Seeking Truth, Finding Love

This blog will be a place where I explore various issues of importance to me, most notably religious and spiritual ones. Even though I've ceased to claim the label of "Muslim," I see no reason not to hang on to the moniker "bashirkareem" because it's actual meaning still has relevance for me and my life. Thus, you will hear more as time passes. God bless!

"Bashir" means "bringer of glad tidings" while "Kareem" indicates ideas such as generosity and friendliness. Thus, my online moniker, Bashir Kareem, indicates my desire to bring gladness and kindness whereever I may, in accordance with the will of God.

Thursday, August 17, 2006

LGBT Rights versus Palestinian Rights? The Childish (Im)morality of Zionism

I just read the article "Queer" As A Tool Of Colonial Oppression: The Case Of Israel/Palestine by Blair Kuntz at ZNet, and it really touched on a conflict I've faced a few times in the past and will inevitably face in the future, especially if I convert to Islam. I am referring to the (alleged) conflict between my sexual orientation and my support for the human rights of Palestinians, who do have a dismal track record when it comes to human rights of sexual minorities. A Google search for "gay" and "Palestine" will reveal horror stories of abuses suffered by gay and lesbian Palestinians, often in the service of glorifying Israel and demonizing Palestine.

While I adamantly condemn Palestine's reprehensible treatment of sexual minorities, the (mis)use of those abuses as a justification for Israeli terror offends me on so many levels. It betrays a stunted and disturbing version of social justice and morality.

First, it encourages a morality of emotions divorced from reason and facts. The aforementioned "horror stories" elicit feelings of shock, disgust, and anger, so that we will exclaim "Oh, those awful Palestinians!" Then, you see this flyer, with it's depiction of a sea of rainbow flags in Israel, a litany of nice things Israel has done for sexual minorities, and final statement that "Israel respects life." And, you are invited to exclaim, "Oh, those wonderful Israelis!" Who cares if Israel also bulldozes Palestinians' homes, cuts down olive trees, divides families, murders peace activists (hint: Rachel Corrie), seizes arable land and water resources, and allows settlers to terrorize everyday Palestinians (including children and elderly women), right? Look at all those pretty rainbow flags!

Rather than being rational and taking a step back in order to view the situation in its entirety, we are encouraged to buy into a false dichotomy: Whose human rights will we support, gays and lesbians or Palestinians? To support one, you must be prepared to condone any and all abuses against the other. If you support gays and lesbians, then you should look the other way while Israel decimates Palestine. If you support Palestinians, then you condone their persecution of gays. No middle ground, no nuance, no complexity. (On another note, what about people who are gay or lesbian AND Palestinian? To answer that question, I will simply refer you to Kuntz's article.)

This retreat from rationality leads to a kind of willful blindness. I becomes a case of "Israel, you're nice to us and the Palestinians are mean, so if you want to abuse and terrorize them, go ahead. We promise we won't look or hold you accountable." Such an attitude is morally irresponsible and a poor excuse for an ethical approach. Being gay, feminist, and leftist, I may have precious little affection for the Christian fundamentalists in the United States, but that does not mean that I want their houses to be bulldozed, their land stolen, or their children to be attacked on the way to or from school! If such things started happening to them, I would be very disturbed, to say the least. Similarly, there are probably many homophobic African-American congregations that I would find very distasteful, but if one such congregation were being harassed or attacked by racists or white supremacists, then it would be morally incumbent upon all decent people, regardless of sexuality, to support them in their struggle. Similarly, the basic, God-given human rights of the Palestinians are not, and should not be, dependent upon attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual diversity--however much we may desire some attitudes and behaviors more than others.

In the end, this reveals a kind of tit-for-tat morality, which has been articulated differently throughout history: "eye for an eye," "lex talionis," "do unto others as they do unto you," "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours," "quid pro quo," etc. In this case, the idea is that because Israel respects (some of) the rights of (some) sexual minorities, unlike Palestine, gays and lesbians should therefore give Israel their blessing to terrorize Palestinians--which inevitably includes children, gay and lesbian Palestinians, and any Palestinians that might be indifferent (or even supportive!) towards gays and lesbians.

Tit-for-tat was the law of the land in millenia past, and it still enjoys much currency among grade school children. (One can imagine one's grade school classmates saying "You hit me, so I'm gonna hit you back" or "If you let me in front of you in line, I won't tell on you".) To many of us as kids, it made perfect sense. However, as a basis for morality and for living in the world productively, it went "out of style" long ago. Most religions and other systems of ethics today recognize that such an approach will get us nowhere, usually advocating instead for a morality more or less guided by admonitions to "treat others as you would like to be treated," "judge not lest ye be judged," and "love thy neighbor." Do good and promote goodness, and refrain from and oppose evil.

Therefore, in the case of gays and lesbians "versus" Palestine, it is clear that we must employ reason and exhibit a more refined morality than Israel and its supporters would encourage. We must reject false dichotomies that would force us to choose between gays and lesbians or Palestinians, supporting the human rights of one group at the expense of the other and ignoring those who belong to BOTH groups. Rather, we must take the high road, a road paved with reason and morality, and collectively say "NO!" to any evil committed against any person or group--even if that person or group itself behaves evilly! We must insist on the following two moral demands, simultaneously and with equally passionate and reasoned conviction:
1. All Israeli abuses of Palestinians, whether by the Israeli government or by individual Israelis, must cease immediately--no ifs, ands, or buts.
2. All Palestinian abuses of gays and lesbians, whether by the Palestinian government or by individual Palestinians, must cease immediately--no ifs, ands, or buts.
None of this irrational "either-or" morality, but a morality that demands goodness and rejects evil, all across the board. Then, we will be better equipped to walk in the way of Allah and to live in the world effectively.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Respecting others’ beliefs?

One issue that has come up repeatedly among my fellow Arabic language program participants is that of being respectful of others’ beliefs. This is especially due to one guy, a self-identified socialist, who is sometimes regarded by others (and himself) as being rather tactless. The debate is always about whether one should tread carefully or be sensitive when addressing beliefs (whether religious or political) that are different from one’s own. I hear arguments both for and against this idea of being “respectful,” and I find myself sincerely confused and ambivalent about this issue. Although I rarely say this, I can see both sides.

On the one hand, we all treasure our respective faiths, our ideologies, our politics, etc., and we really do not like it when others diminish those things. For example, as a leftist and a feminist, I am quite offended when I and people like me are denigrated for possessing, expressing, and acting upon our beliefs—and when I hear comments like “Marxism [or feminism] is dead.” I am also offended when atheists and agnostics put down my religion (or any religion) and try to undermine it for its non-conformity to their worldview. Besides, God, whether you are Jewish, Christian, or Muslim, has enjoined us to interact with each other lovingly, respectfully, and peacefully, so it would seem that we are to show a certain sensitivity—if not to the belief, then to the person him/herself.

On the other hand, how respectful could I be of a Nazi, a Klan member, a Zionist, a right-winger, a bigot, a religious fundamentalist, or anyone else who espouses and promotes ideas and practices that are so repugnant to me? Take the Christian fundamentalists, for example. I am gay, leftist, feminist, pro-Palestinian, and a potential future Muslim, and they are opposed to all that. How can I be respectful of the belief that everything I am is wrong, immoral, inferior, or sinful? Furthermore, how can I be respectful of people who are against everything that I am? Finally, especially in the recent past, it has always been my contention that when oppressed peoples (e.g., women, the poor, people of color, sexual minorities) are asked to respect oppressive beliefs, that this is a method for obtaining their assent and thereby legitimating oppression. Thus, I also see a lot of wisdom in the unapologetic non-tact, or even anti-tact, of my socialist friend.

I'm really ambivalent on this issue. Part of me enjoys donning my buttons, taking up my signs, going to protests, and shouting "Racist, sexist, anti-gay, right-wing bigots go away!" But part of me also finds it satisfying to connect with people who are different from me and believe differently than I do. But, again, I do not want that to drift into refraining from just condemnation of oppressive beliefs and ideologies and those who promote oppression. So, rather than trying to come up with a final answer, I'll simply leave the question open, for you to digest. May you and I both be guided to the truth.

In God's peace,
Bashir