Religion and Ecological Responsibility

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:37 pm Post subject:

Frank: I am not trying to degenerate the value of environmentalism, but the fact is that religious organizations have a violent and abusive track record, and rarely cooperate with each other for very long. You may be able to ignore this fact, but I can’t.

I have tried to find where, in anything I've written here, or the many posts you and I have exchanged over the years, that I deny the violent and abusive track record of religion. Perhaps you can point it out?

What I have stated is that Religious Environmentalism is an attempt by various religious traditions and communities to clean up the mess they have made and change direction towards something more ecologically sustainable. It is at one time a "repentance" of past misdeeds, taking responsibility for the errors and abuses against the planet committed in the past and today. It is also a celebration of those ideas, values and practices that rejoice in creation.

Frank: I don’t buy it, not for one second.

I think the term "won't" is more appropriate. You are ideologically unable to see beyond your frame of "religion=bad, no matter what" kind of thinking.

Frank 013 · Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 2:06 pm Post subject:

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject:

Frank: Your belief that religious environmentalism is a stabilizing force and that it can create a lasting unity between faiths of violently differing dogma is either stemmed from a willful denial or ignorance of the past and current conflicts raging around the world.

I don't see it as a stabilizing force, but as a way to change direction in the behavior of religious communities and individuals...so, I'm not interested in its stability, but in its transformative effect. Why you feel compelled to identify religion as the key source for many of the conflicts around the world is your own ideological necessity...the reasons for conflict are diverse and complicated, and interconnected by way of politics, economics, culture, religion and the struggle for natural resources due largely to ecological devastation. The history of each conflict you refer to is unique and tied to multiple causes, of which religion is one component...but so is technology, economics, politcal and military science....why not rid the world of those, considering each bullet, machete or dirty bomb or facist imposition was made possible by some feat of scientific wisdom or political agenda or economic necessity?

I think a rational approach to conflict resolution or environmental sustainability recognizes varieties of causes to large and small scale conflicts...and a rational approach looks for solutions in a variety of sources as well. I don't think you are rational regarding religion.

Frank: Furthermore whenever I bring up the very real dangers and limitations of religious belief you dismiss those problems out of hand as either nonexistent or not true. This appears to me to be a denial of the violent nature and track record of religious belief.

Again, Frank, perhaps you can show one time, ever, that I have dismissed this? I have offered religious environmentalism as one way that various religious traditions and inidividuals have worked to take responsibility for the damages done in the name of their religions, repent for their ecological havoc, and work to change the direction of environmental behaviors. The hell unleashed by religion is nothing new, Frank, and you are hardly the first to name it. What makes your analysis peculiar is that you seem to miss the complicated interconnections that drive large scale conflicts, as well as smaller, localized problems...you also seem to miss where religion played a part in the solution...offering tools of reconciliation, forgiveness, and reminders of mercy and hope for a better future out of the ashes of whatever the conflict may be....you seem to miss all of those individuals who worked towards, and are working now, solutions to problems all over the world who are doing so out of a passion and love of God or as a spiritual pracitce and way of life.

I dont deny the terror unleashed with the help of religion...whereas you are unable to see any of its solutions...and that is why I think you simply cannot approach this subject rationally.

Frank: Any belief that is not open to debate and scrutiny and elicits this kind of emotional response despite its outrageous claims seems potentially volatile to me.

I don't see the 'taking this personal' or degree of heightened emotionalism you refer to. I do see my attempt to offer multiple examples of how religious environmentalism as something integral to solving our current environmental catastrophe...I see my attempt to be something more than "religion has always been bad, is bad now, and cannot be trusted to do the right thing now or ever." Which I think is the basic impulse of your critique.

Frank 013 · Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:34 am Post subject:

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject:

Frank: I see no transformative effect so far… I’m sure you will keep us posted though.

Again, I think it is more a matter of will on your part...you won't, will not, and simply cannot see the effect. To do so would force a substantial ideological shift...something I don't think you are willing to do.

Frank: In Ireland, the only difference between the warring parties is one of religion their culture is identical except for that one difference.

I suspect the role of England and its centuries of imperial impositions have nothing to with the tragedies that have beset Ireland? I can't imagine how your historical analysis of Irish civil war seems to neglect her majesty's royal elephant in the room. Simply religious is simply ridiculous in this case. As it is in your next example.

Frank: In the case of the Jews and Palestinians we are talking about a holy war fueled by eons of religious hate and in this case even if the Palestinians got their holy land back no one in their right mind believes that the violence against Jews would stop.

Again, never mind the existence of the most prized natural resource in world history in nearby regions...the presence of oil and the necessity of imperial forces across the planet to find their players in the region to support their habit and enforce their mandates. Never mind the role of the USA in funding Israeli military forces, utlizing their presence as a sort of constant, violent reminder to the arabs who control the oil. Again, Frank, you simply avoid the glaring and obvious presence of external forces who influence the region with military and economic support....fueling war, impeding peace and providing a constant threat of further violence...not for religion, but for oil.

Frank: Iran (the country) has vowed genocide against the Jewish Israelis. Their grudge is not one of competition for resources or economics it is purely religious in nature.

I don't know where to start with this. But the same fact regarding external imperial intrusions in Ireland and Israel/Palestine holds true for Iran...the struggle for control of oil in the region is far more important than what scripture is used or not used...how in the world you are able to leave oil out of your equation is...well, it speaks for itself.

Frank: I could say the same of you, but I am curious what exactly is my stance on religion as you see it?

You could, but it wouldnt mean near as much. Actually, I've offered a view of religion that accepts complexity and nuance and requires a careful understanding of how politics, economics, industry, history and ideology are intertwined...making simplistic "it is purely a religious problem" look as ridiculous as it is irrational. I've tried to show how various religions from around the world seek to change their behavior, take responsibility for their past abuses, and shape a more environmentally responsible future.

You, on the other hand, offer absurdly simplistic reductions of large scale, complicated national and international conflicts, involving large regions, and in some cases hundreds of millions of people...and reduce it all to religious delusion.

I suggest we read Roger Gottlieb's book, A Greener Faith
Religious Environmentalism and Our Planet's Future [url]http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ReligionTheology /Spir ituality/~~/dmlldz11c2EmY2k9OTc4MDE5NTE3NjQ4Mw== [/url] and we can explore one scholars attempt to fully explore this complicated phenomena.

Frank 013 · Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject:

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:42 pm Post subject:

Frank: Maybe I cannot see it because it does not exist

Except for the multiple examples I've provided, from a variety of different religious traditions, working within their own communities, as well as together for large and small scale, local and international projects and programs...those will never exist for you: even though they are right before your eyes.

Frank: So please explain to me why the battle lines are so clearly drawn out by religious identity?

They aren't. It's far more complex than you assert. I think rational observers will recognize the ways in which extremists (of which I include yourself) will push positions into either/or black/white dichotomies, easily manipulated by fear and threats of destruction, thus solidifying populations into hardened orthodoxies where dissent is punished and submission is rewarded...ideologically (which will include religious world views, or secular, or any for that matter) it means all-encompassing explanations that reduce complex social situations into simplistic narratives that cannot abide alternative descriptions of the universe...those less orthodox, more tolerant, actively working to bridge differences and seek common solutions across ideological and religious borders will be seen as suspect, dangerous, at least delusional.

Powerful elite segments of any population will utilize religion to enforce and maintain their status and dominion: mobilizing the larger masses into simplified roles, willing to sacrifice their own lives, and kill if necessary...not for their own interests, but for the interests of the elite segments for whom control of natural resources, property and bodies of labor are the real goal...setting shiite against sunni, catholic against protestant, muslim against jew, christian against muslim...a dangerous volatile method of social control and political manipulation...Empires use it to keep local populations from buildiing solidarity against a common colonial enemy...aristocats and monarchs use it in the same way.

Thus, those elements of religion that preach peace, justice, tolerance, healing the sick, feeding the hungry, forgving and loving the enemy, serving the stranger and caring for creation...those valuable and beautiful elements are silenced....the call for justice and peace is dangerous talk...better highlight the hateful and violent side...better remind how angry and threatening and despicable and sinful and deserving of punishment and annihilation your enemy is...hate and destroy is primary, nothing else matters....and it serves the masters very well.

I am providing promising evidence of that side of religion that supports a care and protection of creation. That's good enough for me.

Frank 013 · Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:33 pm Post subject:

Chris OConnor · Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:08 am Post subject:

Religion is divisive, not divine. Frank's example of the Catholics vs. Protestants is one of many examples that support the idea that religion divides people into unnecessary social groupings. Faith in one god over another creates the "us" vs. "them" mentality. And then the cancer spreads.

Frank 013 · Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:13 am Post subject:

Well said chris!

geo · Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject: Humans are special?

Wow, this is some debate. While I'm catching up, allow me to insert a rather simplistic idea into the fray. This is what I see as one of the major problems with religion, and that is the notion that humans are somehow special. That we were made by God, that we have souls, and that we are above the natural world—apart from the animal kingdom. As such we are removed from responsibility over our lives and over our planet. It instills in us an external locus of control. Clearly religion has been a very destructive, divisive instrument, but I believe it's possible that this simple idea, espoused by many religions of the world, has been more damaging in our short, strange history than any other.

That's it! Now please carry one.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT