Thursday, May 12, 2011


First a couple of links:

They're both basically discussing the same issues, with perhaps a slightly different twist.

I've been thinking about this quite a bit over the past few days, and actually over the past few years, come to think of it. The swiftness of some self-describe 'Christians' to dispose of some of the most fundamental teachings of Christ for the sake of political expedience or just plain vengeance is alarming. In particular the 'fundagelicals' willingness to support cruelty, torture and murder to support secular and partisan political goals is deeply disturbing- particularly in the light of their clamor to be the public face of Christianity.

I am very uncomfortable with the killing of bin Laden. Part of me wants to say that it was an ugly thing but had to be done. But the idea of sweeping in and murdering a man in front of his family is abhorrent. And as I pointed out to Wanda (we had a, uh, vigorous argument on the issue) the other day, we think of ourselves and present ourselves to the rest of the world as a nation of laws. But there was nothing legal about what happened, by our laws or anyone else's. Either we are a nation of laws, or we are not. And expedience does not overrule this concept.

I don't think that Jesus meant for us to be killing people, and certainly not in his name. The quickness of some people to suggest that this was a triumph of Christianity over Islam is sickening. I have to wonder, given Jesus' words to Peter after he was so quick to whip out a sword and use it in the garden, what he might have said about the matter. And thinking back to the early Christians, wondering if they would have responded with violence? Violence didn't seem to be a hallmark of the early church. In fact, I don't think you really see any until Constantine and his vision of In Hoc Signo Vinces. (One of the many idiotic things that Constantine did, in my view.)

I don't know what alternatives may or may not have been available. I understand that the President wrestled over the decision for some time (much to the irritation of the Joint Chiefs), and I am glad that he gave such consideration to it. I just wish that, even in this fallen world, there had been a different outcome. At this point, I don't think the killing will ever stop. As the Dalai Lama once said, an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. Well, I think we'd best be learning braille.

1 comment:

ttownbarb said...

On the whole I agree with you, but this man wanted to bring down us, all of us.He may have 'used' religion as a front for his hatred, but his money would continue to fund terrorist activities had he been captured.IF confronted with a rabid dog, what does the community do? But he needed to be taken out. I know he should have stood for trial, but that would only have enraged his followers to further violence. There is going to be some backlash violence, but not as much I think.