An Anti-Secularist. Manifesto. AshisNandy. I. Gandhi said he was secular. Yet, he thought poorly of those who wanted to keep religion and politics separate. He scandalized many in India who view themselves as progressive when, in the mids, he published ‘An Anti-Secularist Manifesto’. Free from the irate polemics seen in some recent anti-religious commentaries ( here and here), his “secularist manifesto” invites constructive.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||5 November 2016|
|PDF File Size:||5.49 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.88 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If you oppose it all then you are probably archbishop material.
Printable version Jan 1, seculatist Commendably, Harris distances himself from any such imperious ambition. A manifesto for secularist change would look like this: Protecting conscience would not imply a “blanket religious exemption based on subjective feelings” but rather a better balancing of objective legal rights. The outcome would be a boisterous procedural secularism in which religious voices could make their distinctive contributions unconstrained by the sort of deliberative restraints often imposed by self-styled secularists.
We are the only country outside Iran to have reserved seats in parliament for clerics.
A response to the ‘secularist manifesto’
Nandy says that he stays clear of these tellings by simply being honest to himself. Religious citizens, organisations, MPs or councillors should — when circumstances require it — be free to invoke religious arguments when they advance policies or laws in democratic forums, including parliamentary and council proceedings.
Sociologist Ashis Nandy calls himself an anti-secularist. Should we be party to the epidemic of apologies that has swept the West and insist that Nandy take back everything he has said? Nandy suggests that the ideas of Akbar and Ashoka would be more accessible to people rather than concepts of secularism, which have come in for some criticism.
Where religious organisations join others in delivering public services, ensure they do so without:. Second, it fails to recognise that an effective right to “manifest” belief is not only individual but organisational.
A secularist manifesto
How did we come to have such fragile sensibilities? April 22, Since at this point his penchant for detail is not on display, let me suggest two forms of religious public speech he might care to consider:.
Topics Religion Cif belief.
Where religious organisations join others in delivering public services, ensure they do so without: First, it proposes a restrictive interpretation of the right to conscientious objection within the public sector, which would be limited to “rare and specific” secullarist agreed by parliament. But Harris wants to impose severe legal restrictions on the ability of such religious organisations to act according to their distinctive religious beliefs the moment they enter the public sector, thereby frustrating the very reason for them existing as distinct bodies rather than mere replicas of secular agencies.
Under this model, advocates of contending belief systems may freely advance their political views in public debate within accepted rules of seculwrist engagement but with no one belief system enjoying entrenched constitutional privilege. Threads collapsed expanded unthreaded.
If you mnifesto with all the above, while you may be an ardent secularist, you are in no way “militant” or “aggressive”. None of this involves anything to secukarist with doctrinal matters such as women bishops, gay priests or Latin masses, which are matters for religions.
Secularism seeks to defend the absolute freedom of religious and other belief, seeks to maximise freedom of religious and other expression and protect the right to manifest religious belief insofar as it does not impinge disproportionately on the rights and freedoms of others.
‘Secularism is an inaccessible concept’ – The Hindu
Nor does it involve the banning of religious opinion from the mxnifesto square. Presumably Harris would not object to religious citizens exercising the same kind of democratic influence over law as that available to everyone else. Protect free religious expression that does not directly incite violence or crimes against others or publicly and directly cause someone distress or alarm.
If you agree with only most of that manifesto, you may well be a vicar. Secularism manifessto unfairly characterised and attacked by religious leaders as a way of seeking to protect their privileges.
The intellectual has a right to publish books. Order by newest oldest recommendations. Order by newest oldest recommendations.
His credentials as an expert social critic have not spared him from controversies that follow those who comment on politics.