the night. There are prayers of friends and strangers that give us strength for the journey, and there are prayers that yield our will to a will greater than our own.
“This world he created is of moral design. Grief and tragedy and hatred are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end, and the Lord of life holds all who die and all who mourn.”
The first category in which we use these things is comfort in grief and mourning, and we’ve had too many of those opportunities: in the space shuttle disaster, 9/11, other things where people are faced with completely unfair suffering. And in that circumstance, a president generally can’t say that death is final, and separation is endless, and the universe is an echoing, empty void. (Laughter.)
A president offers hope – the hope of reunions and a love stronger than death, and justice beyond our understanding. And let me just read a portion of what he said at the National Cathedral on September 14 in 2001 – just an example of how we use religious language.
“God’s signs are not always the ones we look for. We learn in tragedy that his purposes are not always our own. Yet the prayers of private suffering, whether in our homes or in this great cathedral, are known and heard and understood.
“There are prayers that help us last through the day or endure the night. There are prayers of friends and strangers that give us strength for the journey, and there are prayers that yield our will to a will greater than our own.
“This world he created is of moral design. Grief and tragedy and hatred are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end, and the Lord of life holds all who die and all who mourn.”
“”"”" IN this the man speakes as though the world is a Godly place and we as people are Godly as a whole, but this is in fact a false fact! unfourtunatly we are are not we only seem to call on God in great need and whe nthings are fine we forget all about Him. but I dont think we as a nation are lost compleatly, yet because in time of great need we do turn to him and it is our jobs as christians to let people know that its not just in great need that we can call upon God but he is always there!”"”"”"”
April 13th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
I remember one incident in the last election when Frank Bruni – who is one of my favorite people; I really like and respect him – wrote on the front page of The New York Times that the president had said in an interview, actually – not a speech – that people should take the log out of their own eye before taking the speck out of their neighbor’s eye. And Frank, writing on the front page of The New York Times, called this an odd version of the pot calling the kettle black. (Laughter.) Neither he nor his editors knew it was from one of the most famous sermons in history, and the part of the New Testament that’s in red. (Laughter.) But actually, most Americans knew and the disconnect was not particularly – I don’t think – the president’s fault.
But I know that the kind of care that we try to take will not bridge all the disagreements on this topic. There seems to me a genuine disagreement in public life when it comes to religion and rhetoric. There is a view that pluralism requires silence; that religious language violates the truce of tolerance in America, and moral arguments rooted in faith are off limits in public life.
The first category in which we use these things is comfort in grief and mourning, and we’ve had too many of those opportunities: in the space shuttle disaster, 9/11, other things where people are faced with completely unfair suffering. And in that circumstance, a president generally can’t say that death is final, and separation is endless, and the universe is an echoing, empty void.
Gerson talks about how politically Bush and him as his speechwriter, incorporated religious symbols or statements into speeches. The first instance is one in which the nation is suffering; people at the local level of the incident who have direct ties to the tragedy, and nationally as people become afraid of their safety or their children’s futures. I think it’s an interesting point that a lot of atheists would be highly critical of the political system since it’s so tied into Christianity. However, if you were to take their beliefs and try to tell it to people with emotional needs, like Gerson gives as an example here, I could only imagine the negative responses and criticisms he would receive; perhaps intellectually some would claim it as a triumph, but ultimately if they are correct everything is equally pointless. Their victory over the world would be hollowly echoed with a triumphant cheer throughout the boundless vacuum of the universe.
Franklin Graham:
Some of my recent statements, interpreted as critical of Islam, have been widely reported. I believe I’ve been greatly misunderstood, and I’d like to paint a more complete picture.
This kind of makes me curious as to what the criticisms were and what he said to allow them to twist it, if he indeed didn’t say something directly contradictory to what he’s saying here. It seemed pretty clear from the start, and that’s why it’s so brief; he disagrees with other religions, believes they still have the right to believe it, but has to cry out against the horrible acts done in the name of Islam like he would if the same happened in the name of Christianity. Seems hard to twist that around.
NY Times:
Mr. Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and head of a global missions agency, Samaritan’s Purse, said last year that Islam was ”a very evil and wicked religion.” Mr. Vines described Muhammad as ”a demon-possessed pedophile.”
The article is about how basically every minister in the public eye was against such concepts and wanting to expand to Muslims (while still pointing out the differences) a hand to lead them toward Jesus. However, I do think it odd how they emphasize so strongly the need to be polite about it. Isn’t the religion of Islam wicked and evil, as written by Muhammad? If it isn’t, doesn’t it make it another sect/branch of Christianity almost; maybe it still would be as unique as Judaism and Christianity, but to deny what is written in the Koran as wicked seems contrary to the Bible. If Jesus is the truth, and people argue over whether or not God can be around evil because of His godliness/holiness, why wouldn’t that concept apply to a perversion of the truth of Jesus’ glory?
Pew Research Center:
Solid majorities of the general publics in Germany and Spain say that there is a natural conflict between being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society. But most Muslims in both of those countries disagree. And in France, the scene of recent riots in heavily Muslim areas, large percentages of both the general public and the Muslim minority population feel there is no conflict in being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society.
I just found it kind of funny how so many Muslims were supportive of modernization. I can’t say I know of anything that would bar them from living a modern lifestyle in their religion, but considering how devoted they are to traditions and the old ways, it does sort of raise some questions. How much of tradition should they hold onto and keep, is technology/wealth a good thing, the issue of restraint, and of course how they treat women.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaNKz2rDF04
I just found this to be an interesting video. President Bush was talking about learning more about their customs and beliefs; to be tolerant of faith, as that is the American way. I definitely agree that knowledge is vital, as is respect. However, in part I would still resist some of his points, and as part of a challenge would say a wholly devout Muslim (believe the Koran to be inerrant) is behind terrorism. I do believe it is possible for Muslims to have a faith that is not behind those ideas, but it requires taking an interpretation that is partly deviated away from the Koran’s entire message (so in my understanding those people would be a split/branch of the Muslim faith that needs to be distinguished like Catholicism and Protestantism).
President Bush said that Muslims prayed to the exact same God as Christians, however Franklin Graham and the other religious leaders probably would include a different God as part of the differences that separate the two religions. I would definitely have to disagree with Bush’s notion of that issue. Allah in the Koran is a wholly different figure from how God is depicted in the Bible, though as part of my faith I do find some disconnect between the Old and New Testament. Either way though, merely trying to say that Allah is the exact same as God, just somewhat different doesn’t really make much sense. It’s really like saying, both are all powerful and created the universe the same way, but who they are is completely different, yet since there is that overlap they are the same. An apple is not the same as an orange because they both are juiced, are fruits, are round, and grow from trees. The responsibility a political leader has is somewhat tricky, as they are supposed to represent who voted them in, the rights of all people, and also the issue of majority opinion vs. minority rights. If the majority of people voting were atheist, but somehow a Christian was who they picked, should their personal opinions sway them, or are they to voice who voted them in (or are they picked because their expertise is to be so great, that even as they ignore the people’s voice, it is because of their knowledge and thinking big picture as opposed to quick opinion that changes)? Obviously laws ignore the opinions of some people, even in the issue of religion; Muslims can’t practice marriage by capture in America, even though it’s part of their religion (you’d be happier not to ask if you don’t know what that is). I think it’s a tricky mess really, but if Christianity is the truth and is the best way, the data should support that and the law should enforce the best way (while still allowing the freedom to screw up). A religious leader is expected to be close to God, so I don’t know how they could separate personal faith/opinion from public responsibility.
April 13th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
I do not believe Muslims are evil people because of their faith. I personally have many Muslim friends. But I decry the evil that has been done in the name of Islam, or any other faith–including Christianity. I agree with President Bush that as a country we are at war with terrorists, not with Islam. But as a minister, not a politician, I believe it is my responsibility to speak out against the terrible deeds that are committed as a result of Islamic teaching.
“”"”"” should we not all follow Dr gramm in his beleives? the way he puts this says not only that he is strong enough in his faith that he can excpt others for who they are and not expect others to change to our way tof thinking just because thats the way we think. and by being a christ like exaple we can show them Gods love and lead them to christ through example and not force!
April 13th, 2010 at 8:28 pm
nyTimes
Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, and pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, said to the 40 leaders attending today, ”Since we are in a global community, no doubt about it, we must temper our speech and we must communicate primarily through actions.”
“”"”Did your mom ever tell you actions speak louder than words? well here is someone who lisened for once! and not only did he listen but he put in into work! to just say we care but we have to show it not only to those who matter but to everyone untill our misson is done untill we have nothing left to give.
April 13th, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Pew research
Overall, the Germans and Spanish express much more negative views of both Muslims and Arabs than do the French, British or Americans. Just 36% in Germany, and 29% in Spain, express favorable opinions of Muslims; comparable numbers in the two countries have positive impressions of Arabs (39% and 33%, respectively). In France, Great Britain and the U.S., solid majorities say they have favorable opinions of Muslims, and about the same numbers have positive views of Arabs.
“”"”"”"”in many ways i think this shows that we as a nation dispite all odds have in some ways opened the doors of commuication to those outside our doors”"”"”"”
April 13th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
in this video abc set up a actor to go in to a backery and was refused severice and in some cases the other people in the store stood behind the store and in others were apaled by what was being done! what do you think!
April 13th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Way to kick us off guys. Thanks! And you’re quicker than I expected! (Sorry for the misalignment of this comment form. I’ll work on getting it better laid out.)
April 15th, 2010 at 10:09 am
What is most interesting in the article Religion, Rhetoric and the Presidency, is the underlining theme of proper etiquette. Really after I read the whole article I came away with the ideal of…okay so in this, this, and this situation reference to God or spirituality is not only acceptable, but wanted. For example in times of grief. However, if mentioned in any other areas outside of these prescribed boundries the president is stepping over the line and forcing his beliefs on other. How strange.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:18 am
There’s also a deeper objective that I think would be worth discussing, that seems to assume that moral reasoning rooted in religious belief is somehow itself off limits. If you are for a certain right or belief because the Constitution said so, that is okay. If you’re for certain rights because you believe the image of God is found in every human being based on a theological teaching, that is not. G.K. Chesterton, in a quote I like, called this a “taboo of tact or convention whereby a man is free to say this or that because of his nationality or his profession, or his place of residence, or his hobby, but not because of his creed about the very cosmos in which he lives.”
“”it is kind of ironic that we say we can state our moral beliefs on the constitution but not on religion when earlier he spoke of how historically our nation was built on religious ideas. If the religious ideas are what inspired our constitution than how is it not okay today to use them as a guide to help us discern what the constitution means.”"
April 15th, 2010 at 10:25 am
Franklin Grahmn “But Jesus also taught his followers to love others. It is this central teaching of Christianity that motivates my life and work, as a relief worker as well as a minister. While as Christians we disagree with Islamic teachings, if we obey the teachings of Jesus we will love all Muslims”
“”"”I think today many Christians have a difficulty in doing this. How can you love Muslims without giving the appearence of tolerating or compromising by saying it is okay for them to do what they do. Working with Christians from all around the country I hear again and again only hate speech on Muslims and how we should rid ourselves of them here in America. Whenever I hear this I think doesn’t Christ tell us to spread the Gospel, doesn’t having Muslims hear in America present us with a great opportunity to witness to those who we know are lost. I think Franklin’s quote hear helps clarify this issue. Yes what is done in the name of Islam is an almost unspeakable evil, but Christ’s command to love those that our lost still demands us to go into this evil to win over those lost in it.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:31 am
NY Times:
Mr. Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and head of a global missions agency, Samaritan’s Purse, said last year that Islam was ”a very evil and wicked religion.” Mr. Vines described Muhammad as ”a demon-possessed pedophile.”
“”"Do I agree with these statements…yes. Do I think you should go up to a Muslim and tell them this…no. Our goal is not to go to every Muslim and when a great debate to prove them wrong and us right. Our goal is to bring Christ into the world, not by force or argument, but through love, to show them through our lives the redeeming grace given to us by Christ. Attacking what they have known their whole lives as true will simply shut them off to any further talk of grace, we must show them first our heart and love for them and Christ’s love for them before we can speak on any further matters”"”"”
April 15th, 2010 at 10:38 am
The Great Divide
“In most Western countries, the prevailing view among non-Muslims is that there is a conflict between being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society. But Muslims generally disagree – including Muslims who live in major European countries.”
This area I found very interesting. Being in a strict Muslim country for only a month I saw this conflict going on between their younger and older population. The older population again was very agianst the West and the modern world. While younger muslims did not see the conflict, they saw and questioned why they could not remain devout to their faith while advancing their country into a more modern world
April 15th, 2010 at 10:43 am
I also watched the video that Richard posted on his little comment thing. I agree President Bush tried to compromise to much, probably in fear of amking his political stance looked bias to Christianity. Again this brings up that whole messy conflict of seperating your personal beliefs from politics. Which I am still stewing on. however, for the most part I would probably take more of Franklin Grahmns stance on the whole issue over Bush’s stance.
April 15th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
“A fourth category are literary allusions to hymns and scripture. In our first inaugural, we had “when we see that wounded traveler on the road to Jericho, we will not pass to the other side;” or “there is power, wonder-working power in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people” in the State of the Union.
I’ve actually had, in the past, reporters call me up on a variety of speeches and ask me where are the code words. I try to explain that they’re not code words; they’re literary references understood by millions of Americans. They’re not code words; they’re our culture. It’s not a code word when I put a reference to T.S. Eliot’s Choruses From the Rock in our Whitehall speech; it’s a literary reference. And just because some don’t get it doesn’t mean it’s a plot or a secret”
“There’s also a deeper objective that I think would be worth discussing, that seems to assume that moral reasoning rooted in religious belief is somehow itself off limits. If you are for a certain right or belief because the Constitution said so, that is okay. If you’re for certain rights because you believe the image of God is found in every human being based on a theological teaching, that is not. G.K. Chesterton, in a quote I like, called this a “taboo of tact or convention whereby a man is free to say this or that because of his nationality or his profession, or his place of residence, or his hobby, but not because of his creed about the very cosmos in which he lives.”
“The deeper danger of course is the faith itself. A political and politicized and judgmental faith seems to miss the point. I’ve been a Christian all my life, but I still don’t feel competent to define it for others. I think, however, it has something to do with forgetting yourself and seeking the interest of other people. It has something to do with getting beyond petty fears and selfish ambitions and seeing God’s kingdom at work – a kingdom that’s not of this world. And when those kingdoms are confused, it is faith that suffers the most.”
I really agreed with this last quote, and personally connected to it. Faith it really isn’t something you can just describe and give some sort of cookie-cutter answer to when someone wants you to define it. Their are different views and definitions of what faith is to different people. But when a Christian mixes their religion and political sides together, faith can get confused and they way people look at you is as if your faith is a hoax, and therefore, faith becomes what is suffering, Because at times, I think people are expected to set their faith aside when it comes to certain issues, and that is when faith is most important.
My View of Islam by Franklin Graham
“But Jesus also taught his followers to love others. It is this central teaching of Christianity that motivates my life and work, as a relief worker as well as a minister. While as Christians we disagree with Islamic teachings, if we obey the teachings of Jesus we will love all Muslims.”
I think for many Christians this is hard to do. Christ calls us to love everyone, because they are his creation too. I think Christians today, especially since the War on Terror and all the issues we have been having in the Middle East, I think they find it hard to love Muslims, because we don’t believe the same thing. But I think it is one of the most important group of people that we as Christians love because of the Muslims hatred for Christians.
Top Evangelicals Critical Of Colleagues Over Islam by Laurie Goodstein
“It has been more than a year since major evangelical leaders, like the Rev. Franklin Graham, the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Rev. Jerry Vines, past president of the Southern Baptist Convention, began publicly branding Islam, or Islam’s prophet Muhammad, as inherently evil and violent. Mr. Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and head of a global missions agency, Samaritan’s Purse, said last year that Islam was ”a very evil and wicked religion.” Mr. Vines described Muhammad as ”a demon-possessed pedophile.”
I’m not sure why, and I really haven’t anything other than these articles on the topics, but what Franklin Graham apparently said in this article about islam being “a very evil and wicked religion” seem contradictory to me from the other article he wrote. I’m sure he wasn’t meaning that it’s not and evil and wicked religion, but more that we should love them anyway. Graham says that evil things have been done in the name of Islam, and I feel like this article is really one sided.
The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims view each other
“The chasm between Muslims and the West is also seen in judgments about how the other civilization treats women. Western publics, by lopsided margins, do not think of Muslims as “respectful of women.” But half or more in four of the five Muslim publics surveyed say the same thing about people in the West.”
I thought that this was really interesting. It’s funny how the world sees each other. But I was curious when reading this how Muslims then depict how woman are treated in the western world. I know that being a woman in the western world, I feel like I have more respect than what I see when I look at Muslim woman. I actually grew up around a lot of muslim in Iowa. We have a pretty large population of muslims from Bosnia. But I can kinda see how people in the muslim world look at the West and how some woman are treated. I guess everyone just looks at it differently. People in muslim countries might say they respect their woman in a certain way, and the same might go for the West.
In doing this research, I am kinda up in the air about President Bush’s public references to Islam and the responsibility of political and religious leaders. I think as a nation, and even as religious leaders, it can be important to engage in certain aspects to help relate to Islam. We want them to see our nation as friends, rather than enemies. But for Bush to say that Christians and muslims pray to they same God, because if it was the same God, then we would not being the fight that is gonig on. It really all comes down to respect. You may not have to believe in what someone else believes, but you should respect them. And when people feel like they are being respected, it opens doors for other things. As for religious leaders, it’s tough because they have a responsibility to God first, and then to others.
April 16th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
GERSON:
1. A president offers hope – the hope of reunions and a love stronger than death, and justice beyond our understanding.
2. Part of presidential leadership is to give a narrative, a structure to the past. That’s why presidents start speeches, “Four score and seven years ago.” Religion is an important part of that story, and we’ve tried to make that point.
3. “There are many experiences of faith in this room, but most will share a belief that we are loved and called to love; that our choices matter, now and forever; that there are purposes deeper than ambitions and hopes greater than success. These beliefs shape our lives and help sustain the life of our nation. Men and women can be good without faith, but faith is a force for goodness. Men and women can be compassionate without faith, but faith often inspires compassion. Human beings can love without faith, but faith is a great teacher of love.
I thought this third quote really summed up an example of how a speech can be inclusive of people with or without faith. It touches on how faith is merely a vehicle for good actions – which can resonate with both believers and non-believers of multiple faiths. For instance, a non-believer can interpret this to mean that someone else’s faith is their personal aid to goodness, but for them, it comes from another source. To the believer—particularly the Christian, it demonstrates the scriptural idea that salvation is not by good works, but good works should be evidence of salvation.
FRANKLIN:
1. However, the abusive treatment of women in most Islamic countries is nearly as draconian and falls far short of the dignity, respect, and protection almost universally given to women and mandated by the United Nations.
I think it’s a good touch, his clarification of the abuse faced by women in “Islamic countries” rather than the faith of Islam itself. I recently saw a play called “The Domestic Crusaders” with two Muslim friends. The play was somewhat of a comedy – and somewhat tried to depict some of the poor stereotypes that are faced by Muslim Americans. In this play, the wife was depicted as strongly as the husband – and in most cases, even wiser. I think it’s easy for us to confuse cultural differences and differences within a faith. My two Muslim friends are husband and wife and share a healthy marriage based on respect and love for each other. It’s important to distinguish the cultural differences and realize that not all cultures deserve our up-most respect – the ones that are accepting of poor treatment of women, in particular. However, a faith that does not condone that type of behavior does indeed deserve our respect.
TOP:
Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, and pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, said to the 40 leaders attending today, ”Since we are in a global community, no doubt about it, we must temper our speech and we must communicate primarily through actions.”
I think Mr. Haggard is correct – in that a Christian’s actions should come through our actions. What’s interesting about his statement though, is that three years later he admitted to seeing a male prostitute and using methamphetamine. I’m not placing judgment on Mr. Haggard, but it is important to note that often our actions fall short of what we really want to convey. In that case, I believe that we should co-exist with other religions (including Islam), but realize that a lot of the time – before we can be good examples for people of other faiths, we have to examine our own lives and see if we are fit to be those examples.
GREAT DIVIDE:
The chasm between Muslims and the West is also seen in judgments about how the other civilization treats women. Western publics, by lopsided margins, do not think of Muslims as “respectful of women.” But half or more in four of the five Muslim publics surveyed say the same thing about people in the West.
I found this quote to be interesting because it correlates with my comments from Mr. Haggard. First, I would say that the inhumane treatment of people in some civilizations is in fact much worse than how people in Western culture objective women – one is emotionally damaging, the other is physically and emotionally damanging (often times). On that note however, both treatments are not acceptable and I think the cross-judgement again comes from the cultural differences, not the religion – and both treatments should not be dismissed as “just part of their culture.” This shows us again that humans in general have a lot of work to do – of all faiths and cultures – and the actions we like to think we portray aren’t always accurate.
QUESTION 3:
I agreeed with Franklin’s idea that as a minister, he has a certain responsibility to the Church and to God to speak what he deems to be the Biblical truth. For a President however, I believe it should be their job to unite the country with their words – and anything less may create an unsettled attitude that is not ideal in any country. I respect Bush for his inclusion of Islam and think it showed an understanding of when it is appropriate to speak about one’s own faith, and when it’s appropriate to unite the country. As Gerson mentioned, the president’s job is to comfort in crisis, remind us of our historical background, and so-on.