Faith and segregation

[Timsup2nothin]

Today Obama gave what I thought was a great speech. To me, this was a highlight:

And so if we’re serious about freedom of religion — and I’m speaking now to my fellow Christians who remain the majority in this country — we have to understand an attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths.

Coverage from NY Times.

Spoiler :

a search string of "obama speech mosque" may provide a source you like better, but I wanted to avoid the usual whining about my no links position because I think this is important

Now, in examining coverage of the speech intended to heal the religious differences that are plaguing the nation and the world, I find that activist female Muslims are taking this as a slight because the mosque that hosted the President is orthodox and segregates by gender, and they are painting his appearance there as approval of gender discrimination. This relates to an issue that I have been pondering.

Places of worship are exempted from a number of laws. These women are correct, in that in any other place a "men over there, women over here" policy would be pressing the legal limits if not violating them outright. However, Islam is far from being alone among religions in which the more orthodox sects discriminate by gender, and as a nation we have deemed that if this is interpreted as appropriate within the tenets of the faith the law shall not overstep.

This is accepted, sometimes grudgingly and sometimes with outright resistance as found here, based on a truth that may not be true: a citizen does not have to accept the orthodox interpretation and is free to join a sect that shares their beliefs. These women who want "Islam with gender equity" could find it. They point out that in two thirds of all mosques in the US orthodox gender separation prevails, which indicates that in one third it does not. Mosques in that third would no doubt welcome them.

To borrow from economics, the power of the free market could resolve this problem, as mosques catering to the more liberal interpretations would thrive while the more orthodox would wither. In theory.

But this is where I run into my own issue to ponder.

If I wanted to go to a white restaurant, I couldn't. There really is no such thing, and if there were it would get shut down. More importantly, I flat out wouldn't. If a restaurant "rode the line" and subtly discouraged customers based on their race I would be disgusted, and I am fairly sure that enough potential customers would be that it could not function.

At this point, even churches cannot cross that legal boundary. If you choose to interpret some holy book as a faith based loophole into white supremacy you will be shut down. And yet...

On any given Sunday you would have no difficulty at all finding a "white church." Long ago I regularly attended one, which no one who attended thought to be unusual in any way. Now, I attend services at a church that also doesn't try, in any way at all, but can only be realistically described as a "black church." All of this is totally self regulated, and without a blink, apparently. People routinely refer to "black churches" and while there are fewer mentions of "white churches" I don't think anyone questions their existence. I am frankly astonished at how...settled...this situation is, given that the civil rights movement of my childhood is now a topic of history, approaching the muddy line at the far edge of modern history.

I'm not calling for activism. As I said about gender equity and orthodoxy, there is always another church if one does not suit. No demands for some sort of lawfully prescribed racial mixing in churches. I'm just asking anyone of any faith to examine themselves and their favored place of worship and explain...why do we accept what seems to be a throwback to segregation? (Obviously, only if we do. I have no doubt that there are places this does not apply.)

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

I believe it was a common practise of earlier church to have man and woman on different side when conducting services. There is an esoteric meaning to it like Jing/Jang (I dont know how the church used to refer to it) which is practical in regard to spiritual discipline.

...why do we accept what seems to be a throwback to segregation?

most of these churches followers are primarily interested in social interaction not spiritual advancement in the strict sense of the term so thats what gets reflected in who is attending what church.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Well I think the gender segregation in Mosques and existence of white and black churches are different issues or whatnot.

For the mosques it's basically a surviving norm from the old days when women were considered less worth. Conservatism, basically, you know.

The white and black church thing, which you say is self-regulated, I think can be more traced to the greater racial issues or whatever in America. It's also probably tied to like socioeconomic classes.
And probably many just go to the nearest church, so the question rather becomes why there are white and black neighbourhoods, so to say.

I'm not sure how intelligent or whatever this post is

 

[Borachio]

As a matter of interest, how many female imams are there? Especially ones leading mixed congregations.

Still, I don't suppose we'll see a female Catholic priest any time soon either.​

 

[EgonSpengler]

An appearance by a US President is a momentous event, and I do think that it can be taken as a tacit endorsement of the place. So I agree with the women: He probably shouldn't have gone there, 'cause he's not just some guy. That's not quite the question the OP is posing, which I can't really answer because I'm not a person of faith, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I also agree with the President's comment, as quoted above (I haven't heard or read the whole speech).

 

[Farm Boy]

Well Tim, our South Korean minister spends hours and hours every week sitting in the public areas of the village just being available. He organizes the only pre-school close enough to be loosely compatible with most daytime jobs. He organizes family nights and kid event days and none of these things require membership in the congregation. There aren't that many non-whites out in the middle of nowhere yet, people follow jobs and economic opportunity. The ones that are here simply don't come to our services. My wife's Nigerian priest is similarly welcoming to everybody. But their congregation tends to look exactly the same as mine unless he's got family visiting. Which is nice when he does.

 

[warpus]

What prompted the speech and who was it directed at?

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm just asking anyone of any faith to examine themselves and their favored place of worship and explain...why do we accept what seems to be a throwback to segregation?

Seems to be the point, no?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What prompted the speech and who was it directed at?

Interesting questions.

I would say it was prompted by the rising air of Christian bigotry being generated by the rampant rhetoric of the Republican presidential campaign. While I believe that most Christians and Christian leaders are quick to denounce violence against Muslims there has been a marked increase in threats and violence against Muslims.

In my opinion it was directed at all people of faith (including those who place their faith in the nongod) and emphasized the specific line I quoted. In America, no matter what our personal faith, we stand for everyone having the right to their faith and have a responsibility to protect their right. Failure to do so in the face of suppression, even if the source of that suppression is people who share our own faith, erodes the rights of everyone, including ourselves. Whether terrorists pervert Islam or Christianity they should be decried by all. Whether people calling for laws to enforce their belief on others are Muslims, Christians, or Atheists they should be opposed by all.

But that was just what I heard in it. It may have been directed at Independent voters and intended to clarify that the Christian Sharia rhetoric coming out of the Republican party is a REALLY good reason to vote against them.

 

[jackelgull]

I know that the gender segregation wasn't the point of the thread, but as someone who comes from a conservative Muslim background where gender segregation is a thing, I feel like addressing the reasoning behind it(Or at least, the reasoning my imam gave me, I don't know, perhaps in other masjids the imams say its because women are inferior or something). According to him, non gender segregated prayer would add an element of difficulty on concentrating on the actual act of prayer for both sexes, and that while yes, it is possible for men and women to overcome that difficulty with extra willpower, Allah would not want to make things needlessly harder for people discharging their duties.

Do I accept this premise? Not exactly, since I have no trouble distracting myself without the presence of female bottoms, but it is what is.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I know that the gender segregation wasn't the point of the thread, but as someone who comes from a conservative Muslim background where gender segregation is a thing, I feel like addressing the reasoning behind it(Or at least, the reasoning my imam gave me, I don't know, perhaps in other masjids the imams say its because women are inferior or something). According to him, non gender segregated prayer would add an element of difficulty on concentrating on the actual act of prayer for both sexes, and that while yes, it is possible for men and women to overcome that difficulty with extra willpower, Allah would not want to make things needlessly harder for people discharging their duties.

Do I accept this premise? Not exactly, since I have no trouble distracting myself without the presence of female bottoms, but it is what is.

For the record, the complaint from the female Muslim directed at the particular mosque where the speech was given comes straight from the anti-segregation playbook and seems pretty valid if true.

According to her (and I see no reason not to believe her) the beautiful space where the speech was given in front of a large gender mixed audience of Muslims and guests (and it was a beautiful space) is a space that on a regular basis she would not have been allowed to enter as it is the prayer area for men. Her prayers would take place in the women's prayer area, which is normally left unlit to save on the electric bill. The dimness is fine though since the devout don't really want to see the basketball hoops anyway. The "women's prayer area" doubles as a gymnasium.

Bottom line, "separate but equal" seldom really works out to be equal.

 

[Borachio]

I have become involved with the Quakers this last year (I really don't know why). And their bottom line on the male and female divide has always been complete equality since they inception in the C17th. It seems just incompatible with anything Christian, to their viewpoint, to do anything different.

And yet more mainstream denominations have major difficulty with it. I don't understand why this should be so. I particularly don't understand how anyone could think that women are in any way spiritually inferior (or superior).

As for black Quakers, I've heard distant rumours that they really do exist. Somewhere.

 

[jackelgull]

For the record, the complaint from the female Muslim directed at the particular mosque where the speech was given comes straight from the anti-segregation playbook and seems pretty valid if true.

According to her (and I see no reason not to believe her) the beautiful space where the speech was given in front of a large gender mixed audience of Muslims and guests (and it was a beautiful space) is a space that on a regular basis she would not have been allowed to enter as it is the prayer area for men. Her prayers would take place in the women's prayer area, which is normally left unlit to save on the electric bill. The dimness is fine though since the devout don't really want to see the basketball hoops anyway. The "women's prayer area" doubles as a gymnasium.

Bottom line, "separate but equal" seldom really works out to be equal.

Wow, it's that bad in some masjids? In ours, both the men and women's rooms are pretty much the same except the men's room is bigger. That said, I'm all for masjids embracing mixed gender prayer rooms. Even if separate but equal meant equal conditions, it would still suggest that Allah views women differently from men, when all believers are supposedly equal under His eyes.

 

[Berzerker]

If I wanted to go to a white restaurant, I couldn't. There really is no such thing, and if there were it would get shut down. More importantly, I flat out wouldn't. If a restaurant "rode the line" and subtly discouraged customers based on their race I would be disgusted, and I am fairly sure that enough potential customers would be that it could not function.

Segregation laws were anti-free market and private property, but guess who gets blamed for segregation? The free market and private property. And who does the blaming? Opponents of the free market and private property.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Segregation laws were anti-free market and private property, but guess who gets blamed for segregation? The free market and private property. And who does the blaming? Opponents of the free market and private property.

Can't...

quite...

parse...

that.

 

[BvBPL]

I think it is unfair to put upon the President the burden of endorsing all activities of every place he visits. Particularly those activities that involve long standing traditions, as in the case of gender segregation at mosques.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think it is unfair to put upon the President the burden of endorsing all activities of every place he visits. Particularly those activities that involve long standing traditions, as in the case of gender segregation at mosques.

I agree. the fact that he did speak in such a place, though, does provide an opportunity for those with grievances to get their thoughts into the public eye more easily.

Church access is different than restaurant or store access by the general public, so it is easier for governments to regulate what happens in those places. Direct constitutional language (like 2nd amendment) also makes changes more difficult.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I agree. the fact that he did speak in such a place, though, does provide an opportunity for those with grievances to get their thoughts into the public eye more easily.

Frankly, that seems a good thing. While I accept that there may be reasons within a faith for having such segregation, this woman's statements certainly bear investigation. I would expect that mosques more like the one Jackelgull attends will shine through and others that maintain a segregated orthodoxy that have been less diligent about maintaining reasonably equal facilities will have to catch up.

 

[Berzerker]

Can't...

quite...

parse...

that.

its a bit off subject anyway, but your comment about a restaurant going belly up if it tried to covertly discourage customers based on race helps explain why the free market has anti-racist tendencies that Jim Crow sought to avoid by compelling segregation via legislation.

 

[jackelgull]

Frankly, that seems a good thing. While I accept that there may be reasons within a faith for having such segregation, this woman's statements certainly bear investigation. I would expect that mosques more like the one Jackelgull attends will shine through and others that maintain a segregated orthodoxy that have been less diligent about maintaining reasonably equal facilities will have to catch up.

Nevermind

And to be on topic - I don't think it's really a conscious decision for a church to become a white church. However, I think a colored person might feel awkward going to a congregation where most of the people are white, and in certain churches, the atmosphere might not be the friendliest towards non whites, further discouraging them. But I don't know.