Much in the same way that Liberalism is destroying the United States of America, Liberalism is having a negative effect on many Churches in the USA. Here are some examples: (Links)
David Gushee Robert Marus Jeffrey Haggray Charles Haynes Marv Knox Marv Knox
While each of these gentlemen holds a very liberal/progressive view that very few Baptists share, their belief in their perceived intellectual superiority gives them great comfort that they do in fact hold the key to correctness. Much like our current President.
While each will tell us of their strong belief in an almost Christianity Minimizing "Separation of Church and State," and insist that the USA was not build upon a "Judeo-Christian Foundation," they will then proceed to write articles such as this in which their demand for a "Separation of Church and State" seems to have vanished:
About the Tea Party
"A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victim, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the plague." CICERO 106-43BC., loyal to the people and to the Senate in Rome, against Julius Caesar
* * * *
08/28/2010 Marv Knox, Editor, The Baptist Standard Link
"Yes, we still grieve the deaths of 9/11. Yes, we wish the Manhattan Muslims would exercise restraint and exhibit compassion by moving their mosque farther away from Ground Zero. But we dare not participate in denying their right to build their mosque. If we tolerantly undermine religious liberty, who will stand up for churches when Christians no longer comprise a majority in America?"
In over two years of listening to the Liberal/Progressive spew, this must be one of the most absurd comments from Mr. Knox. "Who will stand up?" No one will stand up for Christians when and if Christians no longer comprise a majority in America. We have religious liberty in America precisely because we are a nation built on Christian principle. This is exactly why we cannot allow a "Religious"/Political/Military organization like Islam to enter the USA and make demands for their "Freedom of Religion" ... which they don't even believe in.
And if you have your way, Christianity will fade in America for your children and grandchildren. Then they will cry "why didn't our forefathers fight for America in the same way their forefathers did?"
* * * *
Marxist/Socialist/Communism has known for many years that if it were to succeed in the West, the Christian Church would have to be destroyed or minimized first.
10/11/2009: Evangelical Christians this week offered the Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and members of the U.S. Senate Immigration Reform Committee their ringing endorsement of full amnesty for the 20 to 30 million illegal aliens within the country.
Open borders and high immigration, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) proclaimed, increases membership in evangelical churches and is good for the economy. As American Servicemen and their families fight and die to defend the sovereignty of the USA, Liberal Church Leaders support the illegal invasion of the USA by millions of illegals and seek to reward them with American citizenship.
Anglican Mission in America
Assemblies of God
Brethren in Christ Church
Christian Reformed Church in North America
Church of God
Church of the Nazarene
Churches of Christ In Christian Union
Conservative Lutheran Association
Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches
Evangelical Presbyterian Church
Evangelical Free Church of America
Fellowship of Evangelical Churches
Free Methodist Church of North America
General Association of General Baptist
International Church of the Foursquare Gospel
International Fellowship of Christian Assemblies
International Pentecostal Church of Christ
International Pentecostal Holiness Church
Presbyterian Church in America
Primitive Methodist Church USA
Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America
The Brethren Church
The Christian & Missionary Alliance
The Evangelical Church
The Salvation Army
The Vineyard, USA
Transformation Ministries
United Brethren in Christ
US Conference of the Mennonite Brethren Churches
The Wesleyan Church Corporation
The position of the NAE remains incomprehensible to many conservative Christian conservatives, including Rev. Judith Schmitt of Puritan Congregation Church in Scranton, PA. “It’s outrageous for any Christian or Christian organization to condone law-breaking,” Rev. Schmitt said. “Forgiveness is central to the Christian doctrine but approval and reward of wrong-doing is not.”
Notes on Saul Alinsky and Neo-Marxism:
Alinsky's & Obama's tactics are based, not on Stalin's revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci's transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky & Obama, Mikhail Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins's wrath by suggesting that Lenin's revolutionary plan wouldn't work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report:
"By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible.... Gramsci's master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity's transcendent God."
The infiltration described above has already begun. The election of Obama has given strength to that effort. Today it is difficult to even agree on the definition of "Christian". The voice of Conservatives is quashed in the main-stream media and most recently Conservative opinion is even censored in supposedly Christian media by liberal editors and their supporters.
Shown here are four examples of Liberal Church leaders, editors of Church publications, who are willing to take a Liberal stand on a political issue while attacking conservative responses. Much in the same way that we are seeing a "Grass-Roots Movement" in the politics of the USA, we need to see a similar "Grass-Roots Movement" to reclaim our Christian Churches.
|
Example One:
October 2009 ______ Liberal Church Writer
|
By __________, _________ Joint Committee for Religious
|
|
Published: October 02, 2009
|
For the next several months, people on the roads of Pinellas and Hillsborough counties in Florida will rumble past billboard ads making false claims and misleading assertions about our country's history and commitment to religious freedom. One ad even fabricates a comment from the first president of the United States.
Recently, media reported on the billboard advertisements that use quotes from history to portray a national need for Christian governance. Those behind the billboards refer to the separation of church and state as a lie and say our country's Judeo-Christian foundation is the reason that this country has prospered for 200-plus years. The only lies being told are featured on the billboards.
Few would dispute the crucial role of religion in many of our founders lives. However, they were a mixed lot some orthodox Christians, some Deists, nearly all scions of the Enlightenment and more committed to ensuring religious liberty for all than enshrining their own religion in our founding documents.
The separation of church and state is one of the reasons that, despite our religious passion and pluralism, we have been able to avoid the religious conflicts that have punctuated history and continue to plague much of the world today. In fact, as our founders wisely understood, the separation of the two is good for both.
When those with an agenda "cherry-pick" and completely make up quotes from our founders, they do a disservice to all.
Irony abounds when a group claiming its support for historical accuracy fabricates a statement and attributes it to the nation's first president. For example, one billboard quotes President George Washington as saying, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible."
As reported, the billboard organizers admit there is no proof Washington ever said this. Undoubtedly, Washington believed religion has a place in public life, but one must look at his other statements to understand his view of government's role in religious matters. In 1789, then-President Washington wrote a letter saying he would establish "barriers against spiritual tyranny and every species of religious persecution." He also wrote that everyone should be protected in "worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
Taken together, Washington's words show his recognition of religion's benefits and his belief that a person's preferences were a matter of individual choice in which the government should not interfere. Moreover, James Madison, the father of our Constitution and arguably one of our most religious founders, observed, 'The number, the industry and the morality of the Priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of church and state. '
The phrase 'wall of separation ' is not in the Constitution, but the sentiment surely is. It is simply a shorthand metaphor expressing a deeper truth: Religious liberty is best protected when the institutions of church and state are separated and neither tries to perform or interfere with the essential mission of the other. Separation does not mean an infringement of the right of people of faith to speak forcefully in the public square. From bumper stickers to billboards, religious speech is commonplace.
Certainly, our freedoms allow anyone to purchase a billboard and put almost any statement on it. But putting intentional mischaracterizations, half-truths and outright fabrications on display is patently irresponsible, undermining the very faith the billboard backers claim.
|
|
AMERITIANITY RESPONDS TO RE: 2nd Opinion: Billboard propaganda violates truth
FIRST: It is the very fact that the USA was built on a Christian foundation that allows us to successfully live under Freedom of Religion. While many religions or philosophies, like Islam, promote the idea of the elimination of all of the "infidels", Christianity holds HOPE that the lost will be called or led into the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior, by their own choice. Christians promote the Great Commission while others promote "The Great Elimination" of anyone they cannot force to state a faith in Islam.
|
|
|
|
By ___________, _________ Joint Committee for Religious
|
|
Published: October 02, 2009
Mr. __________, Christians in the United States of America are as fed up with such whiney dribble as what you have written as they are with many of our governmental leaders. You start out by referring to the OPINION of Americans who are Christian as "propaganda" which is appreciated since such writing will certainly limit the number of people who will continue to read your article.
First Question, Sir: Where have you been living? Are you not the least bit aware of the fact that in the USA we have been moving AWAY from the influence of Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices on our society? There was a time when it was understood that we would pray in school. There was a time when the Ten Commandments were on the wall of every school and court house. There was a time when every state in the nation had a law against killing babies in the womb. There was a time when homosexuality was believed by the majority to be wrong and the practice was discouraged. There was a time when chaplains in the military exercised their own beliefs when working with soldiers. There was a time when citizens looked to the Church to meet the needs of widows, orphans, poor, needy, sick, "the least of these." There was a time when virtually every institution of higher education, every hospital, was established by the Church. There was a time when pastors and preachers knew that their rightful place was to speak out when government was getting out of line. There was a time when the Church did not fear the IRS.
Where was your "Separation of Church and State" for most of the first 400 years of settlement in what is now the USA? You would now have us believe that they had it all wrong originally about the foundation of this nation and now, just recently, you "Progressive Liberals" have it all figured out. It is nonsense like your article that is destroying the Church and destroying the only hope for this nation at a time when the enemy of The Church is rising like never before in our nation. You seem to believe that only those of your ilk have truly been enlightened. You are instead weakening the Church while weakening the nation and citizens at a time when the Church should be rising and exercising greater influence.
It is no wonder with a writer on "our side" like you that there is so much confusion even among Christians. It is an even greater wonder that you could write something that you feel is so important without quoting even one verse of scripture. Please show us the scripture that encourages believers to avoid, at all costs, trying to have an influence on our nation, our society, our government.
Matthew 5:13-16: You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? ... You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid... Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.
II Chronicles 7:14: If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Tell us how this Mayflower Compact quotation is propaganda: "Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God."
Tell us how we misread the propaganda of the Declaration of Independence: "And for the Support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
Tell us how it is propaganda that even the ENEMIES of Freedom and Christianity have it wrong when THEY state that THEY must destroy the influence of Christian Beliefs in order to destroy us: "Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev and Obama followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalin's wrath by suggesting that Lenin's revolutionary plan wouldn't work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report:" Our enemies know more about our foundation then you seem to.
"By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible.... Gramsci's master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity's transcendent God."
The BILL OF RIGHTS is designed to limit government's powers over the people and the influence of religious belief on government and society.
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "
Would you have us believe that "or of the press" means that there is a "Wall of Separation" between the press and government so that the press could never criticize the government? Would you have us believe that Christians have forfeited their rights to petition the government for a redress of grievances? Would you have us believe that Christians cannot peacefully assemble to discuss the need for changes in our government?
The Christians, who were involved in the founding of the USA, and indeed those who were not religious, were fleeing STATE RUN CHRISTIANITY. They were fleeing compulsory Church of England, Church of France, forced Lutheranism, forced Catholicism. "The Freedom of Religion" they were seeking, and indeed those they established here, was not a promotion of the "Freedom from Religion" and/or its influence in the affairs of man. It was not the promotion of atheism or "Godlessness."
It is also important to note that Islam and other world religions of the time had nothing to do with and no influence what-so-ever in the founding of our nation. In fact, supporting the influx of Islam into the United Stated is a violation of our Constitution since Islam brings with it a legal system that seeks to be superior to that contained in our Constitution. You seem to be leading a parade of self-destructive Church leaders who have been doing a pretty good job lately.
You wrote: "Those behind the billboards refer to the separation of church and state as a 'lie' and say our country's "Judeo-Christian foundation is the reason that this country has prospered for 200-plus years." The only lies being told are featured on the billboards."
Then you write: "The phrase 'wall of separation' is not in the Constitution'."
"Worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." This is tolerance.
Clearly, Sir, Judeo-Christianity has had the greatest impact on our nation, society, and culture even as we have provided for the "tolerance" of other beliefs. That is what has allowed the USA to live in peace. Much of the confusion today comes from the false assumption by some, like yourself, that "tolerance" is the same as "acceptance as right, equal, and correct" which has been the mantra of Progressive Liberalism/Humanism for many years now.
Where will you stand when Islam's Sharia Law demands "equality" with our legal system? Our enemies seek to destroy us by using our own confusion about who and what we are, and what we believe, against us. Is it your intent to demand that Islam be allowed to have an equal impact on our nation as Judeo-Christianity? Do you support those who come across our borders illegally as having an equal right to impact our society?
Shall we cease praying to our Christian God that He will heal our land because that will give us an unfair advantage on impacting our society?
Click here to see that Catholics also believed that even our educational system in the early USA was Protestant and Christian. CLICK
|
|
EXAMPLE 2:
September 2009 ____ Editor
When I was young the mantra parents and teachers voiced to encourage students that anything was possible with enough work and focus on the task at hand was to say, "You could grow up to be president."
To be president was the highest possible office for which to aim. Achieving that office would accord the holder instant and universal respect. We all knew the president held the best interests of the nation at heart and that we, as school children, were important to the nation and from our ranks would one day rise the person to take his place.
Each of us was encouraged to believe, "It could be me."
It is natural for our president to hold such a position. I don't normally write about secular politics in this space for several reasons, including the conviction that they simply are not as important as the everyday labors of Christians who are loving their neighbors toward faith in Christ.
But I've been so discouraged the past couple weeks at the awful, divisive, hateful rhetoric in the public forum that I cannot in good conscience ignore it: because much of the vilification comes from those who justify their mean, negative, divisive rhetoric from a "Christian" platform.
Even Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said in response to President Obama's Tuesday speech to students, "Conservatives must avoid jumping on every conspiracy theory and labeling every action by the Obama administration as sinister or socialist."
The president encouraged students to stay in school, set personal goals and make a difference in society. Conspiracy theorists took the simple "and not unique" fact that the president was going to speak directly to students to incite fears of something sinister.
There was some controversy over the study guide put together to help students understand what they had heard. Such a guide is good teaching process. But some paranoids think there is something sinister about the study guide asking students to write letters about what they can do to help the president.
There is nothing sinister about helping the president reach the goals he outlined in his address, because his goal was that students work hard to achieve success in their lives. A student helping the president reach his goal is helping himself.
I've never seen such an anxious, uneasy populace during my lifetime. And it seems those most frightened are those who claim the name that casts out all fear.
There are sects who believe Christians must use whatever means necessary to gain control of the "seven mountains" that loom over any society so we have the financial means and political influence to dominate the culture. Some claim the president is the antichrist. Now we learn a "family" of behind the scenes influencers in Washington manipulates the money, the agenda and yes, your opinion, believing that any means justifies the end of a "Christian society."
Whose name do we bear? What does Christ ask of us? The culture into which Jesus was born was dramatically different from the life He proposed for His followers. Yet he emphasized the personal, spiritual life they were to lead as followers of His, not how they were to band together to change and control the elements of their culture.
I'm reminded of the wizard in the Land of Oz when Dorothy and her traveling companions finally pushed their way into the chamber from which the balloon-headed Oz ruled the emerald city with much bluster, hissing air and smoke. They discovered that image was a caricature manipulated by a frustrated old man in a closet, pulling levers and making big noises through a microphone.
When that man saw that his charade was exposed, he said into the microphone, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."
If we as Christians operate in the public forum with the bluster of Oz on one hand masking his weak, fearful frustration on the other, those in the life arena where we seek eternal influence will have every right to say about us, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."
Ameritianity responded:
Once again, it is not the final draft of what Obama does that is the true measure of his intent. Were it not for "Citizens" including Christians of this nation finally awakening and speaking up and banding together about what is happening, his address to our children would have been much different than it ended up being.
At the same time, if Obama had his way on healthcare, the original healthcare bill would have been rushed through and passed before Americans even knew what was in it, which included abortion and other components that have since been removed, because citizens dug and found out the evil therein.
Church leadership has been failing the USA for many years. We have failed to exercise proper stewardship for what God has blessed us with as a Nation. We have become satisfied with preaching to the ever dwindling choir and you can see where it has gotton the Church and our Nation.
"But some paranoids think there is something sinister about the study guide asking students to write letters 'about what they can do to help the president'." It is such statements as this that causes informed Christians to ask that people who spend most of their life and time with their heads buried in the sand at a Seminary please stop popping up now and then and making rash statements when you've not heard what is going on.
The reasons for NOT wanting Obama to speak to our children is because, had he had his way, many of those children would possibly not have been born. Obama prides himself on 100% approval of Planned Parenthood and NARAL. Obama is known for being a slick speaker, a manipulator, and a liar. This is a man who favors allowing babies born alive in botched abortions to be allowed to die "because that was the original intent of the mother."
Obama is a follower of Alinsky. Obama TAUGHT Alinsky's system and plans. Obama worked for and taught members of ACORN. Obama is a racist! I can quote many black ministers who have stated this fact.
"Alinsky's tactics were based, not on Stalin's revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on GRADUALISM / INCREMENTALISM, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci's transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins's wrath by suggesting that Lenin's revolutionary plan wouldn't work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report: "By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible.... Gramsci's master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity's transcendent God."
You said....."It is natural for our president to hold such a position of respect. I don?t normally write about secular politics in my editorial space for several reasons, including the conviction that secular politics simply are not as important as the everyday labors of Christians who are loving their neighbors toward faith in Christ."
Sir, if you do not realize that what happens to our nation, our people, our children, and who our national leaders are, is a very important part of the labors of Christians, please take your own advice and refrain from commenting on secular politics. Seriously!
In support of _______ above, a follower wrote:
hate
written by clhess, September 13, 2009
The outpouring of evil toward President Obama is sickening. It is being orchestrated by a relative few individuals with names such as Hannity, Coulter, and Limbaugh and they are managing to lead a large number of folks who call themselves "Christians" or "Americans" to repeat these evil outbursts. They claim to be concerned about the deficit or national debt but where were they when former President Reagan was tripling the national debt in just 8 years? What if some member of congress had shouted out to Reagan in the middle of a speech to members of congress "You lie!"? Even though Reagan made lying acceptable in the minds of many, such an outburst would have been condemned by all in the congress. Promoting hate is every bit as evil as promoting any other type of pornography. Folks are careful to shield their kids from internet porn but do they shield them from Fox News when hate figures are on?
|
EXAMPLE 3:
|
By _______, Editor, _______ Standard
|
|
Published: May 16, 2009
|
|
What do you think about torture?
For most of our lives, that has seemed like a theoretical question. Torture was the stuff of spy thrillers. So, your answer could have been based more on your antipathy for the villain in the latest James Bond movie or Robert Ludlum novel than on principled ethical decision-making.
Unfortunately, torture no longer is the stuff of fiction. Nor, sadly, can we pass it off as the exclusive domain of despots and dictators. Now, we are familiar with the places, legal theories and techniques that force us to acknowledge our beloved country has implemented torture for its own purposes. We know about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. We have read and heard about government legal briefs that justified torture. Most of us could describe how waterboarding works.
We cannot deny torture. We must confront its reality. We must come to grips with how we feel about it.
Recently, I have been disappointed to learn the demographic group in which I reside "white evangelical Protestant Christians" is the segment of the U.S. population that most enthusiastically embraces torture.
A new survey by the Pew Research Center reveals 62 percent of white evangelicals believe the use of torture against suspected terrorists can often (18 percent) or sometimes (44 percent) be justified. This compares to 49 percent of the total U.S. population who believe torture can often (15 percent) or sometimes (34 percent) be justified.
I know many of you in fact, apparently, most of you disagree with me. (On this issue, I take ironic comfort in joining company with an ultra-conservative ethicist with whom I often disagree, Richard Land, and a moderate/progressive ethicist with whom I usually agree, David Gushee.) But it's embarrassing to realize the population at-large is more likely than evangelical Christians to take what I believe to be a Christlike position regarding torture. No matter how I analyze the situations and possible outcomes, I cannot picture Jesus torturing someone?for any purpose.
Of course, torture is exceedingly complicated. Although we don't have the space to do it here, we must differentiate between "enhanced interrogation techniques" and torture. Some physically and psychologically demanding practices do not cross the line into torture. But most reasonable people agree waterboarding is torture. And my own tribe of Christians leads the way in embracing it. This is disturbing.
Some people defend torture because they believe torturing a small number of foreigners can be justified to save the lives of a larger number of Americans. This argument should be dismissed on two counts. First, it's based on a questionable assumption. Considerable evidence suggests torture is less effective than many other interrogation methods. More significantly, however, this is a utilitarian approach to ethics. At root, it means the ends justifies the means. Americans, not to mention Bible-believing Christians, historically have taken pride in being better than that. We must avoid such flimsy ethics, even when we approach something as scary as terrorism.
Ironically, many Christians who practice utilitarian ethics to justify terrorism excoriate others who argue the ends justify the means to support embryonic stem cell research.
This brings us to a broader point: Christians must lead the way in developing a consistent ethic that supports life. Christians who oppose abortion but then endorse torture and support capital punishment (particularly in the face of mounting evidence of wrongful convictions) are not consistently pro-life. Catholics come the closest to being consistent, but evangelicals are far from it.
These are difficult issues. Consensus is challenging. Still, for the sake of righteousness and the gospel, we must be consistent.
_________ is editor of the __________ Standard.
Ameritianity Responded:
Recently the editor of a Christian Denominations Newspaper wrote about his position on "waterboarding" . . . that it was "Torture" and was an indication of "Moral Inconsistancy." We disagree. His statements are in RED as Ameritianity responds.
RE: Torture, life & moral consistency
"But most reasonable people would agree waterboarding is torture. And my own tribe of Christians leads the way in embracing it. This is disturbing. Some people defend torture because they believe torturing a small number of foreigners can be justified to save the lives of a larger number of Americans."
This writer would fall into the category of Americans who are, in your words, "unreasonable." Equating favoring "waterboarding" to a "utilitarian approach to ethics" simply doesn't hold water. This is not a case of "the ends justifies the means" or "situational ethics" as you imply in your editorial. (David)
The phrase "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" comes to mind. These terms are found in a specific order because without the first, the following have no value. In our Christian community, we speak of the "Right to Life." We take a stand against abortion because we believe Life begins at conception and that Life is a gift from God. If we did not believe that the Life of a baby is of greater value than the Liberty or Pursuit of Happiness of the mother, we would not deserve to win the fight against abortion. God's plan of Salvation is all about the blessing of Eternal Life. The very price God determined to be the price that He would pay for the Salvation of all who would accept His Gift and His Plan was no less than the Life of His Son Jesus.
Let us get a couple issues out of the way before getting to the ultimate question. Yes, some people in our Armed Forces have mistreated prisoners and that is wrong. Some superiors may have ordered some to carry out illegal mistreatment by their subordinates. That is wrong. Police Officers have been known to use excessive force which could also be torture, on non-foreigners. But that is not the issue herein. Waterboarding may or may not be "torture." That would be based on the definition people choose to use which is usually based on whether or not they support the political party in power at the moment. But we will go with the assumption that it is torture.
In your editorial you mention "suspected terrorists." None of the captives who were waterboarded were suspects. They were captured on the battlefield attempting to "torture to death" our men, who were fighting for freedom, fighting for the Life of others. In addition, they admitted to knowing about additional attacks against our country which were imminent and designed to "torture to death" even more Americans.
You write "Ironically, many Christians who practice utilitarian ethics to justify terrorism excoriate others who argue the ends justify the means to support embryonic stem cell research." Sir, resorting to waterboarding to save thousands of lives is not "terrorism." You state that "Considerable evidence suggests torture is less effective than many other interrogation methods." That is true. Three (3) captured terrorists were waterboarded. That is why every other possible technique was used by our government before resorting to waterboarding when time allowed.
Funny thing about Life! Even the terrorists who were waterboarded seem to have a higher regard for Life than you do. The terrorists were willing to give up their groups plans for future attacks on the United States for the purpose of taking away the Lives of Americans in order to . . . save their own Lives! They could have allowed themselves to die for their cause. But, they chose Life.
It was God who created Life out of dust. It was God who breathed Life into man. God wants us to place the very highest regard and value on Life just as He did in providing that Life was the ultimate price that would be paid for the Souls of men. Sometime in the past couple of years you spoke about our need to lessen the importance of "Nationalism." In your editorial we are discussing today, you mentioned "torturing a few foreigners" to save a larger number of Americans. You seem to be supporting the current tendency for some to bash the USA, implying that we are those "arrogant Americans." Questions: Who created nations? Who divided people by language and disbursed them around the world? Who established national government? Kings?
We live in an imperfect nation with imperfect people. But, millions have sacrificed the most valuable commodity in creation so that this nation may long endure. We are blessed to live in the most successful, most free, most giving, nation in the history of the world. No nation has paid a greater price for the LIFE of those in other nations. God's Word tells us:
"If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." II Chronicles 7:14 (NIV)
Millions of Americans who are called by the name of Christ humble themselves, pray, and seek God?s face while turning from their wicked ways every single day. God has healed our land many times. We are indeed a blessed nation. We are blessed because we have recognized the value of God's Created Life. We have remained free because we have been willing to sacrifice for Life, both within our borders and on the land of those "foreigners" you mentioned. Without Life nothing else is of value. When confronted with the opportunity to save Lives, any and all force is justified and it has nothing to do with the ends justifying the means or situational ethics.
"Catholics come the closest to being consistent, but evangelicals are far from it." you said. My goodness! In the most recent general election, the majority a Catholics voted for the most Pro-Abortion, Anti-Life President in our nation's history. The majority of evangelicals did not. To evangelicals, Life is the ultimate issue. You are embarrassed? You are disappointed? Sir, you have yet to understand the value our God has placed on the Life He created. You failed to mention the demographic of Blacks in the USA. 95% of Blacks voted for the Black candidate in our most recent election and he is the most Anti-Life candidate in history having boasted:
"Thirty-five years after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it's never been more important to protect a woman?s right to choose....Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America." Barack H. Obama
RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. Rules for Radicals By Saul Alinsky - 1971
This rule is most often used when applying to the political goals of defeating a political enemy. It is also applicable when dealing with those whose desire it is to kill us. The enemy would like to put us in the position of violating our own standards when dealing with their evil. They will succeed in this if we do not understand the Order of God's Creation. Our current enemy does not realize that we place the highest value on the very thing they place the least value on . . . LIFE.
Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. Think about the choice of birth or abortion. Would we not encourage a young woman with an unplanned, untimely pregnancy to sacrifice her personal pursuit of happiness, and possibly her liberty, at least temporarily, for the Life of the baby she is carrying?
On a personal note, I have experienced the inability, for a time, to pursue my happiness. I have had my liberty taken away for a while. But, I still had my life. With my life, I was able to have my liberties restored and have been able to resume my pursuit of happiness.
It is regrettable that you are "disappointed" and "embarrassed" to learn that the demographic group in which you reside is the segment that "most enthusiastically embrace torture." It is even more regrettable that you have chosen to label them as enthusiastic torturers. No one, including those in the Bush administration who were faced with defending the USA, are enthusiastic about torture.
We often encourage our children to think about what they might face some day and decide beforehand what they will do in situations which may present themselves. If a criminal or terrorist took a loved one of yours captive and was holding them in a place where they knew the oxygen would run out in one hour, decide now what you would do. If you can't decide, or if you don't choose to do anything possible to save the life of your loved one, please, make a note of my phone number now and give me a call should such a situation arise. I will choose Life.
Editor: www.ameritianity.com
PS:
We owe the Bush Administration tremendous gratitude for keeping the USA safe from more attacks. Even in doing so, those interrogated still have their heads, their eyes, their limbs, and their lives. We've had enough of the Obama pretentious "moral high ground". We expect our elected leaders to do all that is needed to keep America safe and free. We cannot allow the insanity of letting terrorists hit us first.
When someone has no moral or ethical foundation, when you have only the "opinion" of other men to rely on, and when that opinion is based on political motives, moral confusion follows. This President was confronted with pirates who had taken over 100+ ships off the coast of Somalia. No hostages have been killed. Pirates are teenagers. One hostage is taken and money is demanded. The decision is made to kill the pirates.
Yet, another President makes the decision, after a terrorist attack that killed 3000+ Americans, to "waterboard" three known terrorists, one who stated that he knew of additional imminent attacks on Americans, after members of Congress and the Legal Establishment gave advice and consent, and that President and his Administration are threatened with prosecution by the very people who authorized killing the teenagers who had not yet hurt anyone. All three terrorists who were "waterboarded" are still living, have their heads, arms, legs, fingers, and had an experience less traumatic than USMC Boot Camp or Navy Seal training, That is moral confusion and playing politics at a very dangerous level.
Do you have an opinion on Liberalism in the Church?
|
|
EXAMPLE #4:
Posted by
thelastcrusade
October 11th, 2009
Why We Are Going to Hell ? Part 3,995
Conservative Protestants Condone Law-Breaking
Has the Christian Church Gone Crazy???
by Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.
thelastcrusade.org
Evangelical Christians this week offered the Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and members of the U.S. Senate Immigration Reform Committee their ringing endorsement of full amnesty for the 20 to 30 million illegal aliens within the country.
Open borders and high immigration, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) proclaimed, increases membership in evangelical churches and is good for the economy.
Rev. Leith Anderson, president of the NAE, said there was no dissent among the members of his organization in ratifying a pro-amnesty resolution.
He testified that the Gospel requires that Christians be willing to forgive illegal aliens for breaking existing immigration laws and statutes.
Rev. Anderson added: "We believe that undocumented immigrants who have otherwise been law abiding members of our communities should be offered the opportunity to pay any taxes or penalties owed, and over time earn the right to become U.S. citizens and permanent residents. The process of redemption and restitution is core to Christian beliefs, as we were all once lost and redeemed through love of Jesus Christ."
The NAE describes itself as ". . . a network of 40 denominations comprising more than 45,000 local churches located in every congressional district and every state."
Most of the member denominations uphold a literal interpretation of scripture and intransigent support for traditional values. The list of includes:
-
Assemblies of God
-
Brethren in Christ Church
-
Christian Reformed Church in North America
-
Church of God
-
Church of the Nazarene
-
Churches of Christ In Christian Union
-
Conservative Lutheran Association
-
Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches
-
Evangelical Presbyterian Church
-
Evangelical Free Church of America
-
Fellowship of Evangelical Churches
-
Free Methodist Church of North America
-
General Association of General Baptist
-
International Church of the Foursquare Gospel
-
International Fellowship of Christian Assemblies
-
International Pentecostal Church of Christ
-
International Pentecostal Holiness Church
-
Presbyterian Church in America
-
Primitive Methodist Church USA
-
Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America
-
The Brethren Church
-
The Christian & Missionary Alliance
-
The Evangelical Church
-
The Salvation Army
-
The Vineyard, USA
-
Transformation Ministries
-
United Brethren in Christ
-
US Conference of the Mennonite Brethren Churches
-
The Wesleyan Church Corporation
The position of the NAE remains incomprehensible to many conservative Christian conservatives, including Rev. Judith Schmitt of Puritan Congregation Church in Scranton, PA. "It's outrageous for any Christian or Christian organization to condone law-breaking," Rev. Schmitt said. "Forgiveness is central to the Christian doctrine but approval and reward of wrong-doing is not."
Others, including conservative writer Patrick J. Buchanan, wonder why the endorsement of plans to grant full amnesty fails to create national outrage. He points out that while 25 million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed, "8.5 million U.S. jobs are held by illegal aliens who broke into the country or overstayed their visas."
Senator Schumer and other advocates for amnesty argue that illegals take jobs that Americans are unwilling to accept.
This argument has been laid to rest by a raid on six Swift & Co. meatpacking plants which rounded up 1,200 illegal aliens, 10 percent of the workforce. The raid failed to create any employment problems for Swift. In a matter of weeks, the plants were operating at full force - manned by hundreds of native-born Americans who were delighted to take the jobs.
Says Vanderbilt University Professor Carol Swain, "Whenever there's an immigration raid, you find white, black and legal immigrant labor lining up to do these jobs Americans will supposedly not do."
|
|
