Ross has a post in yesterday’s NYT in which he advises us not to ignore the “joy” that the ISIS terrorists get from their theology. As usual, some of what he says is accurate, but there are some significant omissions from his analysis that are worthy of further discussion.
The genius of liberal democracy is that it puts up as few barriers as possible to the individual search for transcendence. Ours may be a predominantly secular society, but if you are a Catholic seeking to live like St. Jerome, or a Muslim attempting to display his piety in the most rigorous way possible, our government is not going to do anything to stop you. Since France is a more aggressively secular country than the US for historical reasons, I have no doubt that the situation is more difficult there, but the general proposition would still be true.
Where liberal democracy fails, from the perspective of the religious zealot, is that it makes it difficult for the zealot to impose his views on others. If you insist that you are not “free” if you cannot require everyone else to live the same way you do, you are going to be frustrated here. But is that really “freedom,” and is the zealot/terrorist entitled to any sympathy from us? My answer, emphatically, is no.