Wars Will Never Cease, Is There Time Enough For Peace?
This topic is such an inevitability today it's made me reluctant to post about it so far. Religion. Religion versus Atheism, Anti-Theism, or Secularism. Whatever the debate is really about and honestly, no one on either side seems to have a very clear idea on that, it is something which interests me. At some point I'll come to the whole religion debate in general, but that's an enormous topic not one for tackling without due consideration. It's one small aspect of it, which comes to my attention today. I don't mind at all which side of this debate you fall on, I think there's absolute validity and equal reason potentially in all sides of this argument, equally there is unreasonable animosity shown towards different views, from all sides. That only ever serves to cloud the issue, so to be clear, this is equally about anyone of any belief or lack thereof, to whom this senseless attitude applies.
March 17th, Saint Patrick's Day. Technically, it's the feast day of the Patron Saint of Ireland, so a National celebration of religious origin. It's not something I consider hugely religious, as I'm pretty sure more English people celebrate it than Irish people do, I don't think it's stuck steadfastly to it's Patriotic or Religious roots in that sense. In much the same way as Christmas is definitely not an exclusively Christian event, nor should it be.
Despite this, or in fact, because of this, I do think it's both very unfair and unnecessarily divisive, to ignore or attempt to invalidate the roots of something like St Patrick's day, because you think celebrating it as an non-religious person might be hypocritical. If it bothers you, don't celebrate it. It is completely wrong though, to need to put down the religion or culture from which the celebration originates, to justify you celebrating it despite your opposition to said origin. If you're against religion but celebrate Christmas, good! It means there's one minor aspect of one single religion that has a positive effect. It is to be hoped that in fact there are many, as surely even the most vehement of anti-religious adherents do not want to believe or discover that there are no positive aspects to something so widespread. You don't have to celebrate it in a religious context for that to be valid.
Take the example of the American Government. I don't like it. I don't like the US Constitution, the policing of the world, or the acts of unspeakable horror it has both committed and attempted to justify throughout the last century. This is not exclusive to America, this generally applies to Western Governments on the whole, America is just an example where it's easy to pick exactly what's wrong with it. I do, however, like Barack Obama, a lot. I won't disassociate him from American Government to justify that, he is part of it. This means there is a single aspect of the current American Government that I like. If I did try to disassociate the two, that would be hypocrisy, because I'd be shifting the goal posts to justify my views. It is perfectly reasonable though, to generally oppose a certain thing but acknowledge isolated positive aspects of them.
The same principle can be applied. If you're against religion but you like religious festivals, there's no reason you could be accused of being a hypocrite. If, however, because you're opposed to religion, you show unprovoked contempt for the origins of the festival you're celebrating, then there is no other term for it. If you hate religion so much you couldn't even acknowledge one relatively minor positive point of it, then getting involved with any aspect of it, even if you don't do so in a religious context, is hypocrisy. It's the very definition of hypocrisy!
Regarding St Patrick's Day.
I think it's great that people who are not Irish, of Irish descent, or Catholic, celebrate St Patrick's Day, in the same way it's great and unifying that people who are not Christian, Pagan or religious at all, celebrate Christmas. Celebration of St Patrick's Day in certain areas of England is very poignant. People out on the streets celebrating Ireland, given the appalling treatment of Irish immigrants just a few decades back in history, is very important. In that sense, caring about who is or isn't religious or Irish would be to miss the salient point of any such celebration. Christmas is about hope and promise, in religious terms, but those things are not born of or to religions or religious people, there would be no sense whatsoever in feeling it should be exclusive to Christians. I think it's a very positive thing that both are celebrated, even by those who actively oppose religion, because there are more universally significant factors involved than the social construct of religion they came from.
There's no getting around it though, both are religious in essence and the matter of importance in that is that they are a good things within religion. Removing the religious aspects and trying to justify keeping the celebration despite active opposition to religion, is ridiculous. They're still religious. The more people celebrate more diverse ideas, the better. Cultures in general, I think would mix and get along a lot better if more time was taken to pick up on the good things about every culture, religion and creed and to celebrate them, even if you oppose every single other thing about that culture, religion or creed.
Of course they have religious significance, how universal they have become is in itself, religiously significant. That doesn't need to mean anything to non-religious people, however it is slightly galling to see that more contempt needs to be thrown at religion just to justify celebrating it. I'm not sure who exactly anyone thinks they're kidding there. The vast majority of people, be they Irish, Catholic, or Peruvian atheist, just gets drunk on March 17th and leaves everyone else alone to their own reasons for doing the same. That it the way it should be. If you feel the need to assert your religious or cultural position before getting drunk on March 17th, it would be safe to assuming the only person you're trying to justify your actions to, is you.
March 17th, Saint Patrick's Day. Technically, it's the feast day of the Patron Saint of Ireland, so a National celebration of religious origin. It's not something I consider hugely religious, as I'm pretty sure more English people celebrate it than Irish people do, I don't think it's stuck steadfastly to it's Patriotic or Religious roots in that sense. In much the same way as Christmas is definitely not an exclusively Christian event, nor should it be.
Despite this, or in fact, because of this, I do think it's both very unfair and unnecessarily divisive, to ignore or attempt to invalidate the roots of something like St Patrick's day, because you think celebrating it as an non-religious person might be hypocritical. If it bothers you, don't celebrate it. It is completely wrong though, to need to put down the religion or culture from which the celebration originates, to justify you celebrating it despite your opposition to said origin. If you're against religion but celebrate Christmas, good! It means there's one minor aspect of one single religion that has a positive effect. It is to be hoped that in fact there are many, as surely even the most vehement of anti-religious adherents do not want to believe or discover that there are no positive aspects to something so widespread. You don't have to celebrate it in a religious context for that to be valid.
Take the example of the American Government. I don't like it. I don't like the US Constitution, the policing of the world, or the acts of unspeakable horror it has both committed and attempted to justify throughout the last century. This is not exclusive to America, this generally applies to Western Governments on the whole, America is just an example where it's easy to pick exactly what's wrong with it. I do, however, like Barack Obama, a lot. I won't disassociate him from American Government to justify that, he is part of it. This means there is a single aspect of the current American Government that I like. If I did try to disassociate the two, that would be hypocrisy, because I'd be shifting the goal posts to justify my views. It is perfectly reasonable though, to generally oppose a certain thing but acknowledge isolated positive aspects of them.
The same principle can be applied. If you're against religion but you like religious festivals, there's no reason you could be accused of being a hypocrite. If, however, because you're opposed to religion, you show unprovoked contempt for the origins of the festival you're celebrating, then there is no other term for it. If you hate religion so much you couldn't even acknowledge one relatively minor positive point of it, then getting involved with any aspect of it, even if you don't do so in a religious context, is hypocrisy. It's the very definition of hypocrisy!
Regarding St Patrick's Day.
I think it's great that people who are not Irish, of Irish descent, or Catholic, celebrate St Patrick's Day, in the same way it's great and unifying that people who are not Christian, Pagan or religious at all, celebrate Christmas. Celebration of St Patrick's Day in certain areas of England is very poignant. People out on the streets celebrating Ireland, given the appalling treatment of Irish immigrants just a few decades back in history, is very important. In that sense, caring about who is or isn't religious or Irish would be to miss the salient point of any such celebration. Christmas is about hope and promise, in religious terms, but those things are not born of or to religions or religious people, there would be no sense whatsoever in feeling it should be exclusive to Christians. I think it's a very positive thing that both are celebrated, even by those who actively oppose religion, because there are more universally significant factors involved than the social construct of religion they came from.
There's no getting around it though, both are religious in essence and the matter of importance in that is that they are a good things within religion. Removing the religious aspects and trying to justify keeping the celebration despite active opposition to religion, is ridiculous. They're still religious. The more people celebrate more diverse ideas, the better. Cultures in general, I think would mix and get along a lot better if more time was taken to pick up on the good things about every culture, religion and creed and to celebrate them, even if you oppose every single other thing about that culture, religion or creed.
Of course they have religious significance, how universal they have become is in itself, religiously significant. That doesn't need to mean anything to non-religious people, however it is slightly galling to see that more contempt needs to be thrown at religion just to justify celebrating it. I'm not sure who exactly anyone thinks they're kidding there. The vast majority of people, be they Irish, Catholic, or Peruvian atheist, just gets drunk on March 17th and leaves everyone else alone to their own reasons for doing the same. That it the way it should be. If you feel the need to assert your religious or cultural position before getting drunk on March 17th, it would be safe to assuming the only person you're trying to justify your actions to, is you.