Introduction take 3

“I bet your Dad beats you and that’s why you hide inside your burqa.”

“So what do you do for fun? Plan terrorist attacks?”

Muslim women are the “easiest targets” of hate violence in America (Donnell, 123). No wonder young Muslims are fleeing religion. Constant attacks in the school halls can often lead to self doubt and hurt feelings. Often, the only education many students receive about Islam comes from CNN reports on terrorist events and NPR discussions on ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). In fact, over 50% of Americans reported not having a "basic understanding" of Islam (Bassiri, 54). But teasing targets are not limited to those who outwardly proclaim their religion with a burqa or hijab. 

“At least you’re not one of those hyper-breeding, Romney worshipping Mormons.”

“Look at me! I’m a Hindu cow! Bow down to me!”

“He probably acts that way because he was raped as an alter boy.”

Children and adolescents are very capable of hurtful comments. At one point or another, I have heard each one of these mentioned comments pointed in mocking disrespect. However, are these juvenile commenters entirely to blame? We, as representatives of our religion, foster animosity towards different religions when we emphasize that religious customs and traditions that we do not follow belong to the strangers we call “them,” instead of who we see as the normal “us.” The word “strange” has Latin roots in the word meaning “foreign” (Mann, 3), indicating something peculiar and odd. Thus, it is our responsibility to narrow the perceived gap between “them” and “us” by helping community members understand the motivations behind different religious customs and practices. 

In our public halls, the decision should not be whether we have a Christmas tree or a Taoist shrine. We should not defensively guard our traditions of making latkes, floating lanterns and painting henna, but turn outwards and share our religious traditions. Bullying and discrimination against religious customs and beliefs is often the product of ignorance. We, as leaders in the community, can combat ignorance by implementing more incorporative religious activities and education in our communities so that the Muslim may grow to understand Easter, the Jew, Ramadan, and the Christian, Yom Kippur. Such actions may include implementing a more comprehensive religious education in public school systems, or holding community holiday events.

Indeed, the crux behind moral judgements is “how choices are made” (Kuykendall, 84). If we can play a part in helping students to make choices based upon a comprehensive understanding of religion and cultures, we can begin to banish the perceived notion of “them” and “us.” After all, Diwali, Loy Krathong and Hanukkah all represent a “festival of lights” to Hindus, Buddhists and Jews.

Introduction Take 2

“I bet your Dad beats you and that’s why you hide inside your burqa.”

“At least you’re not one of those hyper-breeding Utah Mormons.”

“Look at me! I’m a Hindu cow! Bow down to me!”

Children and adolescents are very capable of hurtful comments. At one point or another, I have heard each one of these comments pointed towards a friend in mocking disrespect. However, the children themselves are not entirely to blame. We foster animosity towards different religions when we emphasize that religious customs and traditions that we do not understand belong to “them,” instead of “us.” Thus, it is our responsibility to narrow the perceived gap between “them” and “us” by helping community members understand the motivations behind different religious customs and practices. 

In our public halls, it should not be a choice between having a Christmas tree or Diwali candles or a Taoist shrine. We should not defensively guard our traditions of making latkes, floating lanterns and painting henna, but turn outwards and share our religious traditions. Bullying and discrimination against religious customs and beliefs is often the product of ignorance. We, as leaders in the community, can combat ignorance by implementing more incorporative religious activities and education in our communities so that the Muslim may grow to understand Easter, the Jew, Ramadan, and the Christian, Yom Kippur. Such actions may include implementing a more comprehensive religious education in public school systems, or holding community holiday events. 

Indeed, the crux behind moral judgements is “how choices are made” (Kuykendall, 84). If we can play a part in helping students to make choices based upon a comprehensive understanding of religion and cultures, we can begin to eliminate the perceived notion of a “them” and “us” perception. After all, Diwali, Loy Krathong and Hanukkah all mean a “festival of lights” to Hindus, Buddhists and Jews. 

Introduction draft

“I bet your Dad beats you and that’s why you hide inside your burqa.”

“At least you’re not one of those hyper-breeding Utah Mormons.”

“What do Buddhists do all day? Sit under a tree and mediate?”

“Look at me! I’m a Hindu cow! Bow down to me!”

Children and adolescents are capable of hurtful comments. At one point or another in my educational career, I have heard each one of these comments pointed towards a friend in mocking disrespect. Animosity towards religions is reinforced by the notion that things we do not understand belong to “them,” and not “us.” Thus, we must narrow the perceived gap between “them” and “us” by helping community members understand the motivations behind different religious customs and practices. 

In our public halls, it should not be a choice between having a Christmas tree or Diwali candles or a Taoist shrine. We should not defensively guard our traditions of latkes, floating lanterns and henna, but turn outwards and share our traditions. Bullying and discrimination against religious customs and beliefs is often the product of ignorance. One way, we, as leaders in the community, can combat ignorance is by implementing more incorporative religious activities and education in our communities so that the Muslim may grow to understand Easter, the Jew, Ramadan, and the Christian, Yom Kippur. Such actions may include implementing a more comprehensive religious education in public school systems, or holding community holiday events. 

Indeed, the crux behind moral judgements is “how choices are made” (Kuykendall, 84). If we can play a part in helping students to make choices in how they treat others based upon a comprehensive understanding of religion and cultures, we can begin to eliminate the perceived notion of a “them” and “us” population. After all, Diwali, Loy Krathong and Hanukkah translate to a “festival of lights” to Hindus, Buddhists and Jews.

Issue Paper: the Palace of Justice

The Palace of Justice: Martin Luther King

The Anatomy of Intolerance

Kambiz Ghanea Bassiri

The bigger issue: lack of general education about religions

The smaller issue: Facing Islamophobia in American public schools

Why Islamophobia?

Given that this division persists, even though the majority of Americans admit that they do not “have a good basic understanding of the teachings and beliefs of Islam,” it seems clear that attitudes towards Islam have less to do with the religion and its practitioners than it does with current events and media reports, which have indelibly associated Islam with violence in the American public square. (54)

(Look up: “Bands of Others?” Attitudes towards Muslims in Contemporary American Society.” The Journal of Politics  71:3 (July 2009), pp. 847-862)

Anti Muslim sentiments are the manufactured byproducts of the propaganda campaigns of a limited but influential number of Islamophobes.

While public opinion scholars and researches of Islamophobia agree that anti Muslim attitudes are on the rise and politically significant, there is no clear explanation of its basis. (56)

Consequently, both the media and the state reinforce through their actions, if not always by words, the association of Islam with violence that has ostracized a segment of the American population on the basis of religion.” (59)

“In the current climate of escalated religiously motivated violence since the terrible attacks of September 11, Muslim women in hijab (headscarf) are particularly vulnerable because, for many years, western media and literature have consistently portrayed covered women as the predominant image of Islam. As a result, Muslim women in headscarves and other Muslim style clothing are often the first and easiest targets of hate violence.” Donnell (2003: 123)

Teaching With Sensitivity:

“This animosity is reinforced by the notion propagated by some that Islam is “their” religion, not “ours.” Such views are untenable considering that over six million Americans profess faith in Islam, and Muslims comprise one of the largest religious groups in the United States.”

What can we do?

Interpreting their religion in line with national interest. (63)

To profess oneself a Buddhist, a Muslim, or anything but Protestant, Catholic or Jew, even when one’s Americanness is otherwise beyond question would imply being foreign. (64)

I’m a Mormon ad

make your religion relevant to the larger community

strengthen your own people-pretty much the only thing you can do at the grassroots level. Get involved with some of the bigger organizations maybe?

Sharia: moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion-the infallible law of God

Is Sharia like the law of Moses?

watch: Mistaken Identity, Sikh’s in America

“Look, 9/11 was a huge traumatic shock….but the Cold War is gone. All the theologies and ideologies that were going to supplant ours are gone. The communists, the fascists-get serious! The few authoritarian regimes that are left around are peanuts!….We can’t let terrorism suddenly become the substitute for Red China and the Soviet Union as our all encompassing enemy, this great Muslim extremist, monolithic thing from somewhere in Mauritania all the way through Muslim India. They’re all different. It’s not going to come together that way. (Secretary of State Colin Powell)

• “school districts might consider establishing some form of interfaith education committee to help define and develop a mutually acceptable format for teaching about religion in the classroom. Such a group should be comprised of open minded, enthusiastic and committed parents, teachers and administrators striving to enhance sensitivity and balance in the classroom.” (teaching with sensitivity, 55)
• avoid reductionism, open ended seeking not consensus but understanding and appreciation of the values that lead to different religious expressions, especially with the objective of breaking down stereotypes and of helping students to accept the internal validity of religious experiences other than their own.
• ie) organize for there to be a room for salah at school
• educate teachers on Ramadan and other cultural customs

defining terms:

Islamophobia: “emblematic expression of contemporary biopolitical racism” (Tyrer 2011)

The issues:

Islamic teenagers are being made fun of

people are prejudice against Islamic teenagers, particular those with hijab and burqa= “easiest targets of hate violence”

media reports and current events “indelibly associated Islam with violence in the American public square”

We are, thus, left with a media that, rather than providing explanations of the political realities of our time, reflects society’s understanding of Islam and violence and has created a looping effect that fuels Islamophobia. (Bassiri, 58)

“Muslim youth are seen as trapped by an anti modernity that is also inherently anti-Western and opposed to liberal, secular democacy; young males are inextricably associated with the spectre of radical Islam and fundamentalist militancy, and Muslim females are seen inherently oppressed by their religion and cultural traditions and in need of rescue by ‘the West.’ (Razack 2008)-from the far right to the mainstream

Preparing to write

What this paper should answer:

• Why are young adults fleeing religious services?
• What consequences does this have for young adults or the country in general?
• How might our particular congregation bring back youth?
• What are the more appealing alternatives to religion? When did this trend start and why?

Things to look up:

• CAIR
• interesting, in “Islamophobia and Dissent,” the author found that the hardships they had to face in a post 9/11 world strengthened the people, not weakened them or caused dissent.

Really rough draft. More like a jotting of disconnected ideas, tangled with personal thoughts.

A Government In Thrall of Religion

Frank R Zindler

A Call to Atheist America: How Zindler Reaffirms Religion must be Expelled from Government

In A Government in Thrall of Religion, Zindler launches a series of strikes against President Bush’s policies and religion, making an emotional appeal for Atheist America to “restore a semblance of sanity” in American politics. This piece is rife with subtle wordings that undermine Bush’s authority, humorous biblical analogies undermining administrative choices, repetitive phrasing and questions that create draw attention to certain issues, structural parallels to the Declaration of Independence, strong images of nature that makes primitive the role of religion, and makes radical accusations designed to arouse strong emotions. By confidently implementing these tools in his article, Zindler creates an emotionally powerful but logically weak call to restore the American government to “the road of reality.”

Subtle Wording

Zindler demonstrates personal biases in his subtle wording. While these wordings strengthen Zindler’s arguments by undermining Bush’s authority and validity of his decisions, it also weakens his argument because it makes his own biases very transparent.  REPETITIVE Bush is consistently referred to as “Mr Bush,” as if to indicate he is not worthy of being called the President. He is only referred to as “President Bush” when he is being made fun of, such as when Zindler compares Bush to the “angel…from the Garden of Eden.” By recognizing Bush as a President only to compare him to what Zindler perceives to be a whimsical fictional tyrant, Zindler discounts Bush’s authority as President. Zindler also manipulates adjectives to demonize Bush. For instance, he accuses Bush of siding with “greedy, conscienceless” corporations and “suppressing” funds. The use of these strong adjectives causes the reader to associate the subject, Bush, with these words with negative connotations. For instance, the use of the word “suppressing” in regards to funds implies that Bush is singlehandedly preventing progress that would otherwise been easily carried out.

Government in Thrall with Religion also utilizes biblical analogies in order to poke fun at religion. This provides contrast with the serious subject Zindler is addressing, undermines the seriousness of religion and makes him seem more knowledgeable to his audience. Pertaining to Bush, Zindler says that “He knoweth not what he doeth.” By framing Bush’s ignorance in this context, Zindler makes himself appear as the more knowledgeable of the two. Here, Zindler assumes a position of authority as the narrator of events, describing a small child.  WHAT? YOU’RE NOT MAKING ANY SENSE ON PAPER SARAH. 

There is a consistent use of repetitive phrases and questions throughout this piece. Zindler attacks Bush’s actions through the repetition of the “If he…[insert synonym for ‘understood’]” in order to point out perceived failings in Bush’s policy decisions. The use of short, impactful repetitions allows the reader to clearly see the failings of the former President. WHY THOUGH? While this is effective emotional manipulation as the reader clearly is able to see the many faults of the President, at times it oversimplifies, summarizing a complex issue in a few words only allowing the audience to see a single perspective of an issue. GIVE EXAMPLE HERE

This piece ends with a repetitious “we must…” call to action. This emotional revival almost takes on a sermonic rhythm of calling “godless Americans” to remedy the malady of religion. While the rhythm and repetition of this technique is emotionally appealing, it fails to make logical sense. For instance, Zindler argues that ignorance spurred by religion “threatens our species with extinction.” What evidence does Zindler have behind this claim? NEEDS SOMETHING HERE BUT I CAN’T THINK RIGHT NOW

Loose Parallel structure to Declaration of Independence

States what the government should look like, then follows this with a list of grievances. Instead of tea taxes, it’s pulling out of cloning projects. The only difference is Zidler ends with a call to action.

Similarly, this speech echoes the structure of the Declaration of Independence. This famed document first has a preamble describing the extraordinary context for a declaration, boldly declares perceived truths of the world, lists grievances against King George, then declares the desired rights. The structure of this article first describes the context—lack of separation between church and state in today’s government, boldly declares the perceived truth that “Nothing fails like prayer,” proceeds to list grievances against President Bush, then declares the desired outcome—for “godless Americans” to change the world. By patterning Zindler’s argument against the document that was one of the first steps of creating an independent America, Zindler infers that this issue holds the same amount of importance as Americans declaring independence from Britain. Likewise by creating this comparison, Zidler effectively makes deep accusations that the seriousness of the tyrannous actions of President Bush are like the actions of King George. CONCLUDING SENTENCE HERE

At times, this speech resembled a creative writing exercise more than a serious speech. Zindler uses many extreme images subjecting religion to being an insensitive and demeaning entity. He calls religious followers “minions…ignorant of everything”, describes faith as a “dark and swelling tide,” and has priests feeding at “monetary mangers created for the public weal.” By comparing religious followers to “minions,” Zindler implies that religious people are simply blind followers of priests and pastors. Zindler confidently and singularly states his case then moves on to his point. This both hinders and helps his argument. Logically, this makes no sense as he provides no evidence to back up his claim but is emotionally impactful as he asserts himself confidently, allowing the audience to place trust in his claims because he trusts himself. MAKE THIS MAKE SENSE. IT MAKES NO SENSE SARAH. By placing priests feeding at “monetary mangers,” Zindler victimizes religious parishes. Priests are victimized because they are reduced to animalistic status, indicating that they cannot think or act for themselves because they are simply animals. While this is clearly a personal opinion with no evidence apparent in the document, it remains powerful because it is a memorable analogy. SOME SORT OF CONCLUSION HERE.

By making radical accusations against religion and the Bush administration, Zindler reassures his atheist audience that his views are indeed similar to their views. Furthermore, however illogical pointed and unsubstantiated accusations such as “religion fosters ignorance” may seem, they do make his speech poignant and memorable. Without substantiated evidence for his claims, Zindler does not tire his listener with listening to his reasoning but assumes the audience can come to agree with him. WHAT SARAH? WHAT YOU ARE WRITING MAKES NO SENSE. 

In conclusion, Zindler creates an effective attack on religion and the Bush administration for a primarily atheistic audience. His radical but unsubstantiated claims and powerful imagery serve as a double edged sword; they reaffirm the confidence he has in his positions but  logically make little sense. The parallels he plays between the constitution and the bible draw upon emotions of patriotism. For according to Zindler, religion is child’s folly and only the educated have the capacity to stop it from “threatening our species with extinction.”

Thesis Proposal/Outline and random thoughts

A Government In Thrall of Religion

Frank R Zindler

Zindler gives an emotional call to Atheist America to “restore a semblance of sanity” in American politics by launching a series of strikes against President Bush’s policies and religion. This piece is rife with subtle wordings that undermine Bush’s authority, humorous biblical analogies undermining administrative choices, repetitive phrasing and questions that create draw attention to certain issues, structural parallels to the Declaration of Independence, strong nature imagery that makes primitive the role of religion and radical accusations designed to arouse strong emotions. By confidently implementing these tools in his article, Zindler creates an emotionally powerful but logically weak call to restore the American government to a “the road of reality.”

Subtle Wording

Zindler refers to Bush as “Mr Bush” and refrains from addressing him as a President unless he is mocking his position.

• “President Bush, like the angel who chased Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden.”

Consistent use of the preposition anti-, and words with negative connotations

-anti-environmental, suppress, greedy, consciousless, etc.

“He knoweth not what he doeth.”

Biblical Humor through extreme examples

• “He knoweth not what he doeth”
• President Bush, like the angel who chased Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, does not want us to have a chance to eat the fruit of the tree of life.

What purpose does this play? Zindler is trying to say he knows all the biblical stories and is just as in tune with what the bible may say as his opponents are.

Repetitive Phrasing and Questions

• “If he… (had a firm grasp, could understand, realized…)
• Mr Bush (accusation, deprived, pulled out of…)
• Repetition of “We must.”

Loose Parallel structure to Declaration of Independence

• States what the government should look like, then follows this with a list of grievances. Instead of tea taxes, it’s pulling out of cloning projects. The only difference is Zidler ends with a call to action.

Nature Imagery

• dark and swelling tide of superstition
• foxes to guard our henhouses
• chance to eat the fruit of the tree of life
• acorns are not oak trees
• Trojan Horse in a public barn
• horse must be put out to pasture in the churchyard

Radical Accusations

• Nothing fails like prayer
• Mispronunciation of the word nuclear would seem to signal the total depth of his understanding of physics
• He can collude with greedy and conscienceless corporations
• He thinks ecologists are just wacko tree hugging bird watching eccentrics who don’t understand economics.
• It is the ignorance fostered by religion that now threatens our very species with extinction.

If religion fosters ignorance, why are we still alive?

What evidence do you have that prayer always fails?

Where did your ideas come from?

But do the said questions apply to an atheist audience?

Faith in America

Purpose of the piece: To appease those who feel that Romney's religion is incongruous with being an American leader and "calm Americans' concerns about his Mormon religion" (see next article). The official reason would probably just be because Romney wanted to address the role of religion in America.

Ethos: Governor Romney establishes ethos by sharing personal experiences of how he is a "religious, moral man," attempts to identify with the reader by appealing to those with a faith in God, and implies that he is trying to identify with all who are 'good, moral people.’

Pathos: Romney uses concrete examples such as explaining his parents marched for civil rights and worked in a soup kitchen. He also uses strong phrases such as, "theocratic tyranny" and "symphony of faith" as opposed to "secular government" or "faithful group." 

Logos: Romney's arguments are accountable as he mainly uses life examples. It seems his target audience was other religious groups, trying to convince them that Mormons border on "normality." I don't think his scope reached atheists, because he basically disregards their existence.  His words are relevant to a predominantly Christian audience, but don’t reach much further than that. I also felt that his argument was too focused on the faith aspect. This is especially not useful because a lot of people that this was meant to reach don’t have faith in the same thing. In fact, I’m pretty sure that the only similarities in faith was that both the audience and speaker thought they were right.  I think he could have also done a better job distinguishing religion as he sees it and religion as it is manifest in derogatory manners elsewhere. He addresses the “creed of conversion by conquest” but doesn’t talk about extremists and how to differ between the two. I think his approach that people and religion are inseparable could have been approached differently.