#secularlism

[mindfulldsliving]

Unmasking False Doctrines: Lessons from Korihor in Alma 30:6-31

Alma 30:6-31 is a powerful section that reveals the tactics of false teachings and how they can creep into our lives. This passage introduces us to Korihor, an anti-Christ figure whose mission was to deceive the people of Nephi with his erroneous doctrine

Scott Snow, © 1982 IRI Exposing False Teachings: A Study of Alma 30:6-31 In today’s world, false teachings are more rampant than ever, aiming to undermine our faith and lead us astray. Alma 30:6-31 offers a pivotal study on how the adversary uses deception to sway believers. This topic is crucial for Latter-day Saints, Protestant, and Evangelical Christians alike, as it warns us about the…

[memecucker]

Chad Secularlism vs Virgin Separation of Church and State

[disembodiedapparition]

India’s Most Powerful Politician

India’s most popular politician made headlines in late September for making it onto Time’s 100 Most Influential People list for 2020, but not for the best reasons. While the majority of the list is filled with change-makers, visionaries, and pioneers, the reasons that Prime Minister Modi is considered influential are not flattering. Karl Vick, his nominator, writes, “though almost all of India’s Prime Ministers have come from the nearly 80% of the population that is Hindu, only Modi has governed as if no one else matters.”

Who is Modi, and how did he rise to power?

Narendra Modi grew up in a small village in Gujarat. At age 8, he joined the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh), a Hindu nationalist organization that has advocated for the rebuilding of India as directed by Hindu culture and the establishment of a strong unified state. He famously grew up as a child of tea stall owners, and eventually paved his way into politics via his association with the RSS. In 2001, M0di was appointed as Gujarat’s Chief Minister, and was soon after elected to the legislative assembly. In Gujarat, Modi was widely praised for the state’s economic growth – however, his administration was criticized and even considered complicit in the devastating 2002 Gujarat riots, a three day long period of communal chaos which cost 1,044 people their lives, a large majority of them Muslim. After the riots, Narendra Modi was formally accused of initiating and condoning violence, though he was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing in 2012 by the Supreme Court of India.

In September 2013, the Bharatiya Janata Party named Narendra Modi as their candidate for the office of Prime Minister ahead of the 2014 Lok Sabha election. Modi’s personal attributes and ability to resonate with the citizens of India proved to be incredibly useful during this election campaign, with a sizable percentage of voters admitting that they only voted for BJP because Modi was their candidate. During his speeches, he spoke at lengths about the deep ridden corruption that his predecessors, the Indian National Congress, had been infamous for, thus triggering what many political analysts viewed as a protest vote against corruption. However, analysts also unanimously agreed that the main reason for Modi’s landslide 2014 victory had nothing to do with his party’s politics, and had everything to do with him.

Until his run for Prime Minister, India’s lasting impression of Modi had been the haunting visuals and stories from the chaos in 2002. However, his expensive campaign (which spent over 700 million USD) successfully switched gears and rebranded him as the savior of India’s economy and the oracle of India’s tilt away from socialism and towards neoliberalism. His campaign especially resonated with India’s youth and the middle class.

Modi’s dubious history with secularism:

Modi’s complicated history with Hindu nationalism has plagued his career for decades. After the 2002 riots, the sitting Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, began distancing himself after Modi ignored his pleas for tolerance. Even internationally, Modi’s reputation resulted in him becoming the only person to be barred from legally entering the United States, in accordance with recommendations from the Commission on International Religious Freedom. Similarly, the UK and the European Union also refused him entry on the basis of what they viewed as his role in the 2002 riots. These bans stayed in place until October 2012 and March 2013 respectively, as his popularity in India began to skyrocket. Modi wasn’t allowed back into the United States until after he’d won his 2014 election bid.

As Prime Minister, one of Modi’s first moves was to initiate a nationwide ban on beef. Though justified as a move against animal cruelty, his administration made no move to curb the production of seafood, chicken, pork, or mutton; nor did they acknowledge that the vast majority of cattle being slaughtered for food were nearing the end of their productive lives anyway. Cows are sacred animals in Hindu culture, and this directive (which was later repealed) cemented his image as a Hindu nationalist and his desire to promote Hindutva throughout the nation.

What is Hindutva, and what does it mean for India?

Hindutva is an ideology that characterizes India as the homeland of the Hindus. According to its followers, non-Hindus only get to live in the country due to the mercy of Hindus. Though this may be true for India, with a population of 1.36 billion people of which 80% are Hindu, this outlook goes against the principles the Constitution was founded on.

Mahatma Gandhi, though deeply religious, was one of the nation’s strongest supporters of Muslim-Hindu unity. The British’s attempts to divide the Indian people on the basis of religion were suddenly coming to light, and he was determined to put an end to it. Despite his best efforts though, Muslim-Hindu animosity only grew - especially following the creation of the Al-India Muslim League that demanded a separate state for Muslims. As Muslims began ganging up, so did the nation’s fiercest Hindus, prompting the creation of several Hindu nationalist groups who deeply opposed Mahatma Gandhi’s repeated calls for secularism and cooperation. Eventually, his beliefs led to his death; he was shot and killed by Nathuram Godse, a member of the RSS.

Though largely unpopular in during the first few decades of Indian independence, it began attracting a sizable voter base in the early 1990s. Triggered especially by the willingness of certain secular administrations to pander to the Muslim minority, Hindu nationalists quickly began cultivating a solid base, which peaked in 2014 with Modi’s historic victory. Many political analysts mark Modi’s victory as a watershed moment marking the turn away from secularism towards a populist, Hindu orientated future.

Conclusion:

Modi’s command over the Indian people doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon. To most, Modi is the best politician India has ever had – he’s a strong leader who has solidified the nation’s trust in the government that had been broken by the past corruption ridden party. A 2017 report by the CSDS showed that respondents who supported democracy in India had dropped from 70% to 63% between 2005 and 2017. A Pew report in 2017 found that 55% of respondents backed a "governing system in which a strong leader can make decisions without interference from parliament or the courts". Modi has invigorated a large coalition of voters from all over the country, a feat that not many politicians have been able to accomplish. Under Modi, the BJP commands an overwhelming majority in parliament as the first party, and there are no equals. Political scientist Suhas Palshikar believes India could be moving towards a one-party dominant state, just like how the Congress ruled back in the day. Regardless of whether the BJP remains in power, it’s clear that Modi’s influence and impact on Indian politics won’t be fading away anytime soon.

[cherishtheartist]

Moi et Les Eglises

Religious diversity in Paris is unlike anything I have experienced in the United States. If you are American like me, it may come as a shock to you for someone to not share his or her religious beliefs. Well, in France it is just that. Religion is a private matter in France. To make the distinction clearer think about the president of the United States (I’m imagining Obama, not Trump) saying “God Bless America.” This would not take many Americans by surprise. However, in France it would be more than just a taboo but it would cause controversy. If anything it is more likely to hear a French president admit to not believing in a God at all. This actually surprised me a lot when I initially learned about religion in France. You see, the French have a strong belief in the separation between church and state, it’s called laïcité. Many people even argue that laïcitécan’t be translated into English but others say it comes close to the meaning of secularlism – but not what an American thinks of secularlism.

You may remember a few years back when France was having issues with trying to ban certain religious clothing items such as the niqab and the burqini. For many Americans this could sound like a violation of the rights to religious expression, but to the French it is an infringement on the choice to believe or not to believe. Initially, I did not understand how the French could say such a thing. As I understand more about the history of France it is made clearer. I’ll give a brief overview.

The French Revolution was not only against the monarchy but its connection to religious ideals and the control of the state by the church. French has a very interesting history when it comes to the extent that the revolutionaries went to expel the monarchy and everything it stood for. Religion played a huge part in this because most people believed that the right to rule by the kings and queens were divine rights, the will of god. The French went through huge state changes after the revolution which has gotten us to its current republic, which is the 5threpublic of France (read more about it here).

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I do not have a religious group that I affiliate with but I was raised Christian. My journey with spirituality and faith has been a constantly morphing experience. It is hard for me to accept Christianity as my faith because I am still confused about what it all means to me. I am also aware of the history it has for my people. I know that it was used as a tool against my ancestors and to rationalize slavery. Being someone a black person from the United States means that with the horrific conditions of my ancestors past and my people’s future on the line will always cause me to feel conflict with the dominant culture’s standards.

While in Paris, I attended two church services, one at the American Cathedral of Paris and another at Notre Dame, yes the Notre Dame. Although I was open to the experience, I was disappointed with the outcome. For a variety of reasons, I did not enjoy the service and here are just a few.

1.     Predominantly white church, Predominately whitespaces often stress me out because my difference matters. Most people could read that and think I’m just talking about my skin, but it is so much more than that. Imagine being in my shoes in the reverse. Imagine if you were in country that colonized people like you, oppressed them with their religious belief among other things and now you are attending their church services while many of the things that were done to your ancestors linger on in your everyday life. Can’t imagine it? Well, I wish I could say the same. Also, the lack of people of color make me realize even more how this space was never truly created for people like me.

2.     I do not attend church religiously I think that is pretty self-explanatory.

3.     These were not a Baptist church, it was episcopal and catholic. I am not familiar with many of the denominational differences and their beliefs. Add this to my complicated experience of religion and you see me feeling very uncomfortable here. I am used to people dancing, singing, and a service that is not necessarily chronological and ends when people are to hungry to sit any longer(if you went to a Baptist church most of your life you would understand this statement well). There was a strict order for both of the services. At a Baptist church it is more about the community around you and responding to the presence and work of God in your life through praise. It is impossible to keep yourself from moving, dancing, singing, and expressing your feelings for god in a Baptist church. In the services I attended here in France, it seemed to be more focused on the structure and rigidity of the body in order to embrace the presence of god. This is foreign to me and felt lackluster.

Overall, my experience of religious diversity in France was not enjoyable. My perception of the diversity is mixed. The majority claim Catholicism and only forty percent of that majority practices it regularly. There is a small percentage of Muslims and they are told that practicing their faith disrupts the flow of French culture and ideals. It really just seems to me that the French only want to stick within their cultural norms which of course have been shaped by their religious history and present. It really comes down to the idea of the other and the fear that white people continue to have with the experience of a space where the other functions comfortably. Although I knew I would be uncomfortable with the experience of attending these services, I still went. I had to go. Often in the states and in France, the people in the minority have no choice over their comfortability with other cultures. They are often forced to integrate and adapt to the cultural norms of the dominant group. Do you see where this leads? I rarely felt a connection to the services I attended, and instead felt like I was trapped in a cage. Although, I can try to be objective about the experience of these churches, it is a lot easier for me to say how much it made me realize that I loved growing up in a Baptist church. I love that I grew up with the idea of religion and that it became a choice.