Dr Saritoprak

Decent Essays
The Respect for Sacred vs. Freedom of Speech discussion was a very eye opening event. Mediating was director of Niagara Foundation Murat Gurer with a panel consisting of Dr. Peter Haas, Dr. Zeki Saritoprak, and Dr. David Odell-Scott. Dr. Haas represented the Jewish point of view, Dr. Saritoprak the Islamic, and Dr. Odell-Scott the Christian. It was pointed out at the beginning that dialogue is crucial to interfaith meetings and that is why a discussion is necessary in this sort of sacred context. The discussion opened with Dr. Saritoprak. He stated how the Islamic approach to what is sacred requires a linguistic approach. Sacred entities in Islam he suggests are the obvious Prophet and Mecca; furthermore, he lists five things also sacred in Islam: Life, property, religion, intellect, and dignity. Moreover, Saritoprak says that things become sacred in Islam when faith and place are linked. Dr. Saritoprak concludes his statement by stating how many Muslims can be persuaded by media without…show more content…
Haas was the second to give his opening statement. He started by discussing how in many cultures and especially Jewish, you cannot put God into human terms. Haas discussed how God could not speak in a simple human language but in 70 different ones so God’s message was interpreted slightly different by everyone. Consequently, we need to each cherish our own sense of what is sacred and divine and will never really know what the scared really is. Dr. Odell-Scott was last to give his statement. He conveyed that what is important is the conversation about what is sacred, not things that actually are sacred. Scott was also sure to point out that dividing things into what’s sacred versus what is not, creates a grouping of consecration and desecration. Reverberating on what Dr. Haas mentioned; stating what is sacred is always relative. Odell Scott finished by bringing up that you must be humble with free speech in addition to, learning to appreciate what someone else finds
Get Access