I am a fundamentalist....

"fundamentalism - a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles" Islamic fundamentalism, political fundamentalism [ As quoted from online Meriam-Webster dictionary ].


Is there a problem with "fundamentalism" ? I am sure all of us will immediately say "Yes". Our chorus is as follows: "In a democratic society, there is no place for 'fundamentalism' ". Even more, when attached with "Islamic"; then there is no second thought.

May we revisit the definition of "fundamentalism" again ? - A movement or attitude ( i.e., Democracy ) stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles ( i.e., no place for fundamentalism). OOPS!!!! suddenly democracy itself became a "fundamentalism". How could we accept this paradigm ? Is it only a word game ?

Despite the evolution of mankind, the human tendency is to be quick to the principles one has accepted. We believe in what we believe - no matter what is the reality.


The first trigger of this thought sparked when I was watching a conversation in CNN. I think it was "Larry King Live". The discussion topic was "Islamic Fundamentalism". One of the participant was presenting a kind of opinion that "Biblical religion is based on tolerance. Tolerance to other streams of faith. Whereas, Islam as a religion is not based on such postulate."


My controversial mentality started the thinking. There are a few questions to be checked that was put by the conversant. Are biblical religions (Judaism and Christianity - if I would interpret them) based on tolerance ? Is Islam does not propagate tolerance ? In my own opinion, Judaism - at least the way it is interpreted by its followers - is really intimidating. To say that "a set of people" are chosen by God - does not sound an "inclusive" religion. A religion which is not inclusive cannot be tolerant. Jesus Christ - the non-christian Jew - of course was an inclusive prophet. He had said that "the kingdom of God is welcome everywhere. It is also for Romans/Peagans". Let me not get into deep arguments on this subject. I leave it to readers subjudication.

For argument sake, let us accept that biblical religions are tolerant. The counter argument is that "supposing the biblical religions are not tolerant by their nature, what would be the state of their followers ? meaning, if Bible would say that "Those who are not believing in Christ are unbelievers and killing them is not a sin rather a good thing for society and the killer" - what will be the stand by Christians. Will logic prevail and Christian fundamentalists will not promote killing of non-christians OR will we have another variety of "Jihad" ?


The paradigm of right and wrong, accusation and justification, crime and penalty are have been the fundamentals almost in all societies/religions. We all know that the definition for these are very much subjective and cannot encompass all individuals. From that perspective, everyone is a fundamentalist of his own accepted dogma.

I want to be a fundamentalist of a different kind. Not in the same sense of definition from webster. But as a person who seeks to understand the fundamentals of dogmas.