Quote:
Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I'm presuming that analysis, which is appropriate, is not undertaken in a vacuum, but rather in an historical and social context. The poor treatment of fundamentalist Islam of women should be measured against non-Islamic treatment of women in the same culture --- take sub-Saharan Africa, for example. Similarly, the poor treatment of women in Christianity should be measured against the non-Christian treatment of women in the same culture --- take Arkansas, for example.
The question is whether the religion is an improvement over secularism in each religion's region. The answer in the case of fundamentalist Islam is more often "yes" than it is in the case of fundamentalist Christianity, because Christianity predominates in regions in which secularism coincides with economic prosperity, freedom of travel, and freedom of marriage, three cultural contexts that benefit secular women but are denied to women in the same region for religious reasons.
|
Well, if we're going to look at it in an historical and social context (I concede this is a valuable exercise) when run a risk of becoming tautological. In particular, you note the correlation between Christianity and economic prosperity, freedom or religion and freedom of travel, but do not mention the issue of causation. All of these are permissable because of a tolerance thereof among at least some Christian sects. Economic prosperity in the Christian west is due in large part to the lack of a religious dogma holding it back (indeed, in large part it is due to the opposite: the protestant work ethic and the unsanctioned but certainly not discouraged response in the Catholic community).
