Posted on 09/26/2001 8:39:21 AM PDT by flamefront
I think pacifism in this instance flys in the face of common sense AND religion. Why would anyone argue for murderers to go free? Even the Bible doesn't say such things. Our government and military are taking the place of a police force. Justice is just on a much bigger scale. Remember too that the Vatican turned a blind eye to the Nazis killing Jews. I have to disagree with the Pope. He, of all people, should know what the Bible says about justice and wars in the OT.
Thanks! Your posting of this article is why I contribute to FreeRepublic on an automatic monthly basis and come to FreeRepublic for most of my news! Kudos! Rush may have picked it up from your post!
Thanks for this from Kelley's article:
In 1942, George Orwell wrote, in Partisan Review, this of Great Britain's pacifists:
"Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me.'!"
Substitute Pro Arab Terrorist for Pro-Fascist, and Orwell's statement is up todate after 9/11!
I'm not nearly so saintly as Jesus or Ghandhi. I accept the likelihood that military action will be required to flush out criminals responsible for these terrorist attacks.
Punish the guilty but spare the innocent.
Check it out at --- http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20010926-16894360.htm
Perhaps they hadn't heard that the IMF/World Bank conference was cancelled. That would explain why a group of about 90 anti-something individuals showed up Monday at Farragut Square to protest globalization, er, free trade, er, the anticipated U.S. response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks – and why thousands of others plan to join them this weekend."I just came down from Boston to be a part of whatever protest I could find," said one participant, who presumably carried additional posterboard, or possibly even interchangeable placards. ...
But more than anything else, participation in the protest circuit provides the smug, self-righteous satisfaction that comes with knowing that parading around parks named after deceased admirals and shouting slogans at high volume is all that is necessary to solve all the world's problems, including racism, sexism and yes, terrorism. Surely, even Osama bin Laden would have come around if only he had seen the "Restraint is not retaliation" sign featured at Monday's rally....
The IAC is predicting that "thousands" of its clueless brethren will show up for a rally in Washington this Saturday, which, shockingly, is scheduled to start at noon. It should certainly be easy to pick them out: Each of them will be brimming with indignation . . . and carrying an interchangeable placard.
This is not the principles of my country and the fools who believe this will sell out their freedom for security, for revenge and for a narrow interpretation of reality.
bite me, butthead.
How's that?
When the God of the universe died on a cross for those 7,000 people He made the ultimate statement regarding the value of human life. If we fail to act it may well be that we are denying Him.
Do really mean to say that Jesus would expect me to stand by and watch someone murder my children?
Jesus' mission was quite specific. His death on the cross was not pacifistic, it was quite literally to defeat sin, evil and death in the universe. It was, in a way, an act of war. In it he was coming to the defense of every person who ever lived.
That does not mean we are not called to defend ourselves and others by the appropriate means, in love and justice, not revenge. Yes, sometimes those means result in the death of the one who attacks us. But to fail to defend—even to the point of willingess to sacrifice our own life in that defense—would be to deny the very value of human life that Jesus died on the cross to protect.
It's amazing the things you know that just aren't true. In the first place, the chief Rabbi of Rome during WWII converted to Catholicism because of the great help given to his people by the Catholic Church. You have fallen prey to recent attempts to rewrite history. Even the NY Times praised the Pope at the time for speaking out in defense of the innocent. You have been deceived.
And in the second place, the Pope's spokesman recently let it be known that the Pope did not have a problem with the US defending itself against terrorists. So there's no "pacifism" from the Pope for you to ignorantly rail against.
SD
Certainly those with deeply felt religious convictions aren't making that argument. That is a leap from what you quoted to where you landed.
That's why I qualified the judgment. Jesus was mostly, but not entirely, non-violent. OTOH, he didn't just condemn sinners to an ignominious fate. He sought them out, ate with them, and offered them a path to forgiveness and redemption.
Major bad idea.
This would result in Bin Laden's dream of a united Islamic world engaged in jihad against the infidels of the West.
Repeat after me:
Not all Muslims are Arab;
Not all Arabs are Muslim;
MOST of both groups are not terrorists.
gee, now you're peaceful and mature...
But then, that's your right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.