Hey y’all.  While you’re waiting for the election results to come in, check out this podcast I recorded with Thick Culture Guru Professor Jose Marichal immediately after the third debate (sorry, it’s dated but I just figured this technology out)

I love thinking about maps, and I love thinking about religions.  So it totally blows my mind to see mapping of aspects of American religiosity done by credible polling institutions.

Looking at religion from this 30,000 foot level, we need to ask: is religiosity in America on the declinine as in other indstrialized nations?  Or is it thriving, as an upcoming book by Gallup pollster Frank Newport will be arguing?  From the blurb:

Popular books such as The God Delusion have dismissed religion as a delusional artifact of evolution and ancient superstitions. But should millions of Americans’ statements of belief and their behavior be dismissed that quickly? The pattern of religious influence in American society suggests mass consequence rather than mass delusion. In God Is Alive and Well, Frank Newport, Gallup’s Editor-in-Chief, provides a new evidence-based analysis of Americans’ religious beliefs and practices — and bold predictions about religion’s future in the U.S.

Reading about this upcoming book reminded me of a recent article in the Economist that atheism in America is on the rise.

How could both trends be true?

It’s interesting to note that Harvard University has a Humanist chaplaincy program.    What this provides secular or atheist students is a community and all of the other stuff that comes with religion, sans belief.  Is Harvard leading a new trend that other universities will follow?   Could we see institutions like hospitals adopting this trend?  Will Christians or Hindus be okay with being approached by a Muslim Chaplain at a hospital?  What about a Humanist one?

 

 

I am teaching a couple of sections of “Introduction to the Study of Global Religions” this semester, and, as it turns out, last week was quite important for globalization and religion.  Unfortunately, we were so busy in class with discussing readings that we did not get to unpack the extremely confusing events centered around protests to an American-made video about the Prophet Muhammad.

So, here is an attempt to engage those issues.  For really good summaries of global issues like this, I always turn to the BBC’s website.  Muslims see the Prophet Muhammad as the model for living a good life, and God’s chosen recipient for the revelation of the Qur’an.  I think it’s important to start with those basic facts before delving into analysis.

With the facts in mind, what is “thick” about these global events?  My mind goes to the roots of the highly offensive video, which are are quite mysterious.  It was filmed in a shroud of secrecy and deception.  The film seems to have ties to extremist of certain American Christian groups, as well as a member of a Los Angeles area Coptic Christian community.  A soft porn director seems to have been misled in being hired to film the video.  The actors starring in the film also report being duped.

I think the film itself is embarrassingly bad: cheap production, bad acting, with much of its dialogue strangely dubbed over the voices of the actors.  How could anyone take something this ridiculous (and disgusting, and just plain stupid) so seriously?  Somehow, the enigmatic nature of the film, its content, and its history played really well in getting angry people all over the world even angrier.  The embarrassingly bad film was made to embarrass the sentiments of its viewers.

I think this film spoke the language of embarrassed, angry people (who act in the anonymity of mobs) because it was made by embarrassed, angry people (who hide behind duplicitous anonymity).

Two stories this week, oceans apart from one another, showcase strange wrinkles in gender inequity:

One from Egypt, where we learn that the brothers of the Muslim Brotherhood preach a socially conservative message to women who nod along:

Women are erratic and emotional, and they make good wives and mothers — but never leaders or rulers. …

“A woman takes pleasure in being a follower and finds ease in obeying a husband who loves her.”  …

“Can you, as a woman, take a decision and handle the consequences of your decision?” he asked.  A number of women shook their heads even before Mr. Abou Salama provided his answer: “No. But men can. And God created us this way because a ship cannot have more than one captain.”

The article goes on to explain that the Brotherhood’s hold on segments of Egyptian society come in part from the social services it provides, like “financial support to struggling households” and “mass weddings for low-income couples.”

The second story comes from Coconino County Arizona, where Judge Jacqueline Hatch played the old game of blame the victim.  Quoting her own mother, the Judge scolded a sexual assault victim:

“When you blame others, you give up your power to change.”

As if it wasn’t bad enough that the POLICE OFFICER who was convicted as the assaulter received a light slap on the wrist.  Judge Hatch later apologized for her “poorly communicated” words.

As a bewildered outsider to both stories, I guess I can explain the complicity of some Egyptian women to the Muslim Brotherhood’s patriarchal agenda.  This is the use of tradition and religion to reject the hegemony of western liberalism in the form of women’s lib.  Moreover the Brotherhood speaks to a population trying to come to grips with tradition and religion after decades of Hosni Mubarak’s reign. Then there is the matter of the Brotherhood as an institution dispensing social services, etc.

But, I’ve got to ask, what makes a judge in America, who is also a woman, give voice to Judge Hatch’s kind of nonsense?