Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Unveil youself

The british people again are facing yet another test in the faith of the multicultural society that we live in.

The news of a prominant government minister speaking his mind about an apparently sensitive subject has caught the attention of the both the tabloids and broadsheets. Generally when news like this hits both types of consumers of current affairs then it makes it indicitive of a real social issue. Not a political one. A politicans opinion adds reasonable and sensible provocation for a debate.

I've spoken to my friends on the subject and have been asked on my views. I am a person with an objective look on life and with this particular subject when I put my reputation in the public domain causes me to think, and think and think again as to how I can involve myself in this predicament. Like many of the people that I share my social status with am unwilling to freely express what I really think. But then what is the point in hiding behind my own deceptive veil that is 2darts if I can't articulate what I think of the situation at hand. The issue is not about religion or politics; it is about a very human instinct to read an individuals facial expression when talking. Only the socially inept would accept that to hide behind a veil or a mask makes no difference to what is said or expressed. Facial expression is a very natural and telling way of what a person thinks or feels. Raising an eyebrow or a slight upturn of the mouth is more effective at expression than any kind of spoken word could describe. The society that we live in expects it. Humour many a time is delivered wholey by the slightest smirk, grin and grimace. As are other expressions of emotion. It is also a gauge of honesty, sincerity, etc....

I recently had a predicament where a telephone conversation about a problem would not have conveyed my reasoning about a subject. By that I mean negotiating a deal would not have worked by a simple phone call. It is impersonal and inappropriate. I'm from an old school of thought that if you need to cut a deal or convince some one of something that it is best done face to face. I did that successfully, recently. If it had been a telephone discussion, it would have been easier for the other party to dismiss my proposal.

Recent events about a muslim woman having the right to wear a veil and the opposing argument about further alienating the faith sounds a little like the inability for a multicultural nation to integrate. Why? Because religion of any kind is very much a mechanism for promoting segregation and intolerance in the wrong mindset. Any train of thought or concept taken too literally causes division and fragmentation of even the most tolerant of societies. Is there a solution to this ? No. I had a good upbringing where to a point religion was the centre point to living. But thanks to my parents they let me decide how I should live my life. Religion is a manual to how to conduct yourself in life. It promotes a framework for making the right moral decisions and to bring together people that share a common belief but is religion so short sighted that another faith or way of life is wrong? Religion played a part when society wasn't as sophisticated as it is now. Religion was a way of uniting mankind's natural tendancy to protect communities from one another. Religion picked up where tribalism found its limitations. Religion now finds its limitations in a world where technology provides a medium for understanding and tolerance and acceptance. Is there a need for religion? No. Not anymore. Perhaps now we should find another word for this new type of integration. Who now are we protecting ourselves from? The so called religous ghettos that are the buzz words of the media only describe a last stand of those faiths that think they are being threatened. In reality its their faiths that adds colour to human kind......and no I've not dropped a load of acid.

No comments: