Related Posts

The Axis of Evil Speaks to the Great Shaitan

The Boston Globe is running an editorial about the recent Khatami visit to Boston.  They were there when he met with members of the MIT Faculty members.  Some choice quotations: As the people around his table at the MIT Faculty Club laughed, Khatami added: “And Bush and Ahmadinejad are cut from the same cloth. …… Demonstrating his reputed interest in the Western Enlightenment, Khatami at one point cited the British philosopher John Locke, observing that Locke’s reason for separating religion from the state was to protect religion. He invoked Locke to make the point that many Iranians who favor more…

The Mahdi

Father Jake had a question regarding the Mahdi and the use of the name “Mahdi Army” by Muqtada as-Sadr. He’s gone out and done a fair amount of research, and I wanted to add my two cents. From a theological perspective, the idea of the Mahdi is incredibly ill-defined, because the idea of the end days are ill-defined in the Qur’an. While we have a sense that the mountains will crumble, stars will fall from the sky and the sky itself will tear, there is no equivalent to the Book of Revelations in the Qur’an. (For a wonderful discussion of…

2 thoughts on “Idolizing the big 10”

  1. I agree with your comments. Asra Nomani in her book points out that the Saudis are hardcore about pictures of people being idolatrous, but that hasn’t stopped them from plastering Mecca with pictures of the ruling caste. Apparently, not looking directly into the camera is the key difference between idolatry and a halal snapshot.
    It’s hard to believe that Ten Commandments cases are still litigated, but there you go. I’ll predict a split-the-baby (but hardly Solomonaic) decision that will generate litigation (and legal fees) for years still. Here’s my prediction: on a 5-4 vote, displays of the Ten Commandments on public property will be held not to violate constitutional principles of separation of church and state. However, the court will refuse to establish a bright line rule but instead hold that in each case, the question will be whether the display is, in the “totality of the circumstances” for a secular or religious purpose. One “prong” of the test will be how prominent the display is. So a display the size of a house in a public park is out, but a small display in a courthouse along with, say, a display of a copy of the constitution or the magna carta is not. Sometimes, this is as intellectual as constitutional analysis gets.
    But this court is not about to invalidate the countless examples of religious iconography that has always been present in American public life, like prayers before legislative sessions, or even the Court’s baliff’s cry of “God save this Honorable Court” before the Nine take the bench. The last two examples are not implicated directly in the present cases, but you can seen the “slippery slope” that the examples present. On the the hand, I don’t think this Court is prepared to say that it’s ok to have laser light shows over the Capitol building featuring the Ten Commandments and Cecil B. DeMille’s voiceover.
    But of course, I could be wrong. Allahu alam.

  2. Oddly enough, I think I would be OK with the laser light shows. You could argue about the ephemerality of life (Buddhism), the cyclical nature of life (Hinduism), techno-wizadry (Atheism), of course you make the Abrahamics happy. Although I was thinking James Earl Jones for the voice.

Comments are closed.