Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How Jesus endorsed Bush's invasion of Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:24 AM
Original message
How Jesus endorsed Bush's invasion of Iraq
For much of the past 25 years, a small group of Catholic intellectuals has worked to inject its radical religious ideas into the nation's politics. The leader of this theoconservative movement is Father Richard John Neuhaus. In the pages of his monthly magazine First Things, Neuhaus and his ideological allies set the theocon agenda on a range of policies. Michael Novak of the American Enterprise Institute argues that the American founders were orthodox religious believers who thought of the United States as a Christian nation -- and that American-style capitalism perfectly conforms to Catholic social teaching. Robert P. George of Princeton University insists that abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, and same-sex marriage (and perhaps even contraception and masturbation) should be outlawed. And George Weigel of Washington's Ethics and Public Policy Center uses Catholic just-war reasoning to justify neoconservative foreign policy. As the U.S. began to prepare for war in Iraq in 2002, the theocons set out to provide theological justification for the coming conflagration.

Around the time of the January 2002 State of the Union speech -- when President Bush broadened the scope of the "war on terror" to include an "axis of evil" consisting of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea -- the mood on the American right began to grow fierce. What had been a uniform chorus of patriotic support for the president and the Afghanistan campaign quickly evolved into a frenzy of bellicosity. Some columnists denounced deterrence and stability in favor of unilateral preemptive war to overthrow hostile regimes. Others openly advocated American imperialism. Still others proposed that the United States act to topple the governments of a series of sovereign nations in the Muslim Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. And these were the intellectually respectable suggestions, published in mainstream newspapers and long-established journals of opinion. Farther down the media hierarchy, on cable news, Internet websites, and Web blogs, conservatives of all stripes closed ranks, unleashing a verbal barrage on any and all who dissented from a united front in favor of unapologetic American military muscle. The participants in this endless pep rally were insistent on open-ended war, overtly hostile to dissent, and thoroughly unforgiving of the slightest criticism of the United States abroad. They were dismissive of complication and analysis, defensive by default, worshipful of "manliness," admiring of swaggering bluntness, contemptuous of doubt and indecision, addicted to hyperbole, eager to expose "appeasement," and prone to paranoia. Self-congratulation and self-righteousness ruled the day.

The theocons contributed to this atmosphere of pro-war hysteria in several ways. Neuhaus established himself as the rare priest who would grant interviews to National Public Radio in order to defend the justice of invading Iraq. Weigel spoke on college campuses about the administration's firm grasp of the just war tradition. And Novak traveled to Rome to lecture Vatican bureaucrats on the importance of deposing Saddam Hussein and transforming Iraq into a democratic oasis in Middle East. But by far the most significant theocon statement on the invasion of Iraq was Weigel's "Moral Clarity in a Time of War," which he delivered as a lecture in the fall of 2002 at the Catholic University of America Law School before publishing it as a lengthy essay in the January 2003 issue of First Things. The essay was clearly written to provide moral and theological justification for the Bush administration's Iraq policy in every one of its details.

Weigel's case for war ran as follows. In the post-September 11 world, the "peace of order" among nations is fundamentally threatened by international terrorist organizations and rogue states that traffic in weapons of mass destruction. In an ideal world, the UN would possess the means and the will to deal with these threats through the use of coercive military force. But, alas, the UN is deficient in both means and will. Luckily, the United States possesses both in abundance, just as it recognizes the unique responsibility for maintaining global order that flows from its status as the world's preeminent military power. America thus has the solemn duty to act as the worldwide enforcer of international justice -- including the punishment of those who flout the peace of order -- regardless of whether the other nations of the world recognize the legitimacy of such action. In serving as providentially appointed prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner of international justice around the world, the United States furthers its own good (at home and abroad) as well as the good of all decent human beings on the planet. The unilateral overthrow of the government of Saddam Hussein is one example of such righteous American action, but it is hardly the only likely or defensible one to take place in the near future.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43576/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. That Jesus, always pulling sneaky stunts like this...Bad Jesus! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:42 AM
Response to Original message
2. For the record...
Jesus had nothing to do with it. I say that as someone who has absolutely no faith in religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. It appears to be done in his name by his supposed followers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. While other of his supposed followers
oppose the war. All, both those in favor of war and opposed to war basing their position on their allegiance to the teachings of Christ.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I don't think those that cause and support the war, murder, exploitation and torture can be
"canceled" or "balanced out" because there are also those that oppose it, if that is what is implied. Nor is it necessary to oppose these things based on religious doctrine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. No that is not what is implied
But if you want to lay the sins of the Bush Administration at Christianities door, than you have to contend with those Christians who oppose the Bush Administration. If you want to lay the sins of the Bush Administration at the feet of the Bush Administration, no such problem exists.

And of course it is possible to both support and oppose President Bush for non-religious reasons.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Bush claims to do what he does as a "Christian."
And many Christians believe that he was divinely tapped for the power of his position. Many, many of these same people support what he does without question, including mass murder, illegal war, torture and hate.

If other Christians don't believe in this and don't support this, then they need to engage those who are using their name to commit these acts.

Although a small minority have the courage to do so, by far the vast majority choose to look the other way or remain silent or become defensive.

That is why what is currently happening is mass murder, illegal war, torture and hate. If the majority of Christian Americans acted resolutely, this would not be taking place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Yes - and that's why it's ok to kill Muslims
If Muslims really wanted to they could stop the terrorists who killed 3,000 of us on September 11th. Instead most Muslims looked the other way, and many seem to support the general thrust of Al-Qaeda if not their tactics. So killing Muslims is totally justified.

Oh wait, that's thinly disguised bigotry masquerading as thought. My apologies.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. There you go again with that "balance" thing.
But it fails again. Muslims didn't elect the terrorists who killed 3,000 as their President.

They don't pray for them in Church on Sunday (or the day that would be their equivalent).

They don't vote for them, campaign for them, carry around pictures of them, put "W" symbols (or the equivalent) on their cars, claim that they represent Islam, or perpetuate a cult of personality for them.

"Christians" do all of these things.

That is why there are illegal wars going on where thousands are dying every day. Thousands of THEM, and scores of Americans, at the same time.

If the majority of Christians said no, all at once, and demanded it, it would cease almost immediately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Well I can see that your mind is made up.
It's really a shame DU allows any Christians to participate in the discussion at all, seeing how blood thirsty we apparently are.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-31-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Consider this: I admire Abraham Lincoln more than almost anyone else, and he was instrumental
in starting the Republican Party. Today, that party is a very corrupt and twisted organization that has led to the perversion of religion and the planning and execution of illegal wars and torture.

You may tell me: "Those are not followers of Abraham Lincoln, who was a most upright and good man."

And I might even agree.

But what you are telling me is really a non-sequiter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. True. That was the title of the article, but they probably should have
put quotes around Jesus' name. I am not at all religious, but I don't think he would have gone for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
4. They moved pretty far from St Augustine
Edited on Mon Oct-30-06 07:58 AM by karynnj
who articulated what a "just" war could be. The Pope, himself, called the war not a just war and begged Bush not to invade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. the Pope is only relevant when it is politically expediant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
6. The Path to Pax Romana Americana Banana
Are they done with the altar boys yet or not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 05:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC