A Great Deal of Courage: a blog entry in honor of J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter’s Birthday
July 31st is J. K. Rowling’s birthday.[1] It is also the birthday of her famous fictional hero, Harry Potter.[2] For their birthday, continuing a tradition I started last year,[3] I’ve decided to write an essay about an aspect of the Harry Potter series. This year, the topic of my essay is Neville Longbottom’s inner courage and how he learned over the years to believe in himself and his abilities, which is a story we can all learn from.
Neville Longbottom is a forgetful, bullied boy who lacks self-confidence. His feelings of inadequacy are best shown by the form his boggart takes during a third-year Defense Against the Dark Arts class. The boggart takes the form of Severus Snape, a professor who makes Neville fearful and nervous.[4] The intimidation he faces from Professor Snape serves to enhance his already-existing fears of not being a good-enough wizard. These characteristics of self-doubt and uncertainty are ones that many people can relate to; many of us can remember the teacher who made us nervous, the feeling that we would not live up to the expectations of others or to our expectations for ourselves. One of the reasons why Neville’s story is so relatable is because he is not perfect; he must overcome both inner doubt and outside intimidation to become the person he wants to be.
Though plagued by self-doubt, Neville shows that he has within himself moral sense and the ability to do the right thing. During his first year at Hogwarts, he tries to warn his housemate Harry Potter that Draco Malfoy, the school bully, might be trying to get him in trouble.[5] At the end of the year, Neville catches three of his housemates (Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, and Hermione Granger) sneaking out of the dormitory. He doesn’t know their plan, but thinking that they are up to some mischief that will further damage Gryffindor House, he tries to stand in their way.[6] This why Professor Albus Dumbledore says, when awarding Gryffindor House ten points for his actions, “There are all kinds of courage. It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends.”[7] This innate courage that Neville possesses shines through when he is motivated to do the right thing to help his friends or his House. Though he does not always believe in himself, he does understand that there is a difference between right and wrong, and that there are certain situations in which there is a right thing to do. His inner goodness shines through, and we see in him a person who could accomplish so much if he believed in himself. There is, inside us, the knowledge that there is something we should do, even if we don’t always have the confidence to do it. We might watch others performing acts of great goodness and bravery and think that we would never be capable of doing what they did, that we never be good enough. There are times, however, when we can gather up the courage to take action to help our friends, which makes us realize that we have that ability, too, if only we expect it of ourselves.
Knowing the harm that can be done by the wicked and the difference that can be made by those who risk their lives to do the right thing contributes to Neville’s transformation. The son of two Aurors who were tortured into insanity because they fought against Lord Voldemort,[8] Neville knows quite personally how horrible it is to be affected by those who hurt others. Although his parents suffered as a result of their willingness to fight the good fight, he knows that they risked themselves because, if they hadn’t, even more people would have been hurt. It is because of his parents that, during his fifth year at Hogwarts, Neville gains the confidence, not just for the occasional fight against Draco Malfoy or argument with a friend, but for a fight against enemies much more dangerous than a school bully. When news about a mass breakout from Azkaban is reported in the Daily Prophet, many students in the school (especially those from wizarding families) are fearful. They remember relatives who were killed when Lord Voldemort was powerful during the first wizarding war. The members of Dumbledore’s Army become even more motivated to learn defense, especially Neville.
Harry was pleased to see that all of them, even Zacharias Smith, had been spurred to work harder than ever by the news that ten more Death Eaters were now on the loose, but in nobody was this improvement more pronounced than in Neville. The news of his parents’ attacker’s escape had wrought a strange and even slightly alarming change in him. [ . . . ] He was improving so fast it was quiet unnerving and when Harry taught them the Shield Charm, means of deflecting minor jinxes so that they rebounded upon the attacker, only Hermione mastered the charm faster than Neville.[9]
Knowing that the person who tortured his parents has escaped from prison motivates Neville; he knows how dangerous the Death Eaters are, and he wants to make sure that they cannot do more harm. Later in his fifth year, Neville is one of the students — along with Ron, Hermione, Luna, and Ginny — who volunteer to go to the Ministry of Magic with Harry.[10] When he was younger, Neville risked detention to help his friends by warning them about a school bully, and how he’s willing to risk his life to help others who might be harmed by Lord Voldemort and Death Eaters.
Knowing that another person is in danger can motivate us to do what we might have thought ourselves in capable of before. Because we know the harm that can be done, because we have felt the pain of seeing our loved ones hurting, we know that there are indeed causes worth standing up for. There are people like Neville, who know someone who was affected; there are others who may not personally know someone who was affected, but know there are others who are suffering. People work to help defend those who are victims of violence, discrimination, or disease, because they know that there are people in the world whose lives will be improved if they act, rather than just staying silent.
Another important factor that contributed to the confidence Neville gains is the presence of other people in his life who are there for him and encourage him to stand up for himself. Although there are school bullies like Draco Malfoy and intimidating, insulting teachers like Severus Snape, there are also kind friends and understanding teachers who have a great influence on him. When Neville confesses that he’s most afraid of Professor Snape, Professor Lupin doesn’t chastise him but rather encourages and teaches him to overcome that fear by using humor.[11] At the beginning of Neville’s sixth year at Hogwart, when the students in his class are about to start N.E.W.T. level classes, Professor McGonagall tells Neville that he would probably not be able to handle the coursework in the N.E.W.T. level Transfiguration class and asks why he wants to take it, since she didn’t think he enjoyed the subject. He says that his grandmother wants him to. Professor McGonagall responds, “It’s high time your grandmother learn to be proud of the grandson she’s got, rather than the one she thinks she out to have — particularly after what happened at the Ministry”. She suggests that he take the N.E.W.T. level Charms class, because he got a higher grade in the O.W.L. exam for that class.[12] Teachers like Professors Lupin and McGonagall place great emphasis on learning and have high expectations of their students, encouraging them when they most need it.
In our own world, teachers also make a great deal of difference. They have a lot of influence on their students, and have the ability to educate, motivate, inspire, and encourage. A student may feel that others look down on them, but a good teacher can be the person who gives that student hope for a better future. Teachers can make us see the potential we have inside ourselves, even if we don’t see it at first, and help us figure out how to make ourselves better people. They touch our lives in an important way, and we thenceforth affect the lives of others based on what our teachers have taught us.
During his seventh year at Hogwarts is when Neville helps lead Dumbledore’s Army while Harry, Ron, and Hermione are hunting horcruxes. He stands up to Death Eater professors who tell students to use the Cruciatus Curse on those who’ve gotten detention and give lectures encouraging hatred towards Muggles. Even though Neville is physically punished for standing up, he still defies these professors.[13] During the Battle of Hogwarts, he even stands up to Lord Voldemort himself and kills Nagini.[14] Neville shows courage that he would have thought himself incapable of during his earlier years.
Neville Longbottom’s story shows the transformation of a shy and bullied boy who lacks self-confidence into a brave young man who does what’s right even when his life is in danger. His story is one that we can all look to for inspiration when we doubt ourselves. He reminds us that even when we feel fear, it is still possible to do the right thing, still possible to show a great deal of courage.
Happy Birthday to J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter! Happy Belated Birthday to Neville Longbottom, who was born on July 30th![15]
References
[1] J. K. Rowling. Entry at the Harry Potter wikia. Retrieved on 27 July 2011 from http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/J._K._Rowling.
[2] Harry Potter. Entry at the Harry Potter wikia. Retrieved on 27 July 2011 from http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Harry_Potter.
[3] Sharmin, Ani. Morality and the Unknown: a blog entry in honor of J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter’s Birthday. Posted on 31 July 2010 at The Eternal Bookshelf. Retrieved on 30 July 2011 from http://eternalbookshelf.wordpress.com/2010/07/31/morality-and-the-unknown/.
[4] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2003, Ch 7, p. 134-7.
ISBN: 0-439-13635-0
[5] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 1997, Ch 15, p. 242-3.
ISBN: 0-590-35340-3
[6] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 1997, Ch 16, p. 272-3.
ISBN: 0-590-35340-3
[7] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 1997, Ch 17, p. 306.
ISBN: 0-590-35340-3
[8] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2003, p. 512-5.
ISBN: 978-0-439-35806-4
[9] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2003, Ch 25, p.544-53. [Direct quote from p. 553]
ISBN: 978-0-439-35806-4
[10] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2003, Ch 33, p. 761-3.
ISBN: 978-0-439-35806-4
[11] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2003, Ch 7, p. 134-7.
ISBN: 0-439-13635-0
[12] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2005, Ch 9, p. 173-4. [Direct quote from p. 174]
ISBN: 0-439-79132-4
[13] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2007, Ch 29, p. 571-6.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
[14] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Press, a division of Scholastic, Inc., 2007, Ch 36, p. 731-3.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
[15] Neville Longbottom. Entry at the Harry Potter wikia. Retrieved on 31 July 2011 from http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Neville_Longbottom.
Don’t Give Up, Don’t Give In
The United States House of Representatives and Senate have voted in favor of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.[1] It is expected that President Obama will sign the bill, since he has expressed his support for the appeal. Words cannot express how happy I am right now. This is an historic moment. Homosexual and bisexual soldiers will be able to serve our country without fearing that they will be discharged due to their sexual orientation. Our soldiers protect us, and it is only right that they should be treated fairly.
There are, of course, those who see progress in equal rights as dangerous and favor discrimination; they should be considered immoral human beings by all those who favor equal rights for all. Those who support discrimination against soldiers don’t “support our troops”; they exclusively support only some soldiers and not others. One of the most common arguments used in favor of discrimination is that it would hurt “unit cohesion”. Whenever I hear this claim, I think to myself that the person who is citing “unit cohesion” is implying one of two things: either (a) that non-heterosexual people are not capable of being good soldiers or (b) that soldiers are bigots who would not be willing to serve alongside a person with a different sexual orientation than theirs. Either way, it’s an insult to the people in our armed forces. This isn’t about disagreeing with politicians about specific foreign policy decisions; a person who believes that being sexually attracted to people of the same gender should disqualify a person for military service is insulting the actual soldiers themselves.
Imagine — if you will — the soldiers who are currently serving our country. Imagine how they must feel being away from their families for such a long time. Now imagine how concerned their loved ones are for them, how relived their loved ones are to see them again, how devastated the loved ones of dead soldiers are to attend a funeral, how dedicated the loved ones of injured soldiers are to helping them recover. Do you really feel less sympathy if the soldier was homosexual or bisexual? Does the gender of the person who greets them when they come home or the person who cries over their grave really matter?
Moving forward, there are still many more battles to win. There is still much hatred against LGBTQI people in the United States and around the world. Parents erroneously claim that equal rights will harm their children, religious leaders (seeming delusional) claim that homosexual sex causes the Almighty to punish entire nations, and politicians can actual gain support by promising to pass discriminatory laws against LGBTQI people. Marriage equality, ending employment discrimination, and preventing bullying are just some of the goals we have yet to accomplish.
Yet, despite all this, I am happy today. The repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is a small step, but it’s a step in the right direction. As a supporter of equal rights for LGBTQI people, I have grown accustomed to the slow pace of progress and the many setbacks, but today is a good day. Remember to keep up hope, and remember justice will win out in the end.
References
[1] Hulse, Carl. Senate Repeals Ban Against Openly Gay Military Personnel. Posted on December 18, 2010 in The New York Times. Retrieved on December 19, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/us/politics/19cong.html.
Weird Arithmetic and Reasonable Criticism: Some Thoughts on Park51 and Islam [Part 3 of 3]
[To read Part 2, click here.]
The Importance of Reasonable Criticism
As an apostate from Islam, I know that there is much in Islam which deserves criticism. I have no reason to believe that I will agree with the beliefs being taught at Park51; given my disagreement with Islam, I think it is very likely that I will disagree with the religious beliefs of the Muslims who pray there, even if they are not extremists. Whether my disagreement is merely one concerning the existence of God (a disagreement which I can have with a person while still maintaining great respect for that person) or an actual condemnation of a hateful and discriminatory ideology will be based primarily on what kind of Islam is believed in and promoted by the people at Park51.
It is a source of annoyance and worry to me that the criticism of Islam, which I consider so important, comes too often not from those who value freedom but from those with a desire to discriminate. It is important to remember that there is a crucial difference between criticism and discrimination; to speak out against the horrible practices that are all too common within Islam is valid criticism while stopping a group of Muslims from practicing their faith (in ways that are not infringing on the rights or safety of others) is discrimination. The same is true for any other faith.
Given the danger being caused by the Islamic faith all around the world, I think criticism of it is vitally needed. The important qualifiers are that the criticism must be reasonable and based on evidence. Alternative ideas must actually be better and not just more nonsense. Criticizing a bad idea with another bad idea doesn’t move humanity in a good direction, but keeps us forever repeating our mistakes. The reason I supported Everybody Draw Mohammad Day, for instance, is because the protest was based upon the evidence of people being unjustly threatening for drawing Mohammad and because I thought it was a good way to make the point that people should be able to exercise their freedom of speech, even if it offends another person’s beliefs.[1]
Many of the reasons being given for not building this Islamic center do not contain any reason why this particular institution or the people within it will be a threat requiring legal action. There have been arguments over the imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, due to comments he’s made in the past. If there was evidence of funding from a terrorist organization or a reason to think that the people would be involved in illegal activities, then that would be cause for concern and further investigation. If there is no illegal activity going on, then criticism, but not legal action, is warranted.
There is the issue of expressing disagreement with a person or group while still respecting their rights. I think Christopher Hitchens (eloquent as always) makes good points in two articles. In Mau-Mauing the Mosque: The dispute over the “Ground Zero Mosque” is an object lesson in how not to resist intolerance, he expresses concern about the views of the imam and the mosque (in addition to his obvious disagreements with Islam, expressed elsewhere at length) and then goes on to criticize the unreasonable arguments being used by those opposed to the mosque, writing “Where to start with this part-pathetic and part-sinister appeal to demagogy? To begin with, it borrows straight from the playbook of Muslim cultural blackmail. Claim that something is ‘offensive,’ and it is as if the assertion itself has automatically become an argument.” When the actions of those criticizing Islam begins to resemble the actions of those seeking to make excuses for the harm it causes, one finds oneself listening to an endless string of baseless arguments. Hitchens ends the article with, “We need not automatically assume the good faith of those who have borrowed this noble name [Cordoba] for a project in lower Manhattan. One would want assurances, also, about the transparency of its funding and the content of its educational programs. But the way to respond to such overtures is by critical scrutiny and engagement, not cheap appeals to parochialism, victimology, and unreason.”[2] He wrote another article A Test of Tolerance: The “Ground Zero mosque” debate is about tolerance — and a whole lot more, in which he expands upon his concerns about the views of Imam Rauf and points out that Muslims in some Western European countries have taken advantage of the idea of equal rights and tolerance of religion to demand discrimination based on their religious beliefs and censorship of ideas which they find offensive. Hitchens ends the article with, “Let us by all means make the ‘Ground Zero’ debate a test of tolerance. But this will be a one-way street unless it is to be a test of Muslim tolerance as well.”[3] I think that Hitchens is correct on this issue and expresses it wonderfully well. Religious people need to realize that tolerance means not just tolerating religion, but also expecting religious people to tolerate those who disagree with them; it means standing up for equal rights and not giving special privileges to religion. I am glad that Hitchens can simultaneously take apart the ridiculous nature of some of the arguments against Park 51 while offering his own criticisms of Islam. In a similar vein, in his second blog entry on Park51, Professor PZ Myers correctly points out that if expressing support for theocracy was made illegal, it would affect a great many religious leaders, including many Christians, and that this would be unfair, violating their rights. What is necessary, he adds, is that “we stand back and make it an open example of the principle of liberty that they can build anything they want (within zoning laws), whether it is a mosque, a synagogue, a cathedral, a community center, or a retirement home for mentally ill clowns, but that that freedom does have reasonable community constraints that they are voluntarily accepting, and there’s no going back and saying after the fact that the ideology of their building occupants allows them to violate local laws.”[4] Respecting the First Amendment rights of a religious group does not mean that we should blindly trust them; simultaneously, criticism of a religion should not turn into discrimination or an acceptance of any argument made against them no matter how unreasonable and ridiculous that argument is.
We need more people who are willing to criticize anyone who acts unreasonably, even if it means disagreeing with both sides and stating one’s own dissenting opinion. One person who attempts to do this is Irshad Manji, who is a Muslim speaking out for reform in Islam. In A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque: The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong, she calls out Imam Rauf, who criticized the Danish cartoons of Mohammad based upon the feelings of Muslims who were offended but now does not accept the feelings of Americans opposed to the location of Park51 as a valid argument. Manji says that she is offended by the location, but that it does present an opportunity. She writes the following:
But for all the restless offense I feel, I step back and force myself to think. As I wrestle with the issues, I realize that an opportunity exists for something more constructive than anger.
Namely, accountability. If Park51 gets built, thanks to its provocative location the nation will scrutinize what takes place inside. Americans have the opportunity right now to be clear about the civic values expected from any Islam practiced at the site.
That means setting aside bombast and asking the imam questions born of the highest American ideals: individual dignity and pluralism of ideas.
Among the topics that Manji suggests we should ask questions about are whether the swimming pool will be segregated, whether women will be able to lead prayers, whether non-Muslims will be welcome to pray in the prayer area, what will be taught about homosexuals and apostates, and where one will be able to get tickets to a lecture given by Mr. Salman Rushdie at Park51.[5] All of these are exactly the right questions to ask, and we should not shy away from asking them just as we would of any other organization or religion. As Ophelia Benson points out, “Of course, people who make a fetish of ‘tolerance’ without really thinking about what it should mean tend to think questions of that kind are none of their business. That’s why they need, as Manji points out, to think about all this, not just emote about it.”[6] Too often, people misinterpret the First Amendment to mean that religion should be above criticism and that religious groups should be able to get away with all sorts of ridiculous actions without facing criticism, due to the fact that believers justify their actions using quotes from holy texts. This is an unreasonable interpretation. To demand that religious freedom includes censorship of religious criticism is, in effect, to argue that religious freedom only applies to some people while others must remain silent. This is absolutely contradictory to the idea that freedoms apply to everyone.
Criticism must be based on evidence and be reasonable, offering valid arguments. We should keep in mind that rights and freedoms, not fear and hatred, should be the goal of this criticism.
Conclusion
One of many great characteristics of this country, one of the many things which do indeed make our society better than the beliefs of those who attacked us, is that we believe in equal rights and freedom. These freedoms must be extended to each person — not only to people who are members of the majority religion. We must understand that freedom means that everyone, including those whose views we may disagree with, should have equal rights. Let us act in such a way that no person has just cause to claim they were wronged or had their rights taken away.
There are times when freedom is violated, when people use the practice of their beliefs as an excuse for taking away the rights of other individuals, and in these instances when it is essential to speak up. We must do so with the goal of securing freedoms and rights.
I find it frustrating that so many people will speak at length about the distance between a mosque and Ground Zero and be willing to spend time protesting it, but then will be conspicuously silent when there are real human rights abuses occurring in Islam on a regular basis (or, alternatively, will only bring up such human rights abuses when it suits their political goals and soon forget about them once election season is over). We have for ourselves a situation in which the reasonable criticism of Islam gets drowned out by the unreasonable, bigoted, and incoherent arguments made by those whose main motivation for opposing Islam is the desire to win an election or to create a government based upon their own religion. This will not get us anywhere.
What is needed is a willingness to address the real issues within Islam. We should criticize Islam with reasonable arguments and not just baseless nonsense. Let us ask the important questions about the problems within Islam and not be so focused on doing some weird arithmetic to figure out how far Park51 should be from Ground Zero, and let us do this with an actual concern for the human rights of both non-Muslims and Muslims who are currently being harmed.
Secular criticism of Islam is needed, with the goal freedom and human rights for all. My concern is that a continuation of a fight between Islam and unreasonable critics of Islam will result in less freedom and the continuation of human rights violations. The way to actually improve the situation is for critics of Islam to support freedom and show concern for those who are being hurt by Islam. We should remember always that freedom and rights are for each individual, and that it is wrong for leaders of religious groups to cite freedom in an attempt to actually take away freedom, whether from members of other religions or from members of their own religion. People who have been hesitant to speak out due to the sometimes ridiculous and discriminatory nature of some criticisms of Islam should feel motivated to counter the ridiculous critics by offering real criticism of Islam, so that there is progress in human rights, as opposed to just pointless and ineffective yelling.
Truth, freedom, and equal rights should be considered most important. We may not always agree with one another; however, people who disagree on the details but believe first and foremost in freedom can work together, discuss ideas, and learn from one another.
It is in hope that I write this, and perhaps my hope for a better world will be realized. I do think there is something within us as humans, which gives us the potential to imagine a better future and the determination to build it.
#
Acknowledgments
I have quoted extensively from some of the many articles and blog posts that I’ve come across recently, and given credit to the authors when appropriate. I offer many thanks to all of the people who wrote these pieces and inspired me. I’ve done my best to accurately represent their words and to honestly express my agreement and disagreement. I very much recommend reading all of the linked articles and blog entries; their authors have some very thought-provoking ideas.
References
[1] Sharmin, Ani. On Everybody Draw Mohammad Day. Posted on May 20, 2010 at Eternal Bookshelf. Retrieved on August 21, 2010 from http://eternalbookshelf.wordpress.com/2010/05/20/on-everybody-draw-mohammad-day/.
[2] Hitchens, Christopher. Mau-Mauing the Mosque: The dispute over the “Ground Zero Mosque” is an object lesson in how not to resist intolerance. Posted on August 9, 2010 in Slate Magazine. Retrieved on August 21, 2010 from http://www.slate.com/id/2263334.
[3] Hitchens, Christopher. A Test of Tolerance: The “Ground Zero mosque” debate is about tolerance — and a whole lot more. Posted on August 23, 2010 in Slate Magazine. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.slate.com/id/2264770/.
[4] Myers, PZ. I don’t like the Manhattan mosque, but they’ve got the right — as long as I’ve got the right to point and laugh. Posted on September 1, 2010 at Pharyngula. Retrieved on September 9, 2010 from http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/09/i_dont_like_the_manhattan_mosq.php.
[5] Manji, Irshad. A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque: The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong. Posted on August 26, 2010 at The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved on August 27, 2010 from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703632304575451433090488678.html.
[6] Benson, Ophelia. Hitchens and Manji. Posted on August 27, 2010 at Butterflies and Wheels. Retrieved on August 27, 2010 from http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2010/hitchens-and-manji/.
Weird Arithmetic and Reasonable Criticism: Some Thoughts on Park51 and Islam [Part 2 of 3]
[To read Part 1, click here.]
Synagogues in Saudi Arabia
There is the important issue of the persecution and discrimination faced by non-Muslims in various theocratic Islamic countries, such as Saudi Arabia. I for one will be overjoyed when Jewish people can build synagogues in Saudi Arabia and when people of all various faiths can build their houses of worship in countries where they now cannot. The question then arises of how we can bring this about.
Since it is certain governments and other violent groups which are persecuting people of different faiths and no religious faith, I think that any ultimatums we place should be against these groups particularly, instead of against all members of the faith. It is reasonable to demand that the Saudi Arabian government cannot finance any mosques on American soil as long as it does not give equal rights to all people. It is unreasonable to demand that, due to the actions of the Saudi Arabian government, no Muslims can build mosques in America. (The idea that all Muslims would be in support of the governments which persecute non-Muslims is ridiculous in and of itself, since these same governments often also make the lives of the Muslims within their countries a living hell.)
I love the United States and the freedoms we have here; I think the goal should be to create a world in which more people have these freedoms.[1] The suggestion we should model our behavior on the atrocious actions of the despicable House of Saud would, if acted upon, ruin all that our ancestors worked for. Instead of moving in the right direction to gain equality for more people, we would be taking away freedom from the few people on the planet who do have it.
Peter Beinart makes this point in America Has Disgraced Itself at The Daily Beast. (I take exception to the title but am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, since editors often choose or change the title of the article.) Although I don’t share his newfound pining for President George W. Bush, I think his general point is valid. He writes, “Now, Newt Gingrich says we shouldn’t build a mosque in Lower Manhattan until the Saudis build churches and synagogues in Mecca — which is to say, we’re bringing Saudi values to the United States.” Beinart seems to understand a crucial idea which many others seem oblivious to, which is that we cannot defeat religious intolerance and bigotry by modeling our own actions on the actions of government officials of a country whose people are regularly oppressed by religious tyranny.
Beinart also makes a another good point near the end of the article, writing,
And oh yes, my fellow Jews, who are so thrilled to be locked arm in arm with the heirs of Pat Robertson and Father Coughlin against the Islamic threat. Evidently, it’s never crossed your mind that the religious hatred you have helped unleash could turn once again against us. Of course not, we’re insiders in this society now: Our synagogues grace the toniest of suburbs; our rabbis speak flawless English; we Jews are now effortlessly white. Barely anyone remembers that folks in lower Manhattan once considered us alien and dangerous, too.[2]
There have been Jewish people on both sides of this issue; I am grateful for the secular reforms within Judaism and for many Jewish people’s willingness to speak up against wrongdoing, even when some members of their own religion are participating. Beinart’s main point is valid, in that it is highly suspect and ridiculous when people who are themselves often targets of discrimination line up to discriminate against others. I am grateful that there are many people who do realize that discrimination is wrong even if they themselves are not the targets.
Ultimately, the correct response to religious discrimination is not more discrimination. One would think that people should have realized this just by looking around themselves and thinking, but sadly it needs to be pointed out.
The “True Islam” and Terror
One of the ongoing disagreements about Islam for about nine years now has been the question of whether Islam played a role in the attacks of September 11, 2001. When discussing this Islamic Center, the argument is sometimes framed in the wrong way, with some suggesting that Muslims should not be able to build Park51 because Islam played a role in the attacks and others suggesting that Muslims should be able to build Park51 because “true Islam” did not play a role in the attacks. I personally choose a third option: Islam (or a certain version of it) was involved in the attacks, but Muslims who did not participate in those attacks and are not involved with any similar terrorist organizations should be able to build an Islamic center if they want to. In other words, the claim being made about Islam not having anything to do with the attacks and others like them in many places around the world is an exercise in denial, but it is not a valid reason for stopping people who were not responsible for those attacks from building a religious community center.
The idea of building Park51 to show that Islam is peaceful and that the beliefs of the September 11th terrorists were not a part of “true Islam” seems dubious to me. Peaceful Muslims will rightly point out that Islam cannot be judged based upon the actions of just the extremists and called a religion of violence; however, it is also true that Islam cannot be judged based solely upon the actions of peaceful Muslims and thereby called a religion of peace. Just as peaceful, freedom-loving Muslims would not consider the terrorists “real Muslims”, the terrorists would likewise not consider peaceful, freedom-loving Muslims “real Muslims”. I do hope, of course, that the Muslims who will go to Park51 will play a role in improving Islam to move it away from the extremism, but even if they did, they still would not really have a claim to “true Islam” — though maybe they’d have a claim to a more peaceful Islam, which is something to hope for, in my desire for a better and safer future with more freedom, even if I think their God is just as fictional as the horrible one believed in by other Muslims.
As it is, I have grown accustomed (as I’m sure have many others) to various ideological groups mutually excommunicating those they disagree with and claiming that their own version is the “true” version of whatever ideology they espouse. (As Julie Clawson points out, it is also highly ridiculous for members of one faith — in this case, Christianity — who regularly use the “true faith” excuse for extreme members of their own faith to then generalize about all of the members of another faith — in this case, Islam.[3]) The debate about “true Islam” (as that of “true Christianity”[4]) is one for another day and another entry. As it pertains to the issue at hand, whether or not the Islam of those who will attend Park51 is “true Islam” is unclear. If the people at Park 51 are involved in illegal activities, that calls for government involvement; if they are not doing anything illegal but are doing something we disagree with, then it is appropriate to speak out and protest.
Addressing the problems within Islam is a bigger issue than Park51, and moving Park51 is not going to solve them. We need rather to actually discuss and confront the real problems within Islam in a reasonable way. Sam Harris has written two articles about this issue, making it clear that he believes that the people building Park51 have the Constitutional right to do so, and then going on to express his concerns about the religion of Islam and the denial that many moderate Muslims are in over the problems within the faith. Although I disagree with some suggestions he has made in the past, he does offer very clear explanations of the problems with religion. In What Obama Got Wrong About the Mosque (which was actually written, according to Harris, before President Obama made a statement and then given this title later by an editor), Harris writes, “My friend Ayaan Hirsi Ali is said to be suffering from it [Islamophobia]. Though she was circumcised as a girl by religious barbarians (as 98 percent of Somali girls still are) has been in constant flight from theocrats ever since, and must retain a bodyguard everywhere she goes, even her criticism of Islam is viewed as a form of ‘bigotry’ and ‘racism’ by many ‘moderate’ Muslims. And yet, moderate Muslims should be the first to observe how obscene Muslim bullying is—and they should be the first to defend the right of public intellectuals, cartoonists, and novelists to criticize the faith.” A part of the problem is that moderate Muslims take great offense at any criticism of their faith while ignoring the far worse offenses committed by their fellow Muslims, against both non-Muslims and Muslims. Even when they are presented with arguments from people who themselves grew up in an Islamic home and were treated badly due to the religious teachings, many Muslims remain in denial (and others who are aware of the problems may be afraid to speak out).
We come again to the issue of true Islam and response to terrorism of Muslims around the world. Harris continues, “The claim that the events of September 11, 2001, had ‘nothing to do with Islam’ is an abject and destabilizing lie. This murder of 3,000 innocents was viewed as a victory for the One True Faith by millions of Muslims throughout the world (even, idiotically, by those who think it was perpetrated by the Mossad).” Related to the refusal to criticize faith is the denial that anything horrible done was influenced or inspired by faith. There is also the fact that a horrible event may be celebrated by some members of a faith and mourned by others. How does one address believers who say that they were horrified at a terrible crime when others of the same faith celebrated it? How does one address the issue of religion’s culpability when there are so many disparate forms of the religion being practiced? How can one convince followers who are not contributing to the violence that the book to which they subscribe contains passages which (although ignored by some believers) are nonetheless horrible and provide inspiration to extremists? Is there a possibility that some Muslims will make an effort to differentiate between the actual discrimination that they face and the legitimate criticism of their faith that they should pay more attention to?
Harris concludes, “Perhaps there is some form of Islam that could issue from this site that would be better, all things considered, than simply not building another mosque in the first place. But this leads me to a somewhat paradoxical conclusion: American Muslims should be absolutely free to build a mosque two blocks from ground zero; but the ones who should do it probably wouldn’t want to.”[5] Harris seems to be saying that moderate Muslims, who could potentially take steps forward to reform Islam, would probably not build a mosque near Ground Zero out of respect for the site; specifically that which would make them a positive presence also motivates them to take into consideration how others would feel about their actions.
In another article, Harris writes that too many Muslims are remaining silent about the extremism in Islam and gives an example of what he would expect Imam Rauf to say if the imam wants to be considered an actual moderate and allay people’s fears. He ends with, “Find an imam who will speak this way, and gather followers who think this way, and I’ll volunteer to cut the ribbon on his mosque in lower Manhattan.”[6] So, we are back to the idea of so-called moderates being silent and unwilling to properly address the problems within their faith. It seems that it is often the case that the more extreme members of the faith are more organized and vocal; while we as a society should want more participation and cooperation from the moderates of a faith, it is the extremists who make themselves heard more easily and demand attention. Many times, it seems that a person may or may not be a moderate; there are religious leaders who, perhaps wanting to cooperate somewhat with secular society but not wanting to upset the more conservative members of their own religion, make vague statements about the problems within their own religion, being careful not to lay the blame on religion itself (or certain parts of it).
Fortunately, despite the silence, there are some Muslims who are indeed willing to speak out about the problems within their own faith. Asra Q. Nomani writes in A Muslim Questions the Mosque about the problems within Islam. “We’re not being honest in our Muslim community about the violent ideology inside of our Muslim world that needs to be defeated, and so the war has spread beyond our community to include the Tea Party activists. In the name of political correctness, too many inside our Muslim community have been apologists for Islam, feeling defensive, but not being as brutally honest as the world needs us to be about this problem.” Although I cringe at her kind words towards the sometimes ridiculous and sometimes discriminatory Tea Party supporters, I think she makes a valid point about the extremism and, I am glad she points out that many liberal and progressive Americans have not offered “a nuanced, intelligent critique of extremist Islamic ideology, currying pluralism points instead in the name of interfaith relations”. This, I think, is what has resulted in a situation in which many of the people who could offer secular and intelligent criticism of the extremism in Islam are not willing to. There are some who do, but their voices get drowned out by those who really are hateful and who want to discriminate against Muslims. This should convince more people who believe in equal rights to criticize Islam from a secular point of view, with the goal of human rights, so that the only people criticizing Islam are not those who are hateful. Nomani points out what is needed in Islam and illustrates one of the problems in Islam when she writes, “We need an expression of institutional Islam that is moderate, progressive and liberal. We don’t have it yet. There is only one mosque in America where women can pray in the front row. It’s in Toledo, Ohio.”[7] This should make any Muslim question the idea that the discriminatory ideologies within Islam are just a small fringe. Although the worst of the terrorist attacks may be committed by a small fringe, other actions of discrimination and hate are supported by many more. Ignoring these violations of rights is not right, and it is frustrating that many Muslims (using the excuse “We’re not terrorists”) try to hide the other, more ubiquitous, problems within Islam.
There is perhaps some potential for a more secular form of Islam to challenge the extremism that is so much of a problem in the world today. I have mentioned previously that I am of two minds on this, hoping for a reformed secular form of Islam (so that there is less violence and so that more people within the religion itself can gain equal rights) while disbelieving in a nice version of God just as much as I disbelieve in a horrible version of God.[8] Currently, though, there is no question that there are big problems within Islam.
The question then arises: How should we address them properly?
[To read Part 3, click here.]
[1] Sharmin, Ani. The Fourth of July in Four Parts. Posted on July 4, 2010 at Eternal Bookshelf. Retrieved on August 21, 2010 from http://eternalbookshelf.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/the-fourth-of-july-in-four-parts/.
[2] Beinart, Peter. America Has Disgraced Itself. Posted on August 17, 2010 at The Daily Beast. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-17/ground-zero-mosque-controversy-america-has-disgraced-itself/.
[3] Clawson, Julie. A Christian response to the Islamic community center near Ground Zero. Posted on August 10, 2010 at Common Ground News Service. Retrieved on August 29, 2010 from http://www.commongroundnews.org/article.php?id=28282&lan=en&sid=1&sp=0&isNew=1.
[4] Eberhard, JT. An Old Letter about true ™ Christianity. Posted on April 14, 2009 on Zerowing21’s Xanga. Retrieved on August 21, 2010 from http://zerowing21.xanga.com/698959756/an-old-letter-about-true-tm-christianity/.
[5] Harris, Sam. What Obama Got Wrong About the Mosque. Posted on August 13, 2010 at The Daily Beast. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-13/ground-zero-mosque/.
[6] Harris, Sam. Silence is not moderation. Posted on August 24, 2010 at The Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/sam_harris/2010/08/silence_is_not_moderation.html.
[7] Nomani, Asra Q. A Muslim Questions the Mosque. Posted on August 10, 2010 at The Daily Beast. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-10/why-muslims-like-me-agree-with-the-tea-party-activists/.
[8] Sharmin, Ani. Foundations of Dissonance? Posted on July 22, 2010 at Eternal Bookshelf. Retrieved on September 9, 2010 from http://eternalbookshelf.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/foundations-of-dissonance/.
Weird Arithmetic and Reasonable Criticism: Some Thoughts on Park51 and Islam [Part 1 of 3]
Introduction
Given the recent controversy over the building of Park51 (a.k.a. Cordoba House), an Islamic community center and mosque, in New York City near Ground Zero, the site of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, I’ve decided to write an entry containing some of my thoughts about the topic. Professor PZ Myers has stated that he does not care about a mosque/community center in New York,[1] and I might not have either if it wasn’t the topic of so many television segments, news articles, and blog posts (some of which have been incessantly pouring into my feed reader).
It was, however, a good opportunity for me to do some thinking about the various issues that are being brought up, colliding with one another, and being mixed together (sometimes appropriately and sometimes not) in the discussion and argument over this project. This entry is my attempt to gather my thoughts and write them in a somewhat coherent fashion.
First Amendment
Whatever houses of worship may be built in this great land, their continued existence and the freedom of those within them depends on how diligently we build and maintain the wall between church and state (or, in this case, I suppose mosque and state). A legal argument against Park51 can be made if it is found that it is involved in illegal activities or is receiving funding from a criminal organization. The legal attempt to shut down the project cannot be based upon its proximity to Ground Zero. An attempt by the government to choose one religion over another, to stop one religion from building a house of worship in a place where another religion would be permitted to do so (all else being equal) on their own property, would be a violation of the First Amendment. We will all have certain times when we have to say that we absolutely disagree with what someone does while supporting their right to do it, but it is not right to take legal action against a group for doing something that we disagree with.
Tied up in all of this is the noticeable self-contradiction of those who regularly speak up in favor of freedom of religion for their own group, but who deny that same freedom to others. I think part of the justified reflexive defense of the community center is due to the fact that some of the people speaking out against it (especially some of the politicians and news anchors) have in the past shown that they favor one religion — particularly Christianity — over all others, so there is the question whether their criticism is coming from a genuine concern or from their own bias. Combined with similar protests against and vandalism of mosques in other places around the country and the horrifying violence against Muslims, this raises the suspicion that the protests are due to the fact that the people are Muslim and not based on any reasonable argument. There is a concern that at least some of the people speaking against the community center really do not favor separation of church and state and may be in favor of taking away the rights of non-Christians. (This is, of course, not true for everyone. When Susan Jacoby writes that she supports the First Amendment right of those building Park 51, but questions whether it should be built so close to Ground Zero,[2] I believe that she actual does support the First Amendment and equal rights for people of different religions, since she has shown this in her previous writings. She has even written a book called Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism about the important role that secular people and ideas played in American history, including contributions made by both religious and non-religious supporters of secularism.) When others, such as Sarah Palin, claim that they support the rights of those building Park51, but question the wisdom of it, I am suspicious of their motivations, given their support for a nation based upon their own religious beliefs. Since not all the critics of Park51 are supporters of separation of church and state (based on their past statements), there is a need to reaffirm secularism, which is always a good goal. We should remember that secularism is one of the ideas which make this country great, and there are several people who have expressed this sentiment during this whole debate and drama.
Hemant Mehta, in What freedoms will we lose next? (his first article for The Washington Post’s On Faith section) makes a good point about not blaming all Muslims for the 9/11 attacks (just as we should not blame all Christians for something horrible done by some Christians) and writes, “Why do I support the building of the mosque? Because we live in a country that supports freedom of religion, even when we disagree with others’ beliefs. I support it because they’re paying for the space and they have every right to build there.”[3] We cannot start deciding that the First Amendment only applies to certain groups and not to others. Those who routinely say that the Christians who take horrible actions are not “real Christians” should ask themselves what they would think of their freedom being limited based on what other Christians have done.
Herb Silverman, in Mosque is insensitive; so are pandering politicians, criticizes the politicians whose clichéd arguments have gained them undue publicity and then goes on to write that he agrees that the mosque is insensitive. Ultimately, he states quite plainly, “It is my right to be bothered by this, it’s the right of others to be bothered by the potential mosque at Ground Zero, and it’s absolutely the right of American Muslims to build it. Observing Constitutional principles may be bothersome, but that’s a small price to pay for the liberties our Constitution guarantees.”[4] Following the Constitution and agreeing that others have rights, even if we disagree with them, may not always be easy, but it is necessary if we want to preserve our freedoms and rights. The hope that humans will be able to grant others the liberties they themselves so cherish is the basis of my hope that a secular society can work and thrive.
Arthur Waskow tells a touching story about his grandmother in Mosques in America: Rabbi Hillel, George Washington, & my grandma, reminding readers of the promise of freedom that American stands for. Just as his grandmother remembered the horrible way Jewish people were treated in Europe and knew that it was wrong to treat Black people that way (even when other Jewish women were talking about them with contempt), Waskow remembers his grandmother and reminds us that we must not treat Muslims that way. He thinks it is right to build Park51, which will be “[a] beacon of the Islam that celebrates the God Who is Compassion. A beacon of truth, of hope, of peace to vanquish the hatred and despair and violence that murdered 3,000 people of many different nations and many different faiths in the World Trade Center.”[5] I am glad he has hope for the emergence of a better Islam that will not be as fraught with problems as the religion is right now. Perhaps if more Muslims were willing to speak up against the extremism in their own faith and create a new Islam that would be more secular and supportive of equal rights, we would have a better world.
What makes the situation even more absurd is that one suggestion that’s been made concerning the moving of the mosque actually would violate the First Amendment. Over at The Wall of Separation (the blog of Americans United for Separation of Church and State) Sandhya Bathija has written a blog entry titled Land Plan Panned: N.Y. Governor’s Islamic Center ‘Compromise’ Draws Fire, in which she comments on a statement by Governor David Paterson. According to Glenn Blain at The New York Daily News, Governor Paterson supports the Park51 Islamic Center and has said, “Frankly, if the sponsors were looking for property anywhere at a distance that would be such that it would accommodate a better feeling among the people who are frustrated, I would look into trying to provide them with the state property they would need.”[6] Bathija writes at The Wall that this idea will fortunately probably not be put into action due to the fact that it’s obviously unconstitutional. (She links to an article[7] by Justin Elliot at Salon, in which Barry Lynn, Americans United’s executive director, and Professor Jay Wexler express concerns about such an idea.) She points out in her blog entry that a suggestion like Patterson’s (providing state property to a religious group for a religious place of worship) “should outrage Americans, yet it’s hardly caused a stir. At the same time, when a private group wants to build a religion-based community center on private land, some find cause for a public uproar. All this goes to show that many Americans could benefit from another glance at the Constitution, and that includes Paterson.”[8] It does often amaze me that more people are not more concerned about separation of church and state, but as can been seen above, there are many who do. This gives me hope.
It is absolutely essential to remind both ourselves and our fellow humans deserve to have equal rights. Demanding that they should voluntarily give up their equal rights (especially when such criticism is coming from those who have shown their own support for discrimination in the past) is unreasonable and wrong. (It is for this reason that I also support the rights of peaceful protesters who are against Park 51 to express their views, just as I support the right of the people who are building it.) I am glad that there are many people who realize the importance of secularism and of the First Amendment, even for those whose religious beliefs they do not agree with.
Rebuilding Ground Zero
Any hallowed nature associated with Ground Zero is not a characteristic force emanating from the spot itself but rather the hurt that is felt in the hearts of human beings when we look upon a site and remember the horrid events of the past. When Sarah Palin claims that the planned mosque “stabs hearts”, it is as an American that I reply that the real stab to my heart was the actual attack. What further stabs my heart is the attempt by various groups (including, to various extents, the groups both in favor of and against Park51) to use what was a tragedy for our country to forward their own agendas, which contain little or nothing in the way of either dealing with the extremism within Islam or protecting our freedoms, including those outlined in the First Amendment. It is important that we remember what is really important and do not focus on inanimate objects. As Susan Jacoby writes in What makes ground so “sacred” that it provides soil for profane behavior?, “Truth and knowledge, not ground or steps, are sacred.”[9]
The rebuilding of Ground Zero, including a memorial to those who died, has not moved forward by much, and this is a cause of sadness for many Americans, including myself. We are still living with the memory of these attacks, and that memory will never go away. We desire to do something to honor those who died, and lack of such a memorial makes us feel that we are not properly remembering them, that we have been lax in taking the correct action.
There is also the issue of other religious buildings. In the arguments against Park51, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church is sometimes mentioned. The anger over the fact that the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church has not yet been rebuilt is understandable, but I don’t understand how that is related to the building of Park51. The Islamic center is not being built to replace St. Nicholas. The fact that the rebuilding of Ground Zero and St. Nicholas has been slow is not, to my knowledge, caused by some kind of covert plan by the people planning to build Park51. The various building projects going on in our country are not in competition with one another. The fact that Park51 has been approved while plans for Ground Zero and the St. Nicholas Church have not yet moved forward does not mean the government is endorsing Islam or insulting either Christians or Americans in general. One difference between St. Nicholas and Park51 is that St. Nicholas was actually destroyed in the attacks and is in the area that has sadly not yet been rebuilt, whereas Park51 is two blocks away. If all the circumstances surrounding the rebuilding of the church were the same as those involved in building Park 51, then I would expect it to be given the same approval as Park51. There seem to be various issues affecting the rebuilding of St. Nicholas. As Nicole Neroulias writes in an entry at the Beliefnet Blog, “St. Nicholas, a Greek Orthodox church with only a few dozen regular worshipers before 9/11, has been mired in Ground Zero-specific bureaucracy for years, trying to hammer out a deal with the Port Authority to swap its tiny piece of land for a bigger plot and receive millions of dollars in public funds for the construction and security requirements.”[10] She writes in an article at Religion News Service that the plans for Park51 have motivated people to ask about why more progress has not been made on the church, and goes on the explain the various circumstances and events which lead to the delays. “The entire Ground Zero rebuilding process has taken years longer than expected, due to the arduous rescue, recovery and rubble-removal efforts, followed by the bureaucratic process of establishing property ownership and designing the memorial and buildings.”[11] It is clear that, despite the understandable upset of the Greek Orthodox community in New York City, blaming the people building Park51 for the delay in rebuilding St. Nicholas is the incorrect response. Although I disagree with both Islam and Christianity, I support the right of members of both of these religions to build their places of worship. It seems that in addition to being important to the Greek Orthodox community in New York, St. Nicholas also has a long history behind it. I look forward to Ground Zero, including St. Nicholas, being rebuilt.
The relevant parts of this situation, to me, are protecting freedom and equality, building of a memorial to those who died, and dealing with Islamic extremism that played a role in the attacks in the first place. Moving the mosque will not accomplish any of this. The distance between Ground Zero and Park51, to me, is not completely irrelevant, but one of the least relevant points of the whole situation. (This is mostly because the center is not actually on Ground Zero; if it was, then I would be opposed to the location, because I think there should be a memorial there.) As Jeffrey Rowland illustrates in this cartoon, the whole argument is ridiculous and YHWH has not shown a preference in the matter (which is as I expected, given the deity’s propensity for revealing contradictory messages to different members of humanity). Rowland writes beneath the cartoon, “Exactly what is a ‘safe distance’ to put your Muslim Community Center away from a place so that it doesn’t have some imaginary effect on it? I’d prefer a ban on ALL religious buildings being built within 1,000 miles of a place where ANY MEMBER of ANY SPECIFIC religious organization did some harm unto society.”[12] Well, that would considerably decrease the number of houses of worship, but it would of course, not be in line with the freedom of religion on which we place great value. The cartoon and its caption illustrate perfectly the problem we face when trying to determine exactly how far away this Islamic center can be from Ground Zero.
What type of weird arithmetic can we come up with to determine exactly how far away a religious place of worship has to be from the site of a disaster? Does this vary depending on how many people were killed? Does the rule apply to all religions or only to one? Does it apply to all the people who follow the same religion as the perpetrators of the attack or to those of the same denomination?
All of this is not only confusing but misses the point entirely. The building is not the cause of the problems within Islam, but the bad ideas and actions of certain people and groups within Islam. It is important to identify and criticize these ideas and people while realizing that many Muslims themselves also realize the problem and are being hurt by members of their own faith.
[To read Part 2, click here.]
References
[1] Myers, PZ. I don’t care about a mosque/community center in New York. Posted on August 16, 2010 at Pharyngula. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/i_dont_care_about_a_mosquecomm.php.
[2] Jacoby, Susan. Ground Zero mosque protected by First Amendment—but it’s still salt in a wound. Posted on August 4, 2010 at The Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on August 25, 2010 from http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/spirited_atheist/2010/08/ground_zero_mosque_protected_by_first_amendment–but_its_still_salt_in_a_wound.html.
[3] Mehta, Hemant. What freedoms will we lose next? Posted on August 16, 2010 at The Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/Hemant_Mehta/2010/08/what_freedoms_will_we_lose_next.html.
[4] Silverman, Herb. Mosque is insensitive; so are pandering politicians. Posted on July 19, 2010 at The Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/herb_silverman/2010/07/sarah_palin_and_alvin_greene.html.
[5] Waskow, Arthur. Mosques in America: Rabbi Hillel, George Washington, & my grandma. Posted on August 16, 2010 at The Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/arthur_waskow/2010/08/mosques_in_america_rabbi_hillel_g_washington_my_grandma.html.
[6] Quote of Paterson, David (Governor of NY). Blain, Glenn. Gov. Paterson: No objection to Ground Zero mosque, but floats state land for less controversial site. Posted on August 10, 2010 at The New York Daily News. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/10/2010-08-10_gov_paterson_no_objection_to_ground_zero_mosque_but_floats_state_land_for_less_c.html.
[7] Elliott, Justin. Law prof: Paterson mosque plan may be unconstitutional. Posted on August 10, 2010 at Salon. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/10/paterson_mosque_plan_constitution.
[8] Bathija, Sandhya. Land Plan Panned: N.Y. Governor’s Islamic Center ‘Compromise’ Draws Fire. Posted on August 11, 2010 at The Wall of Separation, blog of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from https://blog.au.org/2010/08/11/land-plan-panned-n-y-governor’s-islamic-center-‘compromise’-draws-fire/.
[9] Jacoby, Susan. What makes ground so “sacred” that it provides soil for profane behavior? Posted on September 1, 2010 at Washington Post’s On Faith section. Retrieved on September 8, 2010 from http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/spirited_atheist/2010/09/what_makes_ground_so_sacred_that_people_spill_more_blood_over_it.html.
[10] Neroulias, Nicole. The Real Story Behind the ‘Ground Zero Church’ Rebuilding Delay. Posted on August 24, 2010 at the Beliefnet blog. Retrieved on September 8, 2010 from http://blog.beliefnet.com/beliefbeat/2010/08/the-story-behind-the-ground-zero-church-rebuilding-stalemate.html.
[11] Neroulias, Nicole. Future of destroyed Ground Zero Orthodox church in doubt. Posted on August 23, 2010 at Religion News Service. Retrieved on September 8, 2010 from http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/rnstext/future_of_destroyed_ground_zero_orthodox_church_in_doubt/.
[12] Rowland, Jeffrey. Proximity. Posted on August 16, 2010 at Overcompensating. Retrieved on August 24, 2010 from http://www.overcompensating.com/posts/20100816.html.
The Dream: On the Anniversary of Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” Speech
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous I Have a Dream speech on August 28, 1963, and today is the anniversary of this historic event.[1] This speech has become an important part of our history, with words from which we draw hope and inspiration when we ourselves seek to improve our country and our world.
There is hope in his words, a hope that America can live up to the promises of freedom and justice on which it was founded, as he says, “But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we’ve come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.” Being a part of a movement for equal rights requires a hope that justice can be achieved — that there is actually good to be found in the world and in one’s fellow human beings. The great ideas of the past, those articulated by our ancestors, inspire us and we hope that those ideas will apply in the future to everyone and not just a few. We hope that our fellow human beings will look upon those who are different from them and know that, despite the differences, we are all human.
There is perseverance in his words combining the knowledge that the fight will be long and difficult with the belief that it will all be worthwhile.
There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: “For Whites Only.” We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
It can seem at some times, as it must have to those who struggled so valiantly against the segregation and discrimination during the time of Rev. Dr. King, that the battle is everlasting and ongoing and that there are so many obstacles to overcome. Yet, they knew that they could not live with such injustice, and so they knew that no matter how long it took, the fight was worth it. Rev. Dr. King asserts that nothing less than justice and righteousness will be enough — that living with less than this is not acceptable, and that it is important to keep fighting on until that goal is met. This struggle and perseverance is shared by anyone who is in any such movement for equal rights, as the process of changing human minds can take time, and it is why his words mean so much to us today, offering encouragement from a person who kept working for equality even when it was difficult.
There is a dream for the future in his words, the familiar excerpt describing a future in which we would love to live and for which we hope.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today!
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of “interposition” and “nullification” — one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
His speech, and this section of it especially, is often quoted and often looked upon as a great moment in our nation’s history, as his words echo down the years in our minds and hearts today. We look forward, as did those who were there that day, to a better future for all. We look at all that has been accomplished thanks to their hard work and hope that we are contributing in any way that we can. Even if we never see the perfect future that is envisioned, we know that Rev. Dr. King and the many who worked with him contributed greatly to moving humanity in the right direction and we hope that our species will continue to move forward, getting closer to the day when we all consider each other “sisters and brothers”.
While listening to a recording of the speech, one can hear the crowd clapping and cheering, motivated by his moving words. Ultimately, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (though he was just a human) and this speech (though it was only a few minutes in the vast history of time and located in one tiny place in the vast universe) remind us of so much more. They remind us of all of the anonymous people who were standing there that day and of all the people throughout human history who have likewise stood up to injustice. Ultimately, such movements and struggles for justice are not about any one person or any few minutes of an important day, but about all of those people whose lives are affected daily by discrimination and whose lives are made better when justice prevails.
It is in them and in their hopes for a better future that the dream lives.
References
[1] King, Jr., Martin Luther. I Have a Dream speech from August 28, 1963. Text and audio found on American Rhetoric. Retrieved on August 27, 2010 from http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm.
Amendment XIX
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by proper legislation.[1]
It was on August 26, 1920 that the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was signed into law, expanding the right to vote to include women.[2] It is difficult to believe that this was only ninety years ago. There were many people who worked hard to make this happen, and we should be grateful for all of their hard work.
What I have learned from the history of the United States is that there are people who realize that it is important to make the world a better place. The whole point of the amendments to the Constitution is that we are still learning that rights belong to everyone — not just to one select group. We can protest and speak out when we believe that our actions and laws are not in adherence to the principles of equal rights, freedom, and justice. The Nineteenth Amendment is an example of a change to the Constitution which shows that our country is committed to learning from past mistakes and fixing them. When we realize our past mistakes and stand up for a better tomorrow, we leave a better future for those who will come after us.
The struggle for equal rights has a long history and is still going on, all around the world, including in our own country. It is important on occasions such as this to appreciate how far we have come, and to recognize how far we still have to go. There are still people who see women’s lives and contributions as less important than those of men. There are many women around the world who do not have the same rights we do here, and on this day we should remember their struggle and find ways to help them as we are thankful for those who paved the way for us.
References
[1] Amendment XIX. Constitution of the United States: Amendments 19-27 at the National Archives.
URL of the link: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html.
[2] The 19th Amendment. Constitution of the United States, Amendment XIX at the National Archives.
URL of the link: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendment_19.html.
Morality and the Unknown: a blog entry in honor of J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter’s Birthday
July 31st is J. K. Rowling’s birthday.[1] It is also the birthday of her famous fictional hero, Harry Potter.[2] Rowling is a person to whom I am greatly indebted; it is her writing which caused me to begin, in earnest, my reading of fantasy and science fiction books and to finally write down the thoughts and ideas which had long resided only in my mind. For her and her creation’s birthday, I’ve decided to discuss the ways in which Harry Potter’s birthdays play an important part in the series, specifically the way in which they are doors into the unknown.
Birthdays can be memorable events or easily forgotten. The day itself is rarely a huge step in one’s life (because being twenty-two years and 364 days old does not feel much different than being exactly twenty-three years old) but is rather an opportunity to look back on the entire year, over which there can be substantial changes in a person’s life, and to look ahead towards the future. It can be a day of celebration during which family and friends happily offer congratulations and hopes for a good future. The celebration is not just in honor of that one day but rather in honor of the entire life of the individual. Throughout the Harry Potter series, some of Harry’s birthdays are memorable in and of themselves; additionally, some are also a first step towards other important events, which greatly impact Harry’s life and show his character through the decisions he makes when faced with uncertainty and fear.
Harry’s eleventh birthday is the day when he takes his first step into the wizarding world, from which he had been removed for his own protection and of which he had no knowledge. It is on 31 July 1991 (in the timeline of the Harry Potter series) when Harry first reads the Hogwarts letter that had been sent to him. Copies of this letter had been showing up magically at Privet Drive, causing Petunia Dursley and Vernon Dursley (Harry’s aunt and uncle) great worry, because they had been hoping that they could prevent Harry from developing his magical abilities, of which they are afraid. The letter is addressed to Mr. Potter and states, quite plainly, “We are pleased to inform you that you have been accepted at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Please find enclosed a list of all necessary books and equipment. Term begins on September 1. We await your owl by no later than July 31.”[3] Such a statement would be surprising to any Muggle who read it, and since Harry has been raised in a Muggle home, he is surprised as well.
This birthday is the first time Harry gets a glimpse of the world he is about to enter — a world in which the letter he has just received is considered perfectly normal and would even be anticipated by children in wizarding families. His situation is similar to the ones that are faced by us ordinary humans as we grow older; as we learn more about the world and about people who are different from ourselves, we realize that ideas which seem new to us, when we hear about them for the first time, are actually topics that people have been discussing for ages before we were even born. Many of the same concerns which plague our minds and questions about life which confuse and excite us are similar to those which many others have thought of before, but they are new to us.
Throughout the series, Harry learns more about the wizarding world and is fascinated with it. Because he is not afraid of exploring a new world and learning more about it (unlike the Dursleys) he finds great adventure and new experiences. He has friends who become like family and a school which feels like a home. His life is filled with both comforts and confusions, like our own. There are times when life is wonderful and intriguing and times when it is scary and dangerous. As we learn more about the world around us, as we meet new people and learn new ideas, we find for ourselves and discover unintentionally that life contains many wonderful lessons and unanswered questions.
The way in which Harry approaches the new people he meets is very different from the way in which Lord Voldemort and the Death Eaters treat those who are different from them. The Death Eaters think that they are superior to anyone who is not a pure-blood witch or wizard; they are unwilling to consider Muggle-borns like Hermione, “half-breeds” like Hagrid, and werewolves like Lupin as individuals who deserve rights and full membership in society. Harry, although he feels a bit lost in this new world that he has never known before, does not automatically think the worst of the people he meets. He learns that witches and wizards are, in many ways, just like Muggles in that they can be both good and bad. Harry does not distance himself from Hagrid, Lupin, and Hermione even when he finds out how they are different from other people and even though he knows that others may think badly of him for being associated with them. He even feels some compassion for people such as Professor Snape and Draco Malfoy, who have hurt him, when he finds that they themselves have been hurt by others. In our own lives, we frequently meet people who are different from us and find that they are just as human and just as deserving of rights. When seeing someone behave badly in one instance and then morally in another, we realize that an initial opinion of a person may have been incomplete. Human beings are complicated people and we cannot really know everything about someone based upon the group they are in, what we have heard about them, or on our initial reaction to their differences. We find instead that there is richness in human existence which can only be found by our interactions with the many different people who share the world.
Harry’s seventeenth birthday is, once again, a time of stepping into a situation about which he knows little and for which he does not feel prepared. At seventeen, he is considered a legal adult in the wizarding world, but since he is Harry Potter, his birthday also means that the protection he once had at number four Privet Drive will no longer exist. He has to grow up and leave the protection of childhood even more literally and suddenly than most others. The truth, though, is that he has been growing up for his whole life. The loss of the protection he had at number 4 Privet Drive is metaphorically the culmination of the maturity he has gained up to that point. Similarly, in our lives, although there are certain birthdays which signify an important milestone, even more important are all the years which lead up to them, which made us ready to take on the responsibilities we will now face.
After Harry leaves number four Privet Drive, he travels once again to The Burrow, the home of the Weasley. Once again, Harry learns new information about the wizarding world and, more importantly, sees once again that his friends really do care about him and consider him family.
“It’s traditional to give a wizard a watch when he comes of age,” said Mrs. Weasley, watching him anxiously from beside the cooker. “I’m afraid that one isn’t new like Ron’s, it was actually my brother Fabian’s and he wasn’t terribly careful with his possessions, it’s a bit dented on the back, but — ”
The rest of her speech was lost; Harry had got up and hugged her. He tried to put a lot of unsaid things into the hug and perhaps she understood them, because she patted his cheek clumsily when he released her, then waved her wand in a slightly random way, causing half a pack of bacon to flop out of the frying pan onto the floor.[4]
Being included in a tradition by the Weasleys is important to Harry and he is moved that they would think of him, even when they have so much else to focus on, from Bill’s wedding to fighting in the war against Lord Voldemort. Similarly, when we see that our loved ones have thought of us, even when they didn’t have to, we feel that they are there for us. We see through their actions that they take us into consideration when making decisions and make sure to include us in their lives.
Soon after his seventeenth birthday, Harry must take another step into the unknown. He knows that is about to face the most difficult challenge of his life, that of finding and destroying all of Lord Voldemort’s horcruxes and then killing Voldemort himself, and his friends prove loyal once more. Ron and Hermione go with him on his journey, even though the odds against them are great, because they know that it is important to stop Voldemort and to help their friend in any way they can. They are not sure what to do, and they fight along the way, but in the end, they succeed. Harry’s love of his friends provides a great foundation in his life, and because of them, he is strong enough to face any unknown and face any danger. We seek in our lives stability and comfort like what Harry finds with his friends. The people who we love become trusted individuals who will be there for us in the confusing times, so that we can explore the world and face difficult challenges with loved ones by our side. Although the challenges we face are not battles against the most evil wizard who ever lived, our friends can be just as important to us as Harry’s friends are to him.
An idea developed throughout the series is the question of how a person reacts to the unknown or to new ideas or people. The way a person reacts to these situations shows a lot about who they are. Lord Voldemort is afraid of the unknown, and his actions are partly a manifestation of these fears, as he seeks immortality out of fear of death. As Dumbledore wisely points out to Harry, “There is nothing to be feared from a body, Harry, any more than there is anything to be feared from the darkness. Lord Voldemort, who of course secretly fears both, disagrees. But once again he reveals his own lack of wisdom. It is the unknown we fear when we look upon death and darkness, nothing more.”[5] Lord Voldemort’s fears control him. His obsession with preventing death turns him into a being that is not fully human anymore. He is filled with hatred for anyone who is not a pure-blood witch or wizard, not realizing that there are good people in all groups. Instead of taking the time to learn more about life and realizing that it is filled with great mystery and new knowledge, he seeks only power to control lives. He is too afraid of uncertainties to place great trust in anyone other than himself or to love another person. In trying to prevent himself from facing the difficulties and uncertainties of life, he also loses out on the good parts of life — the love, happiness and friendship. Harry, in not being afraid of the unknown, experiences both the horrible and wonderful parts of life. He knows the pain of losing loved ones and of feeling betrayed, but he also knows the joys of having friends and of believing that the world can be a better place. As Harry gets older, he must face danger time and time again, as he finds his way not just to adulthood but also to a level of maturity that he needs in order to do the right thing. He must face his fears and find courage. Because he has lived his life in a way that has caused him to experience both horror and happiness, he knows that it is possible and morally right to take actions that would lessen the horror and increase the happiness in others people’s lives. As Dumbledore says to Harry in the train station to the afterlife, after Harry has sacrificed himself to make Lord Voldemort mortal once more, “By returning, you may ensure that fewer souls are maimed, fewer families are torn apart. If that seems to you a worthy goal, then we say good-bye for the present.”[6] Harry can face the uncertainty of death and the uncertainty of returning once again to the bloody battlefield because he knows that there can be good in life and believes that creating a future with more justice, happiness, friendship, and love in the lives of others is worth dying for and fighting for. In our own lives, we experience sorrow and joy, comfort and pain, enmity and friendship when we open up our minds and hearts to the world around us. No matter the bad parts of life, we know that the good parts are worth preserving and sharing with others.
When we reach milestones like birthdays, it is important to look both into the past and look forward to our future. We find that if we have spent our time acting in a way that has made life better for those around us, the day is all the more meaningful and can provide us with the encouragement to take moral actions in the future.
Happy Birthday to J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter!
References
[1] http://www.mugglenet.com/jkr/biography.shtml
[2] http://www.hp-encyclopedia.com/characters.php?page=harry
[3] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Arthur A Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 1997, pg 51.
ISBN: 0-590-35340-3
[4] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2007, pg 114.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
[5] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2005, pg. 566.
ISBN: 0-439-79132-4
[6] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2007, pg 722.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
July 31st is J. K. Rowling’s birthday.[1] It is also the birthday of her famous fictional hero, Harry Potter.[2] Rowling is a person to whom I am greatly indebted; it is her writing which caused me to begin, in earnest, my reading of fantasy and science fiction books and to finally write down the thoughts and ideas which had long resided only in my mind. For her and her creation’s birthday, I’ve decided to discuss the ways in which Harry Potter’s birthdays play an important part in the series, specifically the way in which they are doors into the unknown.
Birthdays can be memorable events or easily forgotten. The day itself is rarely a huge step in one’s life (because being twenty-two years and 364 days old does not feel much different than being exactly twenty-three years old) but is rather an opportunity to look back on the entire year, over which there can be substantial changes in a person’s life, and to look ahead towards the future. It can be a day of celebration during which family and friends happily offer congratulations and hopes for a good future. The celebration is not just in honor of that one day but rather in honor of the entire life of the individual. Throughout the Harry Potter series, some of Harry’s birthdays are memorable in and of themselves; additionally, some are also a first step towards other important events, which greatly impact Harry’s life and show his character through the decisions he makes when faced with uncertainty and fear.
Harry’s eleventh birthday is the day when he takes his first step into the wizarding world, from which he had been removed for his own protection and of which he had no knowledge. It is on 31 July 1991 (in the timeline of the Harry Potter series) when Harry first reads the Hogwarts letter that had been sent to him. Copies of this letter had been showing up magically at Privet Drive, causing Petunia Dursley and Vernon Dursley (Harry’s aunt and uncle) great worry, because they had been hoping that they could prevent Harry from developing his magical abilities, of which they are afraid. The letter is addressed to Mr. Potter and states, quite plainly, “We are pleased to inform you that you have been accepted at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Please find enclosed a list of all necessary books and equipment. Term begins on September 1. We await your owl by no later than July 31.”[3] Such a statement would be surprising to any Muggle who read it, and since Harry has been raised in a Muggle home, he is surprised as well.
This birthday is the first time Harry gets a glimpse of the world he is about to enter — a world in which the letter he has just received is considered perfectly normal and would even be anticipated by children in wizarding families. His situation is similar to the ones that are faced by us ordinary humans as we grow older; as we learn more about the world and about people who are different from ourselves, we realize that ideas which seem new to us, when we hear about them for the first time, are actually topics that people have been discussing for ages before we were even born. Many of the same concerns which plague our minds and questions about life which confuse and excite us are similar to those which many others have thought of before, but they are new to us.
Throughout the series, Harry learns more about the wizarding world and is fascinated with it. Because he is not afraid of exploring a new world and learning more about it (unlike the Dursleys) he finds great adventure and new experiences. He has friends who become like family and a school which feels like a home. His life is filled with both comforts and confusions, like our own. There are times when life is wonderful and intriguing and times when it is scary and dangerous. As we learn more about the world around us, as we meet new people and learn new ideas, we find for ourselves and discover unintentionally that life contains many wonderful lessons and unanswered questions.
The way in which Harry approaches the new people he meets is very different from the way in which Lord Voldemort and the Death Eaters treat those who are different from them. The Death Eaters think that they are superior to anyone who is not a pure-blood witch or wizard; they are unwilling to consider Muggle-borns like Hermione, half-breeds like Hagrid, and werewolves like Lupin as individuals who deserve rights and full membership in society. Harry, although he feels a bit lost in this new world that he has never known before, does not automatically think the worst of the people he meets. He learns that witches and wizards are, in many ways, just like Muggles in that they can be both good and bad. Harry does not distance himself from Hagrid, Lupin, and Hermione even when he finds out how they are different from other people and even though he knows that others may think badly of him for being associated with them. He even feels some compassion for people such as Professor Snape and Draco Malfoy, who have hurt him, when he finds that they themselves have been hurt by others. In our own lives, we frequently meet people who are different from us and find that they are just as human and just as deserving of rights. When seeing someone behave badly in one instance and then morally in another, we realize that an initial opinion of a person may have been incomplete. Human beings are complicated people and we cannot really know everything about someone based upon the group they are in, what we have heard about them, or on our initial reaction to their differences. We find instead that there is richness in human existence which can only be found by our interactions with the many different people who share the world.
Harry’s seventeenth birthday is, once again, a time of stepping into a situation about which he knows little and for which he does not feel prepared. At seventeen, he is considered a legal adult in the wizarding world, but since he is Harry Potter, his birthday also means that the protection he once had at number four Privet Drive will no longer exist. He has to grow up and leave the protection of childhood even more literally and suddenly than most others. The truth, though, is that he has been growing up for his whole life. The loss of the protection he had at number 4 Privet Drive is metaphorically the culmination of the maturity he has gained up to that point. Similarly, in our lives, although there are certain birthdays which signify an important milestone, even more important are all the years which lead up to them, which made us ready to take on the responsibilities we will now face.
After Harry leaves number four Privet Drive, he travels once again to The Burrow, the home of the Weasley. Once again, Harry learns new information about the wizarding world and, more importantly, sees once again that his friends really do care about him and consider him family.
“It’s traditional to give a wizard a watch when he comes of age,” said Mrs. Weasley, watching him anxiously from beside the cooker. “I’m afraid that one isn’t new like Ron’s, it was actually my brother Fabian’s and he wasn’t terribly careful with his possessions, it’s a bit dented on the back, but — ”
The rest of her speech was lost; Harry had got up and hugged her. He tried to put a lot of unsaid things into the hug and perhaps she understood them, because she patted his cheek clumsily when he released her, then waved her wand in a slightly random way, causing half a pack of bacon to flop out of the frying pan onto the floor.[4]
Being included in a tradition by the Weasleys is important to Harry and he is moved that they would think of him, even when they have so much else to focus on, from Bill’s wedding to fighting in the war against Lord Voldemort. Similarly, when we see that our loved ones have thought of us, even when they didn’t have to, we feel that they are there for us. We see through their actions that they take us into consideration when making decisions and make sure to include us in their lives.
Soon after his seventeenth birthday, Harry must take another step into the unknown. He knows that is about to face the most difficult challenge of his life, that of finding and destroying all of Lord Voldemort’s horcruxes and then killing Voldemort himself, and his friends prove loyal once more. Ron and Hermione go with him on his journey, even though the odds against them are great, because they know that it is important to stop Voldemort and to help their friend in any way they can. They are not sure what to do, and they fight along the way, but in the end, they succeed. Harry’s love of his friends provides a great foundation in his life, and because of them, he is strong enough to face any unknown and face any danger. We seek in our lives stability and comfort like what Harry finds with his friends. The people who we love become trusted individuals who will be there for us in the confusing times, so that we can explore the world and face difficult challenges with loved ones by our side. Although the challenges we face are not battles against the most evil wizard who ever lived, our friends can be just as important to us as Harry’s friends are to him.
An idea developed throughout the series is the question of how a person reacts to the unknown or to new ideas or people. The way a person reacts to these situations shows a lot about who they are. Lord Voldemort is afraid of the unknown, and his actions are partly a manifestation of these fears, as he seeks immortality out of fear of death. As Dumbledore wisely points out to Harry, “There is nothing to be feared from a body, Harry, any more than there is anything to be feared from the darkness. Lord Voldemort, who of course secretly fears both, disagrees. But once again he reveals his own lack of wisdom. It is the unknown we fear when we look upon death and darkness, nothing more.”[5] Lord Voldemort’s fears control him. His obsession with preventing death turns him into a being that is not fully human anymore. He is filled with hatred for anyone who is not a pure-blood witch or wizard, not realizing that there are good people in all groups. Instead of taking the time to learn more about life and realizing that it is filled with great mystery and new knowledge, he seeks only power to control lives. He is too afraid of uncertainties to place great trust in anyone other than himself or to love another person. In trying to prevent himself from facing the difficulties and uncertainties of life, he also loses out on the good parts of life — the love, happiness and friendship. Harry, in not being afraid of the unknown, experiences both the horrible and wonderful parts of life. He knows the pain of losing loved ones and of feeling betrayed, but he also knows the joys of having friends and of believing that the world can be a better place. As Harry gets older, he must face danger time and time again, as he finds his way not just to adulthood but also to a level of maturity that he needs in order to do the right thing. He must face his fears and find courage. Because he has lived his life in a way that has caused him to experience both horror and happiness, he knows that it is possible and morally right to take actions that would lessen the horror and increase the happiness in others people’s lives. As Dumbledore says to Harry in the train station to the afterlife, after Harry has sacrificed himself to make Lord Voldemort mortal once more, “By returning, you may ensure that fewer souls are maimed, fewer families are torn apart. If that seems to you a worthy goal, then we say good-bye for the present.”[6] Harry can face the uncertainty of death and the uncertainty of returning once again to the bloody battlefield because he knows that there can be good in life and believes that creating a future with more justice, happiness, friendship, and love in the lives of others is worth dying for and fighting for. In our own lives, we experience sorrow and joy, comfort and pain, enmity and friendship when we open up our minds and hearts to the world around us. No matter the bad parts of life, we know that the good parts are worth preserving and sharing with others.
When we reach milestones like birthdays, it is important to look both into the past and look forward to our future. We find that if we have spent our time acting in a way that has made life better for those around us, the day is all the more meaningful and can provide us with the encouragement to take moral actions in the future.
Happy Birthday to J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter!
References
[1] http://www.mugglenet.com/jkr/biography.shtml
[2] http://www.hp-encyclopedia.com/characters.php?page=harry
[3] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Arthur A Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 1997, pg 51.
ISBN: 0-590-35340-3
[4] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2007, pg 114.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
[5] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2005, pg. 566.
ISBN: 0-439-79132-4
[6] Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Arthur A. Levine Books an imprint of Scholastic, 2007, pg 722.
ISBN: 978-0-545-01022-1
Via Friendly Atheist “If Christians Would Listen, What Would You Say To Them?”
[Note: The Friendly Atheist[1] Hemant Mehta posted a blog entry yesterday about a book-and-DVD set called The Outsider Interviews by Jim Henderson, Todd Hunter, and Craig Spinks. Henderson is the person who “bought” Mehta’s soul on eBay. The question asked in the video is “If Christians would listen, what would you say to them?” Mehta asked readers to give a reply in the comments section.[2] I wrote a comment replying to the question, and I thought I would repost it here.]
If Christians would listen, I would say:
Please realize being a member of one particular religion is not a prerequisite for morality. Just look around you. You probably have coworkers, neighbors, and fellow classmates who are members of different faiths and no faith. They are regular people, just trying to live their lives. If you want to be pro-family, then don’t encourage people to be hateful towards family members and friends who convert or deconvert away from Christianity.
Before deciding to support a religious law or Christian organization, please imagine yourself in the other person’s position. Imagine that you’re living in a country where Christians are the minority and where another religious group is doing a lot of the same things which some Christians are doing. Imagine that your kids are going to a school where another religion’s creation story is being taught as science, that your tax money is going to organizations that discriminate against you, and that there are organizations doing biased fake science research to “prove” that discrimination against you is okay. Would you be okay with that? If not, then don’t support it when your religion does it to other people.
Lastly, on a more personal note, don’t assume that I only dislike religion because I’m from a Muslim family and that I would change my mind if I learned about Christianity. I actually considered Christianity and found that I disagree with it as well. I’m an atheist because I don’t see evidence for God; if I saw the evidence, I would believe in God.
[1] http://www.friendlyatheist.com
[2] http://friendlyatheist.com/2010/07/06/if-christians-would-listen-what-would-you-say-to-them/
[3] http://friendlyatheist.com/2010/07/06/if-christians-would-listen-what-would-you-say-to-them/#comment-509664
Skepticon 4: 19 – 20 November 2011
The Midwest's Largest Skeptic Conference Springfield, Missouri
-
Recent Comments at The Eternal Bookshelf
Mugglenet- Emma Watson states 'Reality TV' helped her prepare for 'The Bling Ring' 2012/05/29Emma Watson is in this week's issue of Entertainment Weekly in which she described how she prepared for the role of Sofia Coppola's film The Bling Ring. Emma stated, "I just watched a ton of reality TV. I was doing an English course [at Brown University]. So I would go from reading Virginia Woolf to [watching] Kim Kardashian. I kind of loved i […]
- Mashable: MuggleNet top 'Magical Real-World Creation Inspired by Potter' 2012/05/29Earlier this week, Mashable rolled out their 5 Magical Real-World Creations Inspired by Harry Potter, and coming in at No. 2 on the list was MuggleNet! The top spot went to Bertie Botts Every Flavor Beans, which you can purchase courtesy of Jelly Belly. "While not featured in the books or films, MuggleNet is an important part of the Harry Potter experie […]
- MuggleNet offering chance to cover Grand Opening of 'Harry Potter: The Exhibition' in Singapore 2012/05/29If you live in Singapore and would like a press pass to attend the Grand Opening of the Harry Potter: The Exhibition, then MuggleNet is looking for you! We will provide one press pass to a qualified Harry Potter fan, to cover and report on the Grand Opening event, which is scheduled to take place on Friday, June 1st at 2:30PM. If you feel you are able to cov […]
- MuggleNet Interactive hosts summer trivia-based Quidditch Tournament 2012/05/29The sixth annual SNITCH Quidditch Tournament begins in just under one week on MuggleNet Interactive, as the top Quidditch teams from across the world prepare to claim the prized Quidditch Trophy. If you haven't checked out Quidditch on MNI - no, it's sadly not a game of taking off from the ground on broomsticks. But there are Chasers, Beaters, Keep […]
- Pottermore Insider updates progress on 'Chamber of Secrets' 2012/05/29The Pottermore Insider was recently updated to show current progress on releasing Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets on the Interactive website. From the Insider: Chamber of Secrets update: This week, we're in the sound studio recording audio for the Chamber of Secrets Moments. We're also working on Chapter Three, The Burrow, and Chapter Seven […]
- Order your yearly subscription to Quidditch Quarterly for all your Muggle Quidditch news 2012/05/29Looking to own a piece of Muggle Quidditch history? Then order a year long subscription to the International Quidditch Association's magazine: Quidditch Quarterly. Quidditch Quarterly is the only magazine dedicated to the real-life sport of quidditch and the official publication of the International Quidditch Association. QQ is a 60-page full-color maga […]
- Olympic Quidditch teams jerseys available for purchase now - go support your country! 2012/05/29The sport of Muggle Quidditch is growing increasingly popular around the world and this has never been more evident than with the upcoming exhibition matches that are taking place at the 2012 Summer Olympic Torch Ceremony in Oxford, London this July. At this time, four countries will be represented for this incredible honor: Team UK, Team USA, Team Australia […]
- MuggleNet presents: a fan written guide to Harry Potter conventions 2012/05/29Summer is rapidy approaching, and that can mean only one thing: the time for the ever-popular Harry Potter conventions is drawing near. Our newest submission from resident editorialist hpboy13 features a comprehensive guide to attending these conventions. If you've never attenteded a Harry Potter convention before - or if you would just like to learn mo […]
- Untitled 2012/05/29This past week thousands of fans around the world picked up their copy of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone and rediscovered the very old magic of the book series. We watched as Harry was sorted into Gryffindor - "not Slytherin, not Slytherin!" - and then we all got a crash course in Transfiguration, where we discovered it was possible to […]
- Memorial Day Sale at WB Shop - Save up to 60% on 'Harry Potter' merchandise 2012/05/29The WB Shop has a Memorial Day savings event going on right now through Monday, May 28th, which will allow you to save up to 60% on selected items, including Harry Potter Blu-ray and DVD purchases. Some of the select items on sale include: Save $5 on All Adult Shirts Save $5 on All iPhone Cases Save 20% on Personalized Hogwarts Acceptance Letters Save 15% on […]
- Emma Watson states 'Reality TV' helped her prepare for 'The Bling Ring' 2012/05/29
