“That is why I think that it should be kept away from government places. If you could allow everyone to do what they want to in public that would be fine, but you can’t.”
But Duke isn’t a government place.
The Chief Representative of Muslim Affairs, and former Muslim chaplain, at Duke is a well-loved member of the local religious community. He has been involved in interfaith efforts in the area and overseas and has friends who are rabbis and ministers. He has a wonderful sense of humor, loves this country, and loves North Carolina. There are many articles about him on the Internet. This is one: http://www.readthespirit.com/interfaith-peacemakers/imam-abdullah-antepli/
I say this to provide some context. It is no surprise that such a man has laid the foundation for good relations between the Christian and Muslim communities at Duke.
The only thing that I don’t like about him is that he, referring to sports, “prays for the Devils”.
As to the length of the prayer, 3 minutes once a week doesn’t seem that bad.
My office is right next to the Michigan bell tower which rings every fifteen minutes and has a few very VERY long rings. Not religious but soooooo obnoxious. I’d give anything for it to be just once a week for three minutes.
@mathyone “but the laws remain on the books. If popular opinion were overwhelmingly against them, they would be changed. I think many people agree with the sentiment that freedom of belief and protection from religious discrimination apply only to religious people.”
True. But it takes a long time.i think Mississippi just ratified the 13th amendment banning slavery a year or two ago.
What amazes me is the amount of arguing over the simple idea that we should allow everyone to have the same rights. Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddists, Jews, Atheists, Satanists, it should not matter what your God belief is.
It is amazing to me that in 2015, so many do not agree.
@mathyone You can’t prove God doesn’t exist because you can’t prove non-existence. There is no evidence other than belief that God exists. By your measure, Santa Claus exists because millions of children believe in him and there are presents under millions of trees every December 25th.
Rights are not subject to popular opinion, even though we sometimes have to have court battles to protect those rights. Religious freedom is protected by our Constitution. If a group of atheists wanted to declare God is imaginary, I would have no issue with that, but it’s not a belief - it’s a challenge to an assertion.
No, we know there is no god. There’s a difference.
Much2learn, I simply do not see the vile intent you ascribe to Preamble in what s/he has posted. You seem to have jumped from A to Z while skipping over all of the steps in between. Why are you so intent on accusing that person of wanting to privilege Islam? I just don’t see it in the posts on this thread.
BTW, I am more or less an atheist. Your assertions about atheism are off-base, IMHO. If atheists were “offended” by proclamations of religious belief, they would spend their lives in a permanent state of offense. Atheists are very, very accustomed to listening to people make protestations of faith, generalize about “people of faith,” and so forth. Remember when GHW Bush opined publicly that an atheist could never be a moral/ethical person, or words to that effect?
Most atheists I know simply want public schools, public property, public ceremonies, and so forth to be free of godtalk. They want separation of church and state. They want freedom FROM religion as well as OF religion. They do not want to have other people’s religious beliefs enshrined in law and forced o them, or anyone else. They do not want to prevent people from holding whatever beliefs they hold, and they don’t want to prevent people from worshiping whatever imaginary friend they prefer in whatever way they prefer on their own time and on their own property.
Not everyone was thrilled when the official governmental response to 9/11 was a “national prayer service” with the usual line-up of religious figures. We were supposed to think it was wonderful because there were officiants who weren’t Christian or Jewish. Note that the French held a public expression of unity, attended by millions. I would have been much happier with that, which I found far more meaningful that whipping out the “people of faith” bludgeon yet again.
I agree with Pizzagirl that there is a difference between making an announcement that the Club is meeting at 5 on Friday, and reading a prayer over the loudspeaker. Personally, I prefer not to hear ANY of them, but I’m accustomed to it. It is a private organization, and they can do what they want. If it were a public institution, forcing everyone to listen to prayer, then it would be worth fighting.
What kind of weaklings are people that they can’t abide hearing a Muslim call to worship once a week?
“Why are you so intent on accusing that person of wanting to privilege Islam? I just don’t see it in the posts on this thread.”
There are no steps in between. Either you believe that everyone’s belief should be treated equally or you don’t. Why is that so hard. I accept treating everyone’s personal view of religion equally. Preamble does not.
Additional steps are to confuse an obfuscate that simple point.
Do you agree that all beliefs should be treated equally?
Yes, but I do not see a simple statement that Islam is part of the Abrahamic tradition as relevant to equality.
The college absolutely has the right to plaster their walls in crucifixes. My kid has the right to feel uncomfortable about them. (He applied to college in question, but since he was not accepted did not have to decide how uncomfortable he was.) I do agree that this isn’t that different from ringing bells. One local church has Christmas carols playing from their steeple, so that no one in the neighborhood can miss it. I’d really rather they stuck to ringing changes.
I think that Duke has the right to do this, but I think they are setting themselves up for other religious groups to be equally obnoxious. (Though actually I rather like the way the call to prayer sounds, in practice in the middle east I didn’t care for being awoken at 6 am! - at least Duke isn’t doing that!)
I’ve always thought it took as much faith to be an atheist as it does to believe in God. Much easier to be agnostic. (I see post #37 beat me to this!) BTW my religion, says God may or may not exist, that’s not important, what is important is to act ethically.
Personally, I don’t really see how this has anything to do with religion at all. To me, this is about a campus group asking for permission to do something that might create some inconvenience for others, but which would be of benefit to them. Like vegetarians asking for more options in the dining hall, or an organization asking to use a public space for a meeting or event. Reasonable requests should be granted as long as the inconvenience to others isn’t that great, and in this case, it’s tiny (in my opinion). It doesn’t wake anybody up, it’s only once a week, and they are already ringing bells from this tower. If I were Duke, I’d grant this request without too much concern. If they wanted to do it five times a day, including early in the morning, I’d say no.
Here’s a thought experiment for you: You are Duke. A delegation containing both Muslims and Orthodox Jews comes to you and requests that there be some designated single-sex hours at the university swimming pool. What do you say? Does it matter what time of day they are requesting the specified hours? What if, instead of these religious groups, the request came from the Women’s Center?
[QUOTE=""]
catholic univs have crucifixes in classrooms....many students who attend aren't Catholic .....is that offensive?The college absolutely has the right to plaster their walls in crucifixes. My kid has the right to feel uncomfortable about them. (He applied to college in question, but since he was not accepted did not have to decide how uncomfortable he was.) <<<<<
[/QUOTE]
Of course a person has the right to “feel uncomfortable”. But “offended” that these things exist on private property at a private univ is nutty. If a non-Catholic visits a cathedral, he can feel as uncomfortable as he pleases…but be offended? Uh no…don’t go if that’s the case.
@Consolation I agree with that. Clearly, all three religions evolved from one.
I am disagreeing with the rationale that since the one God in the call to prayer is the Abrahamic God, it is treating Jews and Christians equally. Followed by the rationale that Atheism is not a belief and therefore has no rights.
In the end either you believe everyone’s belief should be treated equally or you don’t, and these rationales for making one group more equal than others are just that, rationalizations.
@Hunt “What kind of weaklings are people that they can’t abide hearing a Muslim call to worship once a week?”
If people would agree that we should accommodate all groups equally, then I agree. Why are people so thin skinned that 3 minutes once a week is so offensive that it can not be tolerated? Why shouldn’t we be inclusive? It would be great if everyone can be open about their views on religion and everyone else would respect that. I think Duke is trying to move toward this ideal. If they will extend the same privilege to people of all religious views, then that would be great. Can Buddhists, Atheists, Hindus, and Jews have 3 minutes of campus air time to express their views? If yes, then I think it is great. If some are more equal than others, then I think it is a problem.
What is concerning is the number of people who do not want to extend that view to everyone. Instead, they want to impose their view on others, and muffle disagreement as offensive. The result is an institutional endorsement of a particular view.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this, Hunt. I have often been impressed by your thoughtfulness.
My point is that this isn’t really about the Muslim students expressing their views–rather, it’s a request to carry on a religious practice in a university facility. It would be like, say, the Baptist student group asking to use the swimming pool for baptisms. So I would say that all groups (whether religious or not) should be treated the same in terms of granting reasonable requests if they don’t inconvenience everybody very much. So you’d let the Baptists use the pool, but not on the day of the big swim meet. But this would really be no different from a group that wanted to use it for water ballet. So, to give another example, the call to worship request is not really different from, say, the Jazz Collective asking if it can have a jam session every Saturday afternoon on the terrace outside the student center.
Thus, in my view, this is different from a case in which we are talking about providing equal access to forums for free speech.
The comparison between ringing bells and a recitation of the Islamic adhan chant doesn’t hold up. There is no declaration of faith in a musical interlude, even if some would associate the specific combination of notes as a song or hymn. There is a declaration of faith in the adhan. The adhan is intended to notify all believers and non-believers of the substance and summary of Islamic beliefs and spiritual ideology. Pure and simple, this is a statement of the Islamic faith, the first of the Five Pillars of Islam.
“Allahu Akbar”, God is Great.
“Ashhadu an la ilaha illa Allah”; I bear witness that there is no god except the One God.
“Ashadu anna Muhammadan Rasool Allah”; I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God.
The problem is, you cannot ignore the spoken testimony of the adhan that is being broadcast (unless your earbuds are intact during the call to prayer). Another point: the traditional call to worship is expected to be declared five separate times each day. Should one expect Duke’s new policy to be expanded over time to allow all five calls?
And please, equating any debate of this topic as “Islamophobia” is a poor tactic that is becoming increasingly tiring. While Duke can do what it chooses to do, I’m surprised that such a university would condone a select religion’s proseltyzing of their foremost tenet of faith, to be broadcast to the entire student body. I believe that was the OP’s original point.
Does Duke broadcast calls for Christian or Jewish prayers over the loudspeakers every week as well?
If not then this new initiative is offensive but Duke can do whatever it wants. Potential non-muslim students and employee can also do whatever they want, for example, do not apply to Duke. There are other religions too, every one of them should insist on their right to announce their calls to prayers over the loudspeakers. This will be one funny campus.
I believe that this is a little bit bigger deal than increasing the number of vegan dishes in the cafeteria.
" I await the argument that it will only be spoken in Arabic so non-adherents won’t understand what is being said anyway, so what should it matter?"
No. it will be translated. Training is underway, currently.
The Adhan will be sung in Arabic, then followed by an English translation, according to a Facebook event announcing the call. Proselytizing?
Nonsense. Church bells playing “Amazing Grace” are certainly declaring faith.
Part of what’s mystifying people here is that this Muslim practice is different from the practices of other religions. Christians and Jews do not practice this kind of call to prayer–except that Christians do it with bells (ever see the famous painting “The Angelus?”). This is an accommodation of a religious practice, just like measures that might allow Orthodox Jews to get around the campus on the Sabbath without operating machines or electrical devices.
I find it depressing that anyone would think that simply observing another person’s religious practices is “offensive.”