Quran (9:30) - “Some of the Jews have said that Ezra is the son of God and Christians have said the same of Jesus. This is only what they say and it is similar to what the unbelievers who lived before them had said. May God destroy them wherever they exist!”
In light of the above verse, it is hard to understand how people who believe in the inerrancy of the Quran can at the same time be wholly inclusive of Christians, Jews, and unbelievers/Atheists. How can that be?
If they do not accept extending rights of others, why should they be accorded special privileges?
Offensive, is not what I find it all. Unnecessary and over-the-top in an effort to demonstrate diversity is what I find it. And the stated goal is to promote religious diversity which seems an odd goal to me since everyone gets to pick their own religion or lack thereof and there is no need for an institution to promote anything. Although, if it’s a private institution they can do whatever they like, I suppose.
Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I just wanted to confirm what @preamble1776 said: Allah is the Arabic word for God, just as dios is the Spanish word for God. It’s not a matter of opinion in any way, shape, or form. It’s a fact of the language. If you want to learn Arabic to confirm that for yourself, that’s your prerogative.
I also think describing the adhan as “proselytizing” is a little dramatic. Seeing as the adhan is aimed at Muslims, not other students (it is, after all, a call to Muslim prayer), it isn’t proselytization. There isn’t any action being taken to hoist the Muslim faith on any other students, nor is anyone being asked to convert.
I would understand it if Christian Arabs were annoyed, because at least they understand the words of the adhan… but for anyone else, it’s like listening to a song in a language you don’t understand. There’s no way to be offended by it because you have no idea what it means. (Think about it like this - if I understood everything Pitbull said in Spanish when he raps, I might be offended. Seeing as I don’t, taking offense isn’t possible.) If a non-Muslim does understand what it means, my point about how this isn’t proselytization still stands.
Anyway, I’ve always believed college is a place to be exposed to beliefs that you don’t necessarily agree with…
Well, I must say that I think an English translation is going too far. THat crosses the line from some kind of symbolic thing, like bell ringing, to actual proselytizing.
Hm, just reread that article - I missed the translation bit the first time. I personally (as a Muslim) don’t agree with the translation of it being broadcast. It’s not traditionally done, anyway, so it’s not like there’s an Islamic need for it.
I think it would be better if they just stuck with the Arabic.
But then again, it’s up to Duke, and it looks like they’re okay with it.
I don’t need to understand the actual words written in a Fatwa or a call to Jihad to realize that the words are profoundly offensive.
I have no issue with the subject at hand- just disputing marshmellows contention that if you don’t understand the language you have no right to be offended.
“Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I just wanted to confirm what @preamble1776 said: Allah is the Arabic word for God”
Yes. We all know that. However, what strains credulity is the suggestion that when the adhan says “There is no God except Allah” that they are not really not referring to the Islamic God at all, but rather, it is a generic reference to God which includes Christians and Jews.
I don’t really understand this. I don’t think preamble, or anyone else, was arguing that the call to prayer is an attempt to have a single 3-minute announcement that includes Muslims and Christians and Jews. It’s obviously aimed at Muslims. I’m not sure why we’re all wrapped up in the semantics of Allah/God, to be honest, but I think it was over the issue of whether “God is Allah” is refuting all other religions. If that’s so, as a religious Jew, I certainly understand that when Muslims refer to Allah, they’re also referring to the same God as me. I’d use “Hashem,” they use Allah, whatever, same concept. Not to get off topic, but rabbinic authorities understand this as well-- it’s why Christianity is generally considered to be idolatry and Jews are traditionally not allowed to go in churches, but we are perfectly permitted to go into a mosque.
So what? I’m a non-believer, but I’m no more at risk of being converted to Islam through a public call to prayers once a week than I am of being converted to Christianity because of church bells, crucifixes in the classroom or visiting cathedrals. Most atheists don’t mind the religion of others as long as it’s not pushed forcefully on them. If they’re offended by the practice of religion they shouldn’t attend schools that espouse a religion (Duke, apparently) or support the public display of their students’ other regions (Duke again.)
Chiming in to agree that atheism is not a belief system. The Santa Claus analogy is apt.
IMO, if Duke has prohibitions against recognizing student organizations that discriminate or promote hate or intolerance of others, then that ought to be the measure of whether an organization can broadcast on campus.
Let’s say the Duke Atheist’s Association wants to invite Richard Dawkins to speak on “Why All Religions Are False.” They ask to have his speech in one of the auditoriums at the school. Will anybody object to this? Will anybody object to the group putting up posters around campus advertising the speech? I wouldn’t object to this. I also wouldn’t object to having the DAA list its weekly meetings in the campus calendar, or on a bulletin board–which, I assume, is the way such a group would typically advertise its meetings. I see no principled difference between this and what the Muslim students want to do.
Well, I think it’s more like broadcasting any other prayer. It’s not just a heads up prayer time guys thing. Or, an elaborate musical reminder not to forget about a Sunday service. But, it’s a little tricky because I am unaware of any other religions that require such a reminder in the first place. So yeah. It’s not just a flyer or a speech or a meeting somewhere. It’s 3 minutes which is a long time over the speaker system and a translation which is not for those who already get it, obviously. It’s also not really comparable to hearing church bells in the distance.
Hunt,
Would you object to the Duke Atheist Association broadcasting “All religions are false. God does not exist,” plus an additional three minutes of similar statements every week on one day at 1:00pm? I assume you would not.
“You can’t prove God doesn’t exist because you can’t prove non-existence.” Yes, that’s what I said: “You can never prove that God does not exist”.
There is plenty of evidence that God exists. Plenty of accounts of miracles, prayers answered etc. Whether or not you accept that evidence as valid is another issue, but many people do consider it sufficient. Other people find alternate explanations more probable.
@rebeccar My primary point is that we should provide treat everyone’s beliefs and rights equally. That is all. Whether you are a Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Atheist, Hindu, Wiccan or Satanist, the same rules should apply. The people who are arguing with me are disagreeing with this statement and by doing so, reveal that this is not really about inclusion for them at all.
Harvard just scheduled and cancelled a Satanic ritual by a group called The Satanic Temple earlier this year. Can they use the Duke Chapel for this ritual?
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has publicly voiced criticism of practices such as female genital mutilation and has also voiced support for atheism and women’s rights. She was disinvited from Brandeis for criticizing how Islam treats women. Yale then invited her to speak. Muslim and other groups attempted to prevent her from speaking. I laud Yale for saying that she deserves to be heard. That tells me that they are actually trying to be inclusive. When did religious beliefs come to trump freedom of speech in this country? She has dangerous ideas like stopping female genital mutilation, and ending discrimination against women and non-Muslims in Muslim countries. Yale’s Muslim student organization argued that views like Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s are “hate speech” against Muslims and need to be silenced. They tried to get the speech cancelled.
It is shameful that many of the PC police, in their well intended efforts to enhance religious diversity, are preventing the open inclusion of the views of all students, and supporting the silencing of intelligent dissent.
I was not aware that this is a traditional practice among Atheists.
I think it’s just not the case that this is proselytizing, or at least, that this is the primary purpose of broadcasting this call to prayer. The Muslim call to prayer is part of their culture and religious practice. It is really most analogous to church bells–which nobody seems to object to, even if they ring every day. To me, this is more like the situation if some Buddhist students wanted to put some prayer flags on a hilltop in view of campus. Or if the Baptist students asked for permission to hold a weekly prayer meeting in some public area. To me, you’d judge all these on the basis of how much inconvenience they pose to other students, and not on whether other students dislike the beliefs of the group in question. I think a college should model civic values, even if it doesn’t have to as a private institution.
Edited to add: The advertising robot is amazing. I’m seeing ads for prints of “The Angelus” by Millet.
Hunt,
You are saying then, that only “traditional practices” should be allowed to be broadcast? You seem to be drawing a line somewhere, that would exclude a new atheist organization on campus. Why?