I believe there is insufficient willingness to acknowledge the importance as well as the unimportance of race. Race matters in the basic physical sense, and may therefore affect intelligence, but it does not matter politically in most periods of history, especially periods predating the early modern, which began in the 1500's. The nations of Mexico and Spain are mixtures of white, black and Amerindian race and skin color, and that was clearly considered completely acceptable in the past. To me, this shows that racism is an absurdity, invented in the early modern period. It is contradicted by any genuine belief in tribe, nation, clan, king, emperor, or religion.
We can acknowledge race in it's basic physical sense, but any one who considers his race more important than his most particular loyalties we must consider a traitor. This form of treachery an be exemplified by the actions of the Ustasha, the Croatian Nazis who exterminated Serbs and gypsies because of race. They are traitors to their nation and religion because they sent people who spoke their language and worshipped in catholic churches to death camps merely because of race. The same can be said of the German Nazis and Hutu.
This also shows why religious violence is almost the polar opposite of racism. Any man who would torture Jews out of concern for their salvation obviously dosn't care about race. The medieval Spaniards definitely didn't.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
I am often gripped by a desire for real meaning, real action, and often I wish to turn to activism to do that. However we must always remember that heaven is the most important goal. If we don't focus on heaven there will be very little of value to be found at the end of life.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Atheists and materialists say that there is no justification for believing in spiritual and religious teaching, but if we take that from the other angle, there is no reason to believe in statements about the material world. We believe whatever statement is made about the material world until it is contradicted by some other information, so why shouldn't we treat spiritual knowledge the same way? If we take their argument to the farthest we would even have to reject things we see with our eyes because we have no experimental evidence that proves our eyesight is not an illusion. At that point we would have no reason for doing anything. If we believe in knowledge we must believe in all of it. If it requires experimental proof we have to reject all of it.