God tells Smith to kill Jones: Where is the moral limit?

God tells Smith to kill Jones: Where is the moral limit?
 
It is one of the privileges of democracy to peacefully worship any god. In a pluralist society that strives to grant freedom of religion, a conflict arises when religious convictions push people to act beyond the boundaries of morality. Absorbed by a religious identity, one can easily find justification backed up by sacred texts to carry out an act of violence that goes against the values, morals and freedoms of a pluralist society. Our humane identity as civilized social beings should precede our religious identity to uphold acting withing the moral limit of non-violence and to prevent the degradation of democracy and the breeding of terrorism and oppression.
Let's use the hypothetical example of Mr. Smith, a religious man, who feels strongly that his cousin, Mr. Jones, should die. Mr. Smith can reach out to different religions and interpret their texts and traditions to justify the act of taking a human life. In our first scenario, Mr. Smith can be either a Jew or a Christian who looks for guidance and knowledge in the Torah, or Old Testament. Recently, Smith's cousin , Mr. Jones, had an affair with Smith's wife, which led to Mr. and Mrs. Smith's separation. Jones is now happily married to former Mrs. Smith. Mr. Smith feels betrayed and outraged. He is reading the book of Exodus trying to find comfort. He reads, “Whoever kidnaps a person, whether that person has been sold or is still held in possession, shall be put to death” (21:16). Smith interprets the verse to suit his emotional state. He feels it is God's will that Jones shall die for kidnapping his wife. Smith believes he is appointed by God to carry out His will and serve justice. Smith kills Jones.
Now let's consider a different scenario: Smith is troubled and looking for guidance in the Holy Bible because he recently found out that his cousin Jones is homosexual. Smith reads in the Old Testament that “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death” (Lev 20:13). He also remembers a passage from The Five Books of Miriam by Ellen Frankel, where the Rabbis say, “Voluntary childlessness is not acceptable to us! But neither is the death penalty decreed here in the Torah for homosexual behavior” (177). Smith is angered by the fact that the Rabbis discard God's will for homosexuals to die and now believes it is up to him to carry out the word of God. He knows that Jones and his partner are regulars at a gay night club in town, and plots to carry out an attack on the club to kill as many homosexual men as possible. Smith kills Jones and 200 other people.
Mr. Smith is now a Hindu. He is highly disturbed by the fact that his cousin Jones has been using the services of a prostitute. In the Hindu spiritual hierarchy, a prostitute would belong in the caste of the “untouchables”, the lowest class. Smith then reads in the Institutes of Vishnu, one of the Hindu sacred texts, the following: “He who has had connection with a woman of one of the lowest castes, shall be put to death” (29, v. 43). Smith is conflicted. He looks for further guidance in the Bhagavad-Gita. He reads the story of Arjuna, a man with a duty to fight and kill people who have committed terrible sins. When Arjuna finds out that these people are his friends and family, he is overwhelmed by the conflict between duty and his loyalty to his kin. Arjuna turns to god Sri Krishna for advice. Krishna tells Arjuna, “The truly wise mourn neither for the living nor for the dead” and “Bodies are said to die, but That which possesses the body is eternal. It cannot be limited or destroyed. Therefore you must fight” (36). Smith finds inspiration and justification in Krishna's words and proceeds to carry out the punishment his religious convictions tell him Jones deserves – death for sleeping with the prostitute. Smith kills Jones.
Let's look at one more religion. Smith is a Muslim, and his cousin Jones has a prejudice against Muslims. Jones is the author of a popular anti-Muslim blog and has many followers on Twitter. Jones also brags that his son is a soldier in Iraq and is killing Muslims there. Smith has asked Jones several times to discontinue his anti-Muslim propaganda, but Jones insists that his right to freedom of speech entitles him to write and say what he thinks. Smith's frustration with Jones escalates to anger, and he feels that Jones' actions are an attack on the Umma, the collective Muslim community. Smith feels that the Koran, the Holy Word of Allah, is calling him to Jihad to protect the Umma. He knows that Jones is a member of a Baptist church and plots to attack it and kill its members. Furthermore, he feels that all Baptist churches should be destroyed as they are threatening the Umma by being a hot spot for Muslim prejudice. Smith recruits fellow Muslims to join him in his Jihad. He believes that he is serving Allah and following His way by declaring Jihad to those attacking the Umma. Smith kills Jones and 150 other people. He plans on killing more.
In difficult times and when encountering moral dilemmas, some people look for comfort and guidance in religion - whether it is in a religious text or the interpretations of it by a Priest, Rabbi or a Fatwa committee. Some interpretations promote peace and content, others can trigger emotions of aggression. Mr. Smith's actions in the different scenarios we discussed are highly unlikely in a rational society, because most religious people exercise values that promote peace and civility toward one another. Unfortunately, while unlikely, it is not impossible for someone to become absorbed by one's religious identity and reach the point of distorted, irrational thinking and act like Mr. Smith in similar situations. The ease with which one can back up the intent to act violently towards another human being with a passage from a sacred text is alarming. If the violence against human beings would be morally justified in our effort to promote freedom of religion, the setting of such a precedent will trigger a dangerous trend. The limit of the morally acceptable will be pushed further into the irrational and inhumane. The increased hostility in the social atmosphere can set off mass violence, religious wars, and can become conducive to oppression, discrimination and prosecution by religious extremists in power. Such turmoil sets the stage for the collapse of democracy and civil society. Therefore, while we grant Mr. Smith the right to peacefully practice any religion, we need to establish firm boundaries of the morally acceptable. We need to convey that in a pluralistic democracy, such as the one in the United States of America, it is immoral to justify violence with religious beliefs. If our religious identities numb our ability to act humanely, our intellect must take over so we can begin to rationalize with the logic of our identities as civilized human beings living in a democratic society. Just like the Muslims think of themselves as part of the Umma, all human beings must envision that we are all part of a more superior Umma – the “Huma”, namely the collective community of human kind. The humane desire for peace, equality and wellbeing driven by our intellectual identity as members of society and citizens of the world should be the ultimate force in rejecting the use of violence. When God tells Smith to kill Jones, it is Smith's responsibility and obligation to muster the courage to refuse to act against nature. Instead, Smith should search deeper into his faith and the religious texts for a peaceful resolution. When religions and their interpretations abuse the privilege of freedom of religion in our pluralist state to justify violence, the tolerance for all Mr. Smiths out there should be nonexistent. As a human being, each one of us has the obligation to think of the world as our collective home, and realize that our collective prosperity depends on our ability to rise above our religious differences and be united by what we have in common – our belonging to the Huma.
There were Crusades and Witch hunts. There have been countless wars throughout the history of mankind fought in the name of gods. In modern society, the manipulative interpretation of religious texts and practices can unleash great forces of destruction and inhumane acts . Therefore, as a pluralist society we should support and cherish freedom to practice any religion, as long as the practices are peaceful and conducive to the wellbeing of all human kind. We should all embrace our identity as members of the Huma and protect democracy from our religious selves.
 
 
Bibliography
 
Holy Bible. Tennessee:Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1989.
 
Frankel, Ellen. The Five Books of Miriam. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998.
 
Bhagavad-Gita The Songs of God. Tran. Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood. New York: New American Library, 2002.
 
The Institutes of Vishnu. Tran. Julius Jolly. Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 7. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1880.