A historic mosque gets brought down in India. No one claims individual responsibility though a political party cashes on the prejudices it unleashes. Many others repeat how this is not true Hinduism. The mob is blamed. Temples get burnt in Pakistan. No one claims individual responsibility though various parties have no hesitation in being complicit with the mercenaries of hatred who commonly indulge in this. Many repeat that this is not Islam. The mob is blamed. Hundreds of minorities get killed and the unnamed mob is blamed, but we hear the lines being parroted this is not true religion. If it is not authentic religion that is responsible, then I have these questions: 1. Why do the merchants of hatred use the name of religion or justify their action as protecting the honour of religion? What is it about religion that allows them to see their actions as religiously sanctioned? 2. Who is the mob if not part of the society? 3. What do true religious people do about this (mis)use of religion? Do they shout and scream and challenge those indulging in violence in their name? Or do they simply parrot the line this is not true religion and feel their responsibility is finished? Before anyone writes to me hinduism is tolerant or Islam is a religion of peace they better show through their words or actions how they respond to those who kill/discriminate/dehumanise/hate in the name of their religion. If they cannot even try to rescue their religion from these mobs, they are complicit despite their parroting to the contrary.
Posted on: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 21:49:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015