Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 05:14 PM Sep 2013

5 faith facts on religion in Syria

By Jay Loschky, Published: September 25 at 10:32 am



Women chant anti-government slogans during a demonstration in Idlib in northern Syria. (Rodrigo Abd – AP)

Syria has been embroiled in civil conflict for more than two years, with little end in sight. And, by some observations, religious intolerance and inflexible identities are a major reason why. The plethora of religious groups and actors in Syria and their ever-shifting relationships make the country a confusing place even for the most seasoned of regional experts.

As we analyze this complex situation, it’s important to ask: What are the most important religious dynamics shaping the Syrian conflict? What are the core interests of Syria’s religious groupings? And how easily can the country’s jumbled politico-religious landscape be demystified? Here are five keys to understanding the role of religion in the Syrian conflict.

1. Prior to the conflict, Syria was a regional beacon of religious tolerance.

Though it may be difficult to see now, Syria has historically been a successful example of co-existence in the Middle East. Home to ancient Christian communities, a variety of Muslim sects, and several indigenous and heterodox religions, Syria’s culture has always been more heterogeneous than Arab lands in the Gulf and North Africa. As fellow ‘People of the Book,’ Christians and Jews (prior to 1948) lived easily alongside their Muslim neighbors, while the country’s deserts and mountains provided geographic sanctuary to less protected religious and ethnic minority groups. Though sectarianism always lurked in its different forms somewhere beneath the surface, prior to the 2011 uprising, more than 87 percent of Syrians ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that they always treat members of other faiths with respect according to Gallup data. Meanwhile, in 2009, another 78 percent of Syrians said that they had a positive opinion of Christians, while 5 percent said they had a negative opinion. In pre-conflict Syria, it was common for friends of other religions to attend each other’s weddings and funerals, and it was considered rude to inquire into someone’s religious background.

2. Despite alliances with Iran and Hezbollah, the Alawites are Syria’s most secular faith group.

Following the decline of Christian power in Lebanon and the end of Sunni rule in Iraq, Syria’s ruling Alawites are the last of the three great minority-led regimes resulting from the “divide and rule” tactics of colonial powers. As an esoteric religion with only 12% of Syria’s population, Alawite beliefs and practices are not well-understood even among other Muslims, partially owing to the historical practice of taqiyya whereby Alawites hid their beliefs in order to avoid persecution. An 8th century offshoot of Shia Islam, the Alawite faith is often considered heretical by both Sunni and Shia Muslims alike. Unlike mainstream Muslims, the Alawites do not consider the Five Pillars of Islam to be obligatory. Culturally distinct from other Muslims, Alawites don’t have mosques, they don’t encourage their women to wear headscarves, and many choose neither to fast during Ramadan nor to pray. Instead, Alawites venerate the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law Ali, for whom they are named, with a zeal which some other Muslim groups have labeled as deification.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/09/25/5-faith-facts-on-religion-in-syria/

The little girl in the picture gives me hope.

37 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
5 faith facts on religion in Syria (Original Post) rug Sep 2013 OP
Hope? I suppose it depends on whether that's a peace sign or a victory sign. Jim__ Sep 2013 #1
Can you make out what's on her fingers? rug Sep 2013 #2
No. Can you? Jim__ Sep 2013 #3
My best guess is a flag. Maybe. rug Sep 2013 #6
Really great summary. Such a tremendously sad situation at this time. cbayer Sep 2013 #4
The other 3 keys, to be brief. . . DinahMoeHum Sep 2013 #5
The little girl... MellowDem Sep 2013 #7
Lol! rug Sep 2013 #8
That little girl is a seething mass of intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance being driven cbayer Sep 2013 #9
I'm on hold with CPS. rug Sep 2013 #10
Make sure to tell them about Ireland. cbayer Sep 2013 #11
. rug Sep 2013 #12
Erm... MellowDem Sep 2013 #21
Distinction: you are right, and they are wrong. kwassa Sep 2013 #30
I think educating children... MellowDem Sep 2013 #32
So SCIENCE to you is.... PassingFair Sep 2013 #13
No, it's just a jab at another member. cbayer Sep 2013 #14
Her mother, despite being a science teacher... PassingFair Sep 2013 #15
No, that will come later, if at all... MellowDem Sep 2013 #18
Here's the thing, MD. You are the one who is not responding in any meaningful way to cbayer Sep 2013 #23
The OP is called "5 facts about religion in Syria" MellowDem Sep 2013 #24
Your post gives me little hope. rug Sep 2013 #25
Speaking of posters... MellowDem Sep 2013 #26
Given you felt a need to include my remark in your post . . . rug Sep 2013 #27
I appreciate your response here. cbayer Sep 2013 #28
Thanks for your response... MellowDem Sep 2013 #29
Perhaps if we clarify definitions, we will see where we agree. cbayer Sep 2013 #31
We seem to agree on the definitions... MellowDem Sep 2013 #33
What and where are the statistics that back up this statement: cbayer Sep 2013 #34
I've provided you with statistics before... MellowDem Sep 2013 #35
Here we go with the personal insults. cbayer Sep 2013 #36
I suppose you are.... MellowDem Sep 2013 #37
A non-sequiter response? MellowDem Sep 2013 #16
That may be but at least it was spelled correctly. rug Sep 2013 #17
It's totally unrelated to anything I said... MellowDem Sep 2013 #19
It's more closely related than you may care to admit. rug Sep 2013 #20
Actually, it isn't... MellowDem Sep 2013 #22
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
6. My best guess is a flag. Maybe.
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 07:53 PM
Sep 2013

If so, you're right, she's rooting for one side, the little snot.

DinahMoeHum

(21,787 posts)
5. The other 3 keys, to be brief. . .
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 05:46 PM
Sep 2013
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/09/25/5-faith-facts-on-religion-in-syria/

3. The Sunni/Shia dimension of the Syrian conflict has a greater basis in international rivalries than on-the-ground realities.

4. Many Christians support the regime, but they support stability even more*.

5. Hardline Islamist agendas likely have only a narrow base of support.


*(the bold emphasis is mine - DMH)

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
7. The little girl...
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 08:43 PM
Sep 2013

Is almost assuredly being indoctrinated into a religion that is inherently bigoted and misogynistic. A religion that has a vengeful, tyrannical god that promises eternal torture to innocents that don't believe.

A real hope is that people stop indoctrinating their children in such hateful creeds all over the world, and that such creeds are discarded.

Hopefully the little girl escapes her indoctrination, but statistics are against it. Heck, most still don't escape it in the US.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
8. Lol!
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 09:36 PM
Sep 2013


Your clairvoyance is stunning.

Richard Dawkins launches children's summer camp for atheists

-snip -

The emphasis on critical thinking is epitomised by a test called the Invisible Unicorn Challenge. Children will be told by camp leaders that the area around their tents is inhabited by two unicorns.

The activities of these creatures, of which there will be no physical evidence, will be regularly discussed by organisers, yet the children will be asked to prove that the unicorns do not exist.

Anyone who manages to prove this will win a £10 note - which features an image of Charles Darwin, the father of evolutionary theory - signed by Dawkins, a former professor of the public understanding of science at Oxford University.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/5674934/Richard-Dawkins-launches-childrens-summer-camp-for-atheists.html

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
9. That little girl is a seething mass of intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance being driven
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:26 AM
Sep 2013

by childhood indoctrination.

Someone do something!!!!

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
21. Erm...
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 09:09 PM
Sep 2013

They will teach kids about atheism... Not indoctrinate them in it. These are obvious and important distinctions.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
32. I think educating children...
Sun Sep 29, 2013, 08:46 PM
Sep 2013

On what atheism is is very important. There is a lot of confusion and misinformation about atheism, some of it deliberate.

Same goes for knowing what the texts of major religions say.

Knowledge is power.

PassingFair

(22,434 posts)
13. So SCIENCE to you is....
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:46 PM
Sep 2013

"intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance"?

My niece asked me a question about evolution when she was over for dinner.
I gave her the English version of that book.

She spent the evening looking it over and asked me if she could borrow it.

I told her she could, but at the door, when she was leaving, she gave it back
to me and told me that she "felt like she was sinning" when she was reading it.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
14. No, it's just a jab at another member.
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:51 PM
Sep 2013

Sorry that your niece feels that way. If it's just about science, which she certainly must be exposed to in school, I would wonder what about it made her feel like she was sinning.

Did you ask?

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
18. No, that will come later, if at all...
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 08:59 PM
Sep 2013

But your apparent defense of childhood indoctrination into hateful creeds is something to behold. You don't defend your position with any relevant point, you attack the poster.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
23. Here's the thing, MD. You are the one who is not responding in any meaningful way to
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 11:31 AM
Sep 2013

the content of the OP.

It doesn't matter what an OP in this group is about, you will repeat the same dogma and use exactly the same language to make exactly the same point.

That you get the kind of responses you do should not surprise you.

I'm not attacking you, I am reflecting back to you your style, a style that makes it pretty much impossible to have any kind of real conversation with you.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
24. The OP is called "5 facts about religion in Syria"
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 07:09 PM
Sep 2013

And the OP said the little girl gives him hope. Given that the topic was religion in Syria, I think pointing out that childhood indoctrination is a huge part of the problem was very relevant, and that as long as it's going on, there's not lots of hope to be had.

Your response was irrelevant and directed at me. You need to look up what dogma means. I say my opinion on stories. If you don't like them, or agree, whatever. You can say why and have a discussion, or you can ignore them. You can disagree vehemently, you can attack my opinions, though I recommend you try to do so explaining your reasoning or opinion.

You're not reflecting me. It's simple. I say my opinion, you get offended, and you attack me and ignore the subject. You really seem to get mad when I say my opinion multiple times. I don't know what to say other than grow up, or maybe think about why what I say offends you so much you respond like you do.

I'm not the one responding to your posts with irrelevant passive-aggressive snarky attacks on you. I will admit I've been goaded into responding similarly by some posters who attack me in this manner first, since then it's fair game, but I'm trying to stop doing that now, it's not worth it.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
26. Speaking of posters...
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 07:19 PM
Sep 2013

With passive-aggressive responses that ignore the subject...

Hello rug

Hope you are enjoying this beautiful Friday.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
27. Given you felt a need to include my remark in your post . . .
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 07:25 PM
Sep 2013

it would be rather silly not to expect a comment.

I hope you are mellow tonight.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
28. I appreciate your response here.
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 07:45 PM
Sep 2013

Although I would point out that telling me to grow up and that I need to look up dogma is pretty inconsistent with what you are saying I should do.

Be that as it may, I respect that you have laid out your take on this here.

We disagree about children and religious indoctrination. I think that being raised in a religious community can be toxic, but it can also be a very positive experience. It all depends on the community.

Since we know nothing of this little girl, I don't think either of us could make a definitive statement on where she is coming from.

But when you take the hard stand that she must be suffering from "childhood indoctrination", it sounds like dogma to me. It's a term you use a lot and pretty consistently use it to describe all children who are being raised in a religion.

You present it in an authoritative manner and as incontrovertibly true in a way that allows for no questioning. To me, that's dogma.

This leaves no room for discussion.

But I do apologize for being snarky. It was unfair and disrespectful.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
29. Thanks for your response...
Sun Sep 29, 2013, 03:25 PM
Sep 2013

What I say is my opinion, not the end all be all authority. If you criticize my opinion, I won't respond by saying I'm right, just because. I'll try to address the points made.

I can't make a definitive statement on the child, which is why I made it a probability statement, and really it's a comment on the currently socially accepted practice of indoctrinating children into ecertain religious beliefs and thinking that's A-OK. But what I think is absolutely true is that Islam (and quite a few other religions) are inherently bigoted and misogynistic and promote all sorts of terrible behavior. I come to that conclusion from their own texts.

I personally blelieve indoctrination is always immoral. Yes, that even means indoctrinating someone in "good" beliefs. Can religion be a force for good? Sure. But it's not necessary to do good, and it's fraught with danger for doing bad. Faith is a dangerous concept. It cannot be reasoned with. It makes no sense. It glorfies gullibility. Combined with the idea of a perfectly good, all powerful being, it's a recipe for disaster.

Considering people indoctrinate their children into a religion all the time in the US, it's still mainstream and definitely not thought of as indoctrination by many people. That's simply because they lack perspective, it's a symptom of religious privilege keeping people blind to the realities of religion. Different rules are applied. The perspective is changing in the US though, slowly, and more and more parents are choosing not to indoctrinate them themselves (though, there are still many neighbors, organizations, and communities that will try to do so).

And just to be clear, teaching children about various religions is not indoctrination, it's education. Telling children unprovable, unfalsifiable claims are the truth is. That's all that most religions do.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
31. Perhaps if we clarify definitions, we will see where we agree.
Sun Sep 29, 2013, 03:42 PM
Sep 2013

If by indoctrination we mean that a person is given a set of ideas that they are expected to swallow whole and never question, I agree with you.

But what if religion is introduced to a child in a way where they are encouraged to question it, to explore different paths and come to their own conclusions? And what if those children choose to believe in something unverifiable?

I can't deny that within some religions there is indoctrination. But it's not universal, imo.

I also can't deny that the texts associated with the major religions promote misogyny and bigotry, but if looked at in the context of the time they were written, those things may longer make sense.

There are women within these religious groups fighting hard for a different way of seeing and treating women. There have been major changes within major religions towards GLBT people. While we clearly have a long way to go, change has occurred and continues to occur.

These texts can be used to promote positive change. I've got not problem with cherry picking.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
33. We seem to agree on the definitions...
Sun Sep 29, 2013, 09:34 PM
Sep 2013

but maybe disagree on the prevalence of indoctrination in religion. I think indoctrination is nearly universal with religion. Statistics back it up, and the religious beliefs themselves promote indoctrination. Any faith based belief relies primarily on childhood indoctrination, since there is nothing else to support the idea. Other tools include social or government sanctioned pressure or incentives, which are very strong in some countries. I think it is a big part of why a given population that indoctrinated their children in religion generally maintains the same or similar percentages of those who believe, while those who don't, or do it less and less, see their populations having more unbelievers and a wider array of denominations.

Relatively speaking, few religions encourage children to question the basic foundation of the belief system. Some say they do, but some of those are disingenuous in how they "allow" certain types of questioning and how they respond to it. Religions have had centuries to develop apologetics/manipulation to explain away the many inconsistencies and logical fallacies of their belief systems.

If a child chooses completely on their own to believe in something unverifiable (which seems rare, there is always some outside influence), if they were my child I would say why I believe it makes no sense to believe those things, using logic and reason, and point out the negative consequences of believing things for no good reason. For example, if they believed there was an invisible monster in their room, hiding under the bed. If my child continued to believe in unverifiable things, then there would be little I could do, unless it was a symptom of a mental illness.

As for the texts, the claim is that they are the word of god. Context means nothing with such a claim. Yes, I realize that through the use of intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance (seriously, this is a legitimate use of the terms I believe) people are able to cherry pick. But asking people to be intellectually dishonest and engage in cognitive dissonance merely to be able to reconcile a belief system with the practical considerations of the modern world shows the weakness of the belief system, and ultimately, it's uselessness.

Yes, these religions are changing to survive in modern society. But their foundation is still just as weak. A religion may change so that it is now über progressive, but if someone challenges their beliefs, if their response for their political or moral positions is "God, wants it this way, and my proof is this book and lots of convoluted reasoning to interpret it in such and such way", that's not a good thing. Faith is never a good thing.

Women fighting for change in society or even in religions would have much more success by leaving misogynist religions altogether. They would have even more success, in my opinion, by leaving religion altogether. Religious women who stick in their misogynist religion have to argue for change on religious grounds, which can be an exercise in futility in many religions. Really, the only thing that has changed some religions is simply the threat of people leaving them because of their dogma.

The Mormons changing their positions on blacks and polygamy is an obvious, recent example of this sort of terrible, dishonest opportunism religion has always engaged in. And it begs the question again, what is the point of religion as a belief system? It shows how useless and opportunistic it is, as a belief system.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
34. What and where are the statistics that back up this statement:
Mon Sep 30, 2013, 10:13 AM
Sep 2013

"indoctrination is nearly universal with religion".

I've never seen any data that has looked at that, but would be very happy to look at it. Again, I do not challenge that it happens, I'm just not certain that it happens to the degree that you think it does.

I had to stop reading when I got to the intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance. Sorry, but it seriously turns me off.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
35. I've provided you with statistics before...
Mon Sep 30, 2013, 07:55 PM
Sep 2013

But you are not mature enough to have a discussion it seems. You get so offended by opinions, you refuse to read further.

I don't care if my opinion "seriously turns you off". Your lack of addressing my points is good evidence to me you have no response.

Your offense is seriously baffling to me, but shows how insecure your position must be if you can't address legitimate criticism.

If you want to discuss things further, I can provide you with the plentiful evidence that religion relies heavily on childhood indoctrination for their membership numbers and not adult conversion. The evidence is so overwhelming and obvious as to be a bit silly to think otherwise, in my opinion. The idea that a 99 percent Islamic country that remains 99 percent over multiple generations, where the practice of religious indoctrination from childhood is ubiquitous and part and parcel of being a member of that religion, did so mostly because of adult conversions, would take a level of self-delusion or extreme naïveté.

But, my honest opinion is that this is a losing argument for you, and you're bowing out with an incredibly weak "I'm offended".

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
36. Here we go with the personal insults.
Mon Sep 30, 2013, 08:00 PM
Sep 2013

I am not immature, insecure, silly, delusional, weak, naive or a loser.

I am truly done trying to discuss anything with you.

Truly.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
37. I suppose you are....
Mon Sep 30, 2013, 08:44 PM
Sep 2013

personally, I'm offended by the notion that one can claim that something like the Bible is the word of god, and then, inexplicably, cherry pick what "really is" the word of god. That's such a disingenuous, terribly deceptive way of thinking. And I find it offensive. That way of thinking has excused and continues to excuse some horrible beliefs that continue to harm a lot of people.

Luckily, my offense didn't stop me from rightly pointing out how that is intellectually dishonest and a form of cognitive dissonance.

If you are simply offended by criticism, but have no response to criticism, it's probably because you're wrong. You should examine why you are offended.

As for personal insults, I didn't insult you. I gave some legitimate criticism. You refused to have a discussion because you were offended by legitimate points. That's immature. On this topic at least, you have declared you cannot handle it.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
16. A non-sequiter response?
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 08:55 PM
Sep 2013

Why am I not surprised? I say children being indoctrinated in hateful creeds is wrong, and you post an article from the right-wing telegraph about Richard Dawkins? Wow.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
17. That may be but at least it was spelled correctly.
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 08:58 PM
Sep 2013

Actually, it was not a non sequitur at all.

MellowDem

(5,018 posts)
22. Actually, it isn't...
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 09:12 PM
Sep 2013

Which is why you won't actually say how it was related to my post, because, we'll, it isn't. All you'll do is cryptically say that it is.

I can guess at why you posted it. But you're mum on what sort of point you were making, so guesses they'll remain. Strawman is my best guess.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»5 faith facts on religion...