Dialogue, not dominance

Dialogue, not dominance

WHEN I FIRST saw posters for a “Great Debate Series” on campus, my heart almost stopped.

On an ominous black background, a white Christian cross stands in opposition to a white Islamic crescent. Just the image reminded me of the religious discrimination that followed 9/11. I remember fearing for my friends who were Muslims, and I feared that my country would not be able to heal the wounds to religious pluralism in the minds of the greater population that a few extremists had created in a single moment.

I worry that framing the interfaith discourse in an antagonistic way, such as in a debate, will perpetuate religion being seen as a source of division and not of great love. I worry that using the debate forum will send the message to people that these two great religions, Christianity and Islam, cannot coexist and must always strive to dominate one another. I fear that this sort of discourse lends itself to the notion that religion is only capable of contributing to conflict and controversy, not inclusion or acceptance. I have been to many debates in my life, thousands probably; as a member of my high school debate teams, I have debated in more than half of the provinces in this country. Yet, never in a debate has either party worked to find common ground. It has always been about dominance and control. Never is the purpose to actually listen to what motivates the other to do what they do and believe what they believe.

Faith is probably the strongest of all motivators. It strikes at a core within one’s identity and ties them to narratives of old. Religion places one in the line of many, giving purpose and meaning to one’s life. It can be a great source of strength and inspiration to act for good things in the world, and it is on this that I choose to focus my energy. I want the University of Ottawa to be one of the first universities in the world to take interfaith dialogue and interfaith actions seriously. We have differences—this is what makes the dialogue most enriching and most rewarding. Being open to dialogue means we are open to see the other as a true human being, rather than a person to be controlled, changed, or manipulated. We must create an option for peace. he Student Christian Movement Ottawa (www.scmottawa.tk) is offering a space for more meaningful dialogue and face-to- face interaction to break down misconceptions and debunk stereotypes to enrich each of our personal faiths and the public discourse of religion, and to move forward in united community action.

Sean Barron Second-year conflict studies student

Check out his letter published in uOttawa's Fulcrum newspaper.