is an experience common to us all the time reports, discussion of journalistic information you require daily feeding and emotions in the debate rather than reflection, abusing Capabilities concentration of individuals, too exposed to the means of mass communication. Not that the phenomenon is experienced, the terms of the debate remain constant, but actually refer to ideal or concrete change. Even in the debate on secularism and secularism of the words change meaning without notice to the new meanings are silently imposed by the rapidly changing environment, creating a short circuit between past, present and future, and filling up with new content without that old concepts is to stop to consider What are we really talking about. Arrestiamoci then a moment to consider what it means to lay, secular, secularism in Italy today.
What misconceptions and misunderstandings more or less concerned have accumulated around and within these words is obvious. In some cases because they invest overtones that do not refer to anything other than a ghost. Spoken crisis of secular thought and culture, weakness of secularism and secularism in the face of world events, silence lay. We forget that all our daily lives and the essential decisions of our existence is based on the results of a story (hard and contrast) of separation between church and state, that we live in a scientific, literary, political, historical non-denominational ( in which no longer have to whisper: 'And yet it moves'), which we enjoy civil and political rights defined according to different criteria, none of which has a reference to religious affiliation (or gender: it may be recalled that the women's vote is a value deeply secular?).
Italy is also thanks to generations of liberal Catholics, both lay a country to afford a prime minister who was able to remarry after divorce thanks to a law of the Italian Parliament, who resisted the referendum just wanted to Who this essential characteristic of a secular state's intention to accettare.In Second secular and secularism and secularism are now - confused - the contrasting element to indicate an undefined Catholic-Christian culture, the custodian of the values \u200b\u200bof tradition and 'national identity, a soothing medley of attitudes and interests, and memories of an idealized past and hopes for a future property over time, uguale al presente. Dove ci si dimentica - ad arte - che è esistita e tuttora esiste ed è ben attiva una robusta e, si spera, maggioritaria parte della cultura cattolica e del clero cattolico stesso che sa cogliere la strumentalità e l'insussistenza di una contrapposizione costruita per aprire la strada a un progetto politico dalle forti venature autoritarie.
In questa contrapposizione, tutto quanto è riconducibile ai valori storicamente laici è sotto attacco perché legato al liberalismo, al dialogo, al dubbio metodico, al riconoscimento dell'altro e alla creazione di un terreno comune e quanto più possibile neutrale di discussione e decisione.Una terza osservazione riguarda la distinction between secular and all-Italian secularist. It is a curious distinction that comes from the need to invent and define an enemy. Who defines secular (very few indeed, and always in a situation controversy) in the hope that it is born as a definition of anger and condemnation, if not as an insult, will turn into a source of pride specificity, as they did in fact successfully homosexuals who adopted the label 'gay'. France, which rightly or wrongly, is considered the birthplace of all forms of assertion of statehood on ecclesiastical prerogatives, does not distinguish between secular and secularist.
In Italy the split between secular and secularist has created two distinct figures. In Italian the lay public discourse without additives is a secular good, respectful of the Catholic tradition, the secular secularist is a secular evil, driven by a destructive impulse to destroy everything and everyone, not just the Catholic church, which is of course the first of its objectives, but also the family, Europe, the religious sense of life and everything else. But even the definition of secularist polemic is found clearly indeed. Quite the contrary. In his speech at the meeting of Communion and Liberation, the current chairman of the Senate accused secularists of being the first proponents of nihilistic moral relativism, those who "have tried to give a violent blow to the values \u200b\u200bgap" with the referendum on fertility assisted.
But when faced with the alleged dangers of miscegenation led to mass immigration, we must adapt to seek a wider consensus, the chairman of the Senate that adapts to propose a united front between the laity and believers "to affirm our identity and save the Western democratic and liberal against us because it was declared a 'holy war'" (Corriere della Sera, August 22, 2005, online edition).
Lay and believers, but not the secularists, whose fate in this confrontation is not covered.
Lay and secular, if you really want to accept both words and incorporate them into the vocabulary of the controversy not only petty, are not incompatible breeds of animals, but they insist on neutrality and respect for public institutions to meet the religious choices of individuals and groups. This is the core of the secular political / secularism.
Italian history has been to seek now a neutral weak, passive defense and guarantee of the balance achieved between the state and religion, which until now has been the majority in the country, now a strong neutrality, that wants to impose neutrality when the imbalance is at the expense of non-Catholics, when they want to regain and redefine neutrality public institutions is questioned, in particular, to the detriment of agnostics and atheists, who, lacking an institutional umbrella edict of Constantine onwards, citizens are more sensitive to the need for the state of the universality of face interpreter protection of individual conscience, which is worth remembering, is not the monopoly of any institution.
0 comments:
Post a Comment