
Thursday, May 31. 2007True FreedomTrackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Coming back from the west, it struck me that in Malaysia, individual autonomy is not regarded very highly. Therefore it seems to me that any kind of progress toward freedom has to made against a backdrop of social contracts/tribalism and approached with a great deal of wisdom and subtlety. I've come to accept that a lot of the freedoms we have in the west are derived from Judeo-Christian worldview -- which in many parts of the world is not fully embraced and is in fact viewed with suspicion because it is associated with the Western world (although the worldview is actually middle eastern). Concepts like the sanctity of life, freedom and value of the individual, etc. are all built around the idea that love is the supreme ethic and that we are created by God. Most people in the world give mental assent to these concepts because they are thought to be universal, but they miss their true implications because they don't understand their source. That's why countries founded on Judeo-Christian, even if they are very secular today, look very different from those that aren't. As for Indonesia, the details are here: [url=http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13873.htm]http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13873.htm[/url] In general, proselytization is disallowed, but conversions do occur and is permitted. I did not know about this until I talked to one of my Indonesian friends about it. I was surprised to learn that in many ways, there is more freedom in Indonesia, especially post-Suharto, than in Malaysia (I always thought it was the other way around). Anyway, sorry for cakap'ing so much. It's time for my nasi lemak... I'm dissappointed but unsurprised at the verdict. It seems to me that the reality is that it was either that or riots. (given the emotional climate, I believe many in this country would not be above that). However, too many have been too quick to condemn those who cheered the decision -- not recognizing that they, like us, are broken people too and that we ought to love them. In that, I find your perspective refreshingly postive. That said, on a fundamental level, I think the problem is in our basic presuppositions, i.e. there are fundamental differences between our understanding of freedom (ref. Jn 8:31-32) and theirs. For instance, we may think that true religious freedom has the entailment of the courtesy of disbelief at all times, but in their worldview this is not the case. My understanding is that they believe that religious freedom only applies before conversion. The consequence of that is when there is no conversion process (i.e. when one is born into the worldview), then the term "no compulsion" does not apply. This means some people are predestined to have this freedom and some aren't. It seems unfair to us, but in their worldview God's justice is higher than man's (which I can agree with in principle, except the problem is our constitution seems to be manipulating this justice). In that sense, we have to understand where they are coming from. If we are to build bridges, we have to start there. p.s. interestingly, Indonesia doesn't have this problem. Add Comment
|
About Me
Ariel is surrounded by amazing, loving folks. So what if there's a fly outside the window with an irritating buzz? Pfffftt :PCommentsMenuQuicksearchCreative Commons |
Ariel is surrounded by amazing, loving folks. So what if there's a fly outside the window with an irritating buzz? Pfffftt :P

