Critical Mass and the One-Way Street: Tolerating Fundamentalists

Image by Paul Robert Lloyd via Flickr

Government tolerance for near all religions and speech is specified by the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It is an extraordinary thing. Prior to the United States, most if not all nations had national religions. That this tolerance has been fairly reciprocal among sects in America is a near miracle when you consider the history of religious conflict. Americans generally keep out of each other's way when it comes to religion.

The exception is the fundamentalist. I include self-righteous secular fundamentalists here, too, the purveyors of political correctness and such. The essential quality of fundamentalism is intolerance. Fundamentalism promotes active opposition of other points of view because the opposition is "wrong" based upon the pronouncements of a Higher Authority.

Critical Mass is the amount of radioactive material you must hold together to initiate nuclear fission. Without that critical mass of material you get no explosion, or, as Howland Owl would say. "Nary a fizz!" As our population has grown, so have the various fundamentalist communities. We now find ourselves surrounded by countless communities of citizens intolerant of something or other. I believe we have reached a Critical Mass of Intolerance and are starting to fizz.

Hating the opposition is the national pastime of American politicans, but it is less so among the electorate. Generally, we hate politicians, but we love politics. Because of Critical Mass we can no longer play politics as parlor game for fear of offending a nearby fundamentalist. We can no longer have a deep discussion about issues among dissenting parties because fundamentalism is likely to rear its head and discussion descend into the mantra-like repeating of cant. Proof of this critical mass can be found right here in the blogosphere. Very few read those with whom they disagree. Most blogs have a narrowly self-selected audience that is unlike that of traditional mass media. There are no vegan friends on the American Beef facebook page.

Have you ever read the comments on the articles in online newspapers or discussion groups? Few comments are even on point. It is disheartening to see intelligent comments answered by name-calling or the relentless restatement of unsupported and often disproven "facts" by the members of groups purported to be pursuing discussion, but actually involved in a masturbatory massaging of the memberships' preferred view of the world. For example, there are a plethora of Health Care Reform groups seeking "consensus" about the reform. Should you go there and express an opinion contrary to the actual goals of the group, you will be excoriated. They are like people discussing which flavor of ice cream to make, rather than answering the larger question of how to make a dessert with available ingredients. We'd all like to have ice cream, but it can't be made from wheat. At least, not yet.

The rise of the narrow Fundamentalist Interest Group (FIG) on the Internet has created a new, obstructive power in society. Nuts of all persuasions can now find each other more easily to plan and execute havoc. Sometimes, or most times really, they simply reinforce each other's delusions, but there is a real danger in this incubation of looniness and the illusion that your particular looniness is your normal peer group. You think so because it is a self-selected group, but they are not really your peers, they are your compatriots or co-conspirators or co-dependents. You have become a full fledged member of a FIG when you become a Lying Egotistical Arrogant Fool, or a FIGLEAF, who believes their own cant. This is most appropos because figleaves were once used to cover the genitalia of nude statues by "right-thinking people" to counteract the lust that might be aroused by the sight of Hercules' wee-wee carved in stone.

The new FIGLEAF is used to cover thinking for yourself and to establish conformity so no one's thinking can be compared, because that would be "Judgmental, man", and we can't have that. After all, all ideas are equal, right? That's what Equality means, right? If all people are equal, then doesn't that mean their ideas are equal, too? Well, only if you are a moron. All moronic ideas are equal. All other ideas must be submitted for testing. Is it possible? Is it likely? Is it pragmatic? Et cetera, et cetera. et cetera. But FIGLEAFs are opposed to testing because to test a belief is to doubt a belief, and there is no doubt in a FIG, only doctrine and delusions.

Our constitution mandates we tolerate the intolerant, but the intolerant would like to change that. Some would "restore God" to our society. I tell those folks to substitute ALLAH for God when they get on the idea of injecting their religious morality or legends into civic life. The fiction that America was founded by "Judeo-Christians" belies the fact that Freemasonry was considered a dangerous secret society by many churches, notwithstanding its recognition of a Supreme Being. Most of the Founders were Deists and Freemasons, some were sectarians, and some were atheists or what we now call secular humanists. God did not found or guide America. It is the product of men, and now of women, too. Neither has God been driven out of America. Can a Supreme Being be made to leave the area by mere mortals? Would an all powerful Supreme Being favor Cowboys over the Indians? Men over women? Whites over Blacks? No. I don't think so.

So, the next time you meet an intolerant fundamentalist, tolerate them. But let them know that you are only tolerating them because you dissaprove of intolerance.