Jesus in Baghdad Why we should keep Franklin Graham out of Iraq.

Slate ^ | April 11, 2003 | Steven Waldman

[Dec31,1999]

on = one. Sorry about that.

[DED]

It's now slate.msn.com; I assume that indicates something about the financing.

[DED]

I think we need to help them develop a Constitution, but that's another article altogether.

[The_Media_never_lie]

Oh no, not another "evangelize the Arabs" thread.

[lanceboyle]

I say, let everyone in the country. Because when the contractors come in to the country to rebuild it, those workers will need Union representation. AFL-CIO, get off yer duffs and send some organizers. The troops helped the Iraqis win not only religious freedom, but the freedom for a person to join a collective-bargaining organization.

[DED]

I think it would be more accurate to characterize this as a "what do you think about our government BLOCKING someone from evangelizing the Arabs?".

[Cindy]

~SAMARITANSPURSE.org (Click Here for more information on this wonderful charity.)~

[zarf]

Mr. Graham should keep his rear end out of this buisness for the time being. Religious freedom, hopefully, will come in time in the region but the last thing we need are high profile bible thumpers confirming the their worst expectations about our intentions.

[UbIwerks]

I've read enough of this guy's s...(read without the elipses).

Franklin Graham is one of the three wise men, alongside Pat Robertson and Rev. Jerry Falwell. Franklin Graham understands what Islam is and is not afraid to say it.

Except for Israel, I think the Middle East should be Christianized.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

So does this mean we should keep the Islamists out of the USA?

[antaresequity]

The author seems to feel a need to educate his Western American readers who Franklin Grahm is [I didn't know who he is].

Franklin Graham is the son of Billy Graham

Then he goes on to argue how much of threat he is to future stability in Iraq...to a populace who have absolutley no idea who this guy is.

This missive has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with the authors dislike of Mr. Graham.

These aren't the droids your looking for Mr Waldman...move along

[nanny]

but the last thing we need are high profile bible thumpers confirming the their worst expectations about our intentions.

Just what are our intentions? Purely to give them freedom and democracy? The brand of democracy we now have - where the Presidents threatens his own citizens in favor of one religion or chastizes one religion for speaking out against another religion - I am confused. Someone with food, clothing and medical care that would tell them about Jesus would be worse?

Franklin Graham has been helping poor people around the world for many years, many, many of them have been Muslims.

I guess some people do not understand that Christianity is not a religion that can be forced on anyone - you have to accept it yourself and it is between you and God. There is no government involved - maybe that is what scares people about it. It is a personal, independent thing that doesn't need government - oh horrors!!!!!! We cannot let that get out.

[Mr. Mojo]

Graham is also....."poised and ready" to send representatives of the charity he runs to Iraq as soon as possible.

You go, Graham!

[KC_Conspirator]

I will never be convinced that Islam is a peaceful religion.

Well maybe its because their actiosn speak louder than words.

[zechariah]

In fact, religious liberty does not trump all concerns. Among the concerns it does not trump is the safety of our soldiers and the desire not to have the entire Muslim world wanting to wage war against America. And make no mistake: Franklin Graham's mission to Iraq will help convince the Arab world that America is out to convert Muslims to Christianity. What Graham is doing probably isn't illegal; it's merely immoral.

Abraham set out from Ur--present day Iraq. Are the sons of Abraham not allowed to return?

As if there aren't Christians in the Middle East already. Always have been and always will be. To call an effort to convert Muslims to Christianity immoral shows just how loose a grasp the author has on the subject of morality.

[z]

[willyboyishere]

You're the first two responses on this thread to make any sense. If Graham is let in his activities SHOULD be seriously circumscribed. I can't believe we would fight this war militarily with as much care and political scrupulousness as we have only to undermine it by bringing
in Christian evangelists to try to "convert" a population that is basically secular even with its strong ties to Shi'ite and Suni traditions. The Iraqis have enough problems to face for a good long time without having to deal with another religion to think about. This is absolutely the WORST thing that could happen.

[Restorer]

Oddly enough, I agree with most of what FG has to say about Islam.

But his presence in Iraq would be highly counter-productive.

Our goals in Iraq are secular. They have an overabundance of religion over there already.

[MHGinTN]

I have doubts that the average needy Iraqi would even know what Graham has said regarding Islam. It's a good call that Samaritan Purse workers would focus on helping first. Just being in Iraq to help, giving an example of caring by doing for them, might be all the workers would 'inflict' upon the Iraqis. Graham should personally stay out of Iraq until the society has had the opportunity to elect representative government. Then, if that government wants to allow him in, to preach, so be it. I would venture to say, Graham would be more than willing to have Smaritan's Purse in country giving aid, under instruction to speak/give answer for the hope that is within each worker only when asked.

[DED]

You might want to learn more about Samaritan's Purse before jumping to the conclusion that the organization would cause problems. It is an international relief organization (and a highly effective and respected one at that); not primarily an evangelical one.
http://www.samaritanspurse.org/home.asp#

[willyboyishere]

"Samaritan's Purse"---
----I'm sure the organization is wonderful. But there is no more highly charged place on earth than Iraq right now,
no place where the outcome of this earth-shaking upheaval we've started is more crucial, no place where the potential for everything to go badly or well is more fragile....if there's no evangelism, that would be fine...I just doubt that it would stay that way for very long. I don't want to see a repeat of the way that the Clinton Administration blundered in Somalia, fatuously turning what was supposedly a humanitarian mission
into an attempt at "nation-building" before it had ANY of its ducks in a row.