I hope the intervention of Mr Cameron stopped the beating of poor Karl Andree in Saudi Arabia. But the 74-year-old’s still in prison for the terrible crime of drinking alcohol – forbidden by Islam. Meanwhile, the Catholic church is embroiled in a controversy as to whether those who have had an abortion can ever be welcomed back into the fold – and is struggling over what to do about gays.
Any spectator from, say, Mars, might find it odd that beliefs and religions seem to be so often defined by what they forbid, what they decide is sinful, rather than what they offer and approve of. Catholics aren’t allowed to divorce, Christian Scientists won’t be cut up by operations, though they aren’t forbidden various other cures; Jews won’t eat pork, and various bits of Islam – not the lot, thanks goodness – think even education for females is evil, let alone refusing to do what males tell them to.
Presumably all faiths offer inner peace, good relations with fellow believers, purity in their various families, and many promise happiness beyond the grave. The forbidden behaviours are simply the actions that might stand between a believer and true purity and happiness. The various prohibitions of things which stop the followers of a faith letting down their co-believers or stand in the way of living a righteous and godly life may have a place, a usefulness, no doubt. But for PR purposes alone it’s a pity it’s so hard to let the attractive, happy beliefs and behaviours be outshined by the arduous restraints.
One is reminded of the father of a child banned from playing ball games on Sundays, who thought it was important to reassure the child that Jesus wasn’t against football in case he’d be put off religion altogether.
What do you think? Have your say below
