What role if any should the state play in regulating religion?

[DC Al Fine]

Inspired by the Crabcake post below which I found very interesting.

I will say that most of those radicalised by Isis have not done so in mosques. Which is not to say that the salafi mosques are not an issue, but I don't know how important they are in the specific context of violent jihadism.

Yeah, I think here they were mostly not welcome in mosques, and those who have gone that far down the rabbit hole are also likely to be paranoid enough to avoid going there, as intelligence services usually know damn well in which mosques they should have infiltrators and sources. Those who are at that stage of radicalization usually meet up in living rooms. Radicalization often does start in these mosques though.

Not completely convinced salafism was the issue here, even though Kurz and Strache did mention political Islam, because they also talked about far-right extremism and ties to the Grey Wolves. That's a whole different issue, I'd say. At least organizations tied to the Grey Wolves here are associated with different types of problematic behavior (violent crime, mafia stuff, intimidation of political opponents in other Turkish organizations), but not with salafism, which is more of a problem in Arab than in Turkish mosques in the first place.

Yeah, the Grey Wolves connection is a lot less sticky a reason to target these mosques and organisations; they're basically a criminal syndicate like the Mafia.

I don't think people or religions should be targeted because they are conservative though, as long as they are not preaching hate (calls to genocide etc). That said, I think the state should work with religions to make them less patriarchal and closed off.

I'm on board with this except for your last sentence which I don't understand. What do you mean by that?

I think ideally, religions and the state would work together a bit more. For example, I think the state should clamp down on unregulated madrassas/religious schools and ensure that religious children are not grown up in isolation. Ideally I would ban schools from having religious requirements to enrol entirely, but that might be too much. I also think the state should promote gender parity in religion, and try and cajole as many female inmans/clergy as possible (within theological limits). Maybe there should be more effort in RE classes to teach that all religious perspectives should be treated as equally valid, and that no one centralised book or person has all answers (not state atheism or anything, just a contextualisation of religion).

[DC Al Fine]

Inspired by the Crabcake post below which I found very interesting.

I will say that most of those radicalised by Isis have not done so in mosques. Which is not to say that the salafi mosques are not an issue, but I don't know how important they are in the specific context of violent jihadism.

Yeah, I think here they were mostly not welcome in mosques, and those who have gone that far down the rabbit hole are also likely to be paranoid enough to avoid going there, as intelligence services usually know damn well in which mosques they should have infiltrators and sources. Those who are at that stage of radicalization usually meet up in living rooms. Radicalization often does start in these mosques though.

Not completely convinced salafism was the issue here, even though Kurz and Strache did mention political Islam, because they also talked about far-right extremism and ties to the Grey Wolves. That's a whole different issue, I'd say. At least organizations tied to the Grey Wolves here are associated with different types of problematic behavior (violent crime, mafia stuff, intimidation of political opponents in other Turkish organizations), but not with salafism, which is more of a problem in Arab than in Turkish mosques in the first place.

Yeah, the Grey Wolves connection is a lot less sticky a reason to target these mosques and organisations; they're basically a criminal syndicate like the Mafia.

I don't think people or religions should be targeted because they are conservative though, as long as they are not preaching hate (calls to genocide etc). That said, I think the state should work with religions to make them less patriarchal and closed off.

I'm on board with this except for your last sentence which I don't understand. What do you mean by that?

I think ideally, religions and the state would work together a bit more. For example, I think the state should clamp down on unregulated madrassas/religious schools and ensure that religious children are not grown up in isolation. Ideally I would ban schools from having religious requirements to enrol entirely, but that might be too much. I also think the state should promote gender parity in religion, and try and cajole as many female inmans/clergy as possible (within theological limits). Maybe there should be more effort in RE classes to teach that all religious perspectives should be treated as equally valid, and that no one centralised book or person has all answers (not state atheism or anything, just a contextualisation of religion).

This is a good example of the cultural difference you were talking about. You are talking about working together, while I'm surprised you think some of these proposals are concessions at all and not the state running roughshod over religious minorities.

Making sure kids don't grow up isolated and unable to function in secular society is fine, but it makes a mockery of religious liberty IMO if the government is interfering with the clergy or our ability to set up religious schools.

I don't think religions should operate as capitalist organisations operating under the free market rules.

I'll take "things that need elaborating" for $300 Alex.