Downlo

A very interesting list that discusses some recent-ish trends in religion— from Judaism to Latino Catholicism to the ‘new nihilism’—that haven’t been widely covered in the press. I’m particularly irked by #6 Upside-down Ideas about Religious Liberty:

The dramatic new push for religious liberty exemptions for faith-connected providers of taxpayer-supported health services underscores the radical way in which understandings of religious liberty have changed in recent years. It’s not that the push for exemptions hasn’t made the news; it’s that no one is writing (at least in the MSM) about the radical nature of the shift. In the past, the social service arms of religious bodies understood that if they wanted public money they would need to honor public law regarding the disposition of the money: i.e., provide the full range of mandated services on a universal basis. We used to say to objectors, “If you don’t like the mandate, don’t take the money.”

Apparently such a commonsensical response is now insufficiently deferential to religion. More and more people seem willing to say that if a Catholic health care provider doesn’t “believe” in providing reproductive health care to women, that private belief can trump public law. This is a particularly thorny problem because of the many regional health care system mergers involving Catholic partners: there are now many places in the country where, if a dominant provider that toes the bishops’ line won’t provide the service, area women will be out of luck and deprived of benefits they are entitled to receive by law.

See also the refusal of religious pharmacists to fill orders for Plan B, the repeated attempts by fundamentalists to force public schools to teach creationism, and the mandate of abstinence-only sex. ed. by politicians and school boards (despite the fact that it’s led to dire results). Absurdly deferential treatment of religious folks (Christian ones, at least) is becoming the new normal in this country (here’s one example from this past year). I fully blame the GOP for courting evangelicals in the ’90s and fostering an atmosphere in which the views of far-right Christians have become privileged over everyone else’s.

This state of affairs completely undermines what the Founders intended with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Freedom to practice your religion without state interference does NOT mean that government must therefore privilege your rights over everyone else’s. If a Catholic hospital is funded with taxpayer money, then they can’t use religious reasons to restrict the use of that money, i.e. not provide reproductive healthcare.

latimes:

downlo replied to your photo:

I’m sure the sincerity of your grief is correlated to your position in North Korean society. Defectors obviously have little love for Dear Leader, as would those mistreated by the regime.

Actually, you’d be surprised! It’s not so one-sided. Here’s an article about some defectors’ mixed emotions.

I was being a bit of a pedant. The original post was about defectors questioning the sincerity of the national grieving in North Korea. I wanted to point out that a) there are people in North Korea who are still invested in the regime, especially elites. There seems to be a common idea in the West that everyone in North Korea just hates it there and is being kept in mainly by force or brainwashing. Which is wrong, of course. Any student or close observer of politics can tell you that there are plenty of understandable and pragmatic reasons why people will willingly support (or abide) even a brutal dictatorship.

For one thing, there’s self-interest, which is why I mentioned the correlation between your opinion of a regime and your place in the society under that regime. For another, I think most westerners underestimate the role of nationalism and patriotism has had in propping up the Kim regime.

So being deeply critical of your government or opting to leave your country doesn’t necessarily mean you stop being patriotic or nationalistic (any raging lefty who’s lived through the Bush years can understand this). That’s why I said, that the defectors have “little love for Dear Leader” and didn’t mention their feelings about the country as a whole.

And b) it is completely understandable that a defector would be skeptical of North Korean media, etc. That skepticism, while well-founded, doesn’t necessarily mean they’re right in this case.

So that’s what I meant by my remark. But the reply box only allows you 250 characters!

(Source: Los Angeles Times)