Author: Brett Fujioka
Someone suggested the other day that the only polite religious people are the ones who keep their faith to themselves. Is it truly possible for a group of people with different faiths to discuss their beliefs without offending one another? It’s often said that the two most inappropriate subject matters at the dinner table are religion and politics, but why is that? Surely, it must be possible for intelligent minded individuals to breach the matter at hand and come out unscathed.
First of all, it’s understandable why both politics and religion are sacred in the Western world. In Europe, the United States and the Middle East, both politics and different religious sects shaped one another and in turn led to different historical wars over time.
One of the reasons why, I believe, religion and politics are two sensitive topics is because their adherents cling onto the absolutist notion that everyone who follows these strict guidelines produces a possible outcome in the form of a rewarding afterlife or a system of government.
In the same respect, Islam, Judaism and Christianity are immersed in politics. All three faiths envision a political utopia arising in the end of days under the condition that all people embrace an ideology in unison.
Despite the relationship between the two, it’s still possible to separate one from the other. For example, let’s say an agnostic/atheist, a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew and a Buddhist are all eating together at the Marketplace. Somewhere a conversation ensues about everyone’s religious background. Amidst all this, each person mentions what they believe and why, without condemning any non-believers in the process. They’re objectively discussing religion without incorporating any issues concerning absolutes or truths. No one tries to convert one another, and everyone remains content and happy.
Contrary to what the person who sparked the idea for this article said, it is possible for people to discuss religion together without breaking into a fight. Bear in mind, though, that no one at the table even bothers mentioning the situation in the Middle East because that’s a political matter with religion haphazardly thrown into the mix.
However, there are still some religious denominations—mostly fundamentalists—out there who are incapable of carrying on a mature conversation surrounding faith. The reason why is because there are some sects that incorporate so much hate into their doctrine that it leaves scarcely any room for any attention towards love or civility.
As opposed to religion, it’s barely possible to carry on a conversation about politics without offending someone at the table, the reason being that a majority of people are pursuing political agreement rather than intellectual clarity. In the same respect, I have several Republican friends who get nothing but adversity from Occidental’s liberal majority because of their partisan identity. The closest thing to a polite political conversation I’ve seen at the dinner table with people of different partisan backgrounds involved a recount of what happened on Capital Hill.
It’s because people have a difficult time separating religion and politics that they grow uncomfortable when the former topic comes up in a conversation. Even with this in mind, I feel that anyone who can’t stand talking or learning about religion has a serious problem. Any discomfort regarding faith in a formal environment reveals more about the listener’s intolerance than the speaker’s etiquette.
Brett Fujioka is a senior ECLS major. He can be reached at bfujioka@oxy.edu.
This article has been archived, for more requests please contact us via the support system.
