We live in a culture that wishes to consume everything from food, to clothes, to transportation, to sex…and of course, it also consumes religion. Not religion as a political force…not religion as that which can actually create things like political forms of life, or contribute to discussions of ethics, but religion as that which can be simply a product for the masses to integrate into their consumer consciousness.

Ridiculous Claim of the Episode:

The funamendalists, whether Muslim or Christian, have got one thing right: Religion, at the end of the day, if not enacted politically is, quite simply, a trend…a product…or in other words, a dis-empowered form of an otherwise powerful, political force. Par example: Muslim’s in Canada (mostly the male population) wish to have the right to have Sharia law in Canada as a formal, accepted law. Of course, many Canadians, and many Muslim women are against such a scenario as it is claimed that Sharia law contains within it statutes that suppress women. Now, this is significant, no doubt. What is more, however, notice how the problem isn’t just that the law is oppressive to women, but that it is another law in general. This is a case in which religion wishes to have political force, and where the state wishes that it wouldn’t. If the muslim’s want their own litte mosques and community centres where they can do their private thing, then that’s fine, but don’t get political — don’t assert yourself in issues of law, etc. Does this meant that the state should always deal with matters of law, which are really matters of community life, family, and ethics? Can religion not also have a say? And when it does have a say, does it have to always bow to the religion of the state?

Show Notes: