Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jesus in Baghdad Why we should keep Franklin Graham out of Iraq.
Slate ^ | April 11, 2003 | Steven Waldman

Posted on 04/13/2003 6:34:45 PM PDT by DED

With the exception of his unfortunate post-Sept. 11 call for a "crusade" against terrorism, President George Bush has fashioned his rhetoric about Islam carefully. The administration has scrupulously crafted numerous speeches that make clear that the United States is not making war on Islam, even as it hunts down Osama Bin Laden and invades Iraq.

I believe him: Ever since he was the governor of Texas in the mid-1990s, Bush has been friendly to Muslims and to Islam and has pointedly referred to "churches, synagogues, and mosques" in speeches. But I wouldn't believe Bush if I were a Muslim in the Middle East and saw his attitude toward Franklin Graham.

Franklin Graham is the son of Billy Graham and a far more influential figure in the evangelical Christian community than Jerry Falwell or even Pat Robertson. Graham is viewed as the torch-carrier for his father, who is still among the most beloved figures in American Christianity. Moreover, the Graham family is close to Bush. Billy Graham led Bush to Christianity in the 1980s; Franklin Graham delivered the invocation at his presidential inauguration.

In addition to being publicly allied with the Bush administration, Graham also happens to be stridently anti-Islam. His list of anti-Islam comments is long; his most succinct was that Islam is a "very evil and wicked religion."

Graham is also, he says, "poised and ready" to send representatives of the charity he runs to Iraq as soon as possible. His primary purpose is humanitarian aid—providing food and shelter—but he also admits, "I believe as we work, God will always give us opportunities to tell others about his Son. … We are there to reach out to love them and to save them, and as a Christian, I do this in the name of Jesus Christ."

There are reasons to have great respect for Graham: He has used his considerable fund-raising prowess to build up a humanitarian organization, Samaritan's Purse, rather than a crystal cathedral or a Bible theme park. Samaritan's Purse has done extraordinary work in many of the most difficult and impoverished places in the world. It spends a more than $100 million a year on aiding the needy. (It should be noted that Muslim radicals have attacked hospitals and projects run by Samaritan's Purse, which may, in some small way, have incited Graham's anti-Islam rhetoric.)

But I'm not sure any of this means that America's foreign-policy objectives are served by having a Bush-loving, Islam-bashing, Muslim-converting Christian icon on the ground in Iraq tending to the bodies and souls of the grateful but deeply suspicious Muslim population. Or, to put it more simply, the idea is absolutely loopy.

The Bush administration has taken a highly principled position of removing itself from discussion of the matter: Ari Fleischer insists that the administration can't block a private group from doing its thing. Ellen Yount, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is coordinating the humanitarian efforts, elaborated: "What private charitable organizations choose to do without U.S. government funding is ultimately their decision. How could the U.S. government control that? We can't just say to an organization, 'You can or cannot do something,' if we don't fund them. Imagine what the United States Congress would say to us."

The idea that the U.S. government is powerless to do anything about Samaritan's Purse seems odd. We can obliterate another nation's army in a few weeks, but when it comes to reining in a disruptive charity, well, our hands our tied? Besides, given the Bush-Graham connection, reining in Franklin Graham need not even be an official government action. I'm pretty sure that if George Bush or Colin Powell called up Graham and asked him to stand down, he probably would, without a single regulatory shot fired.

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.

The administration's sudden fastidiousness about civil liberties has everything to do with who Franklin Graham is: not only a friend of Bush's, but, along with his supporters and the Southern Baptist Convention, arguably the largest and most loyal voting bloc in Bush's re-election strategy. And so Bush refuses to do unto Franklin Graham as was done unto Sister Souljah. This is cowardly. To be fair—or maybe to be generous—Bush may be leaving Graham alone because he thinks that Samaritan's Purse does good humanitarian work and that's what the Iraqis need most desperately. And I do believe that half of Graham's motivation is genuinely to help feed people—the other half being the desire to save the souls of some Muslims by helping them find Jesus before they die of thirst.

(Excerpt) Read more at slate.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: baghdad; franklingraham; iraq; islam; jesus; samaritanspurse; stevenwaldman; waldman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: Dec31,1999
on = one. Sorry about that.
21 posted on 04/13/2003 7:22:28 PM PDT by Dec31,1999 (You show me a country that doesn't have clear title to property, and I'll show you a poor country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
It's now slate.msn.com; I assume that indicates something about the financing.
22 posted on 04/13/2003 7:26:25 PM PDT by DED (Liberals Never Learn. *LNL*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dec31,1999
I think we need to help them develop a Constitution, but that's another article altogether.
23 posted on 04/13/2003 7:27:25 PM PDT by DED (Liberals Never Learn. *LNL*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DED
Oh no, not another "evangelize the Arabs" thread.
24 posted on 04/13/2003 7:27:47 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
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.
25 posted on 04/13/2003 7:28:36 PM PDT by lanceboyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie
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?".
26 posted on 04/13/2003 7:40:35 PM PDT by DED (Liberals Never Learn. *LNL*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

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

27 posted on 04/13/2003 7:44:51 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DED
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.
28 posted on 04/13/2003 7:47:42 PM PDT by zarf (Republicans for Sharpton 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnfl61
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.

29 posted on 04/13/2003 7:53:08 PM PDT by UbIwerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DED
So does this mean we should keep the Islamists out of the USA?
30 posted on 04/13/2003 8:04:19 PM PDT by Ursus arctos horribilis ("It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!" Emiliano Zapata 1879-1919)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DED
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

31 posted on 04/13/2003 8:05:09 PM PDT by antaresequity (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zarf
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.

32 posted on 04/13/2003 8:07:54 PM PDT by nanny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

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

You go, Graham!

33 posted on 04/13/2003 8:17:15 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rebel85
I will never be convinced that Islam is a peaceful religion.

Well maybe its because their actiosn speak louder than words.

34 posted on 04/13/2003 8:41:50 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DED
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]
35 posted on 04/13/2003 9:20:45 PM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Restorer; skr
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.
36 posted on 04/13/2003 9:32:32 PM PDT by willyboyishere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: willyboyishere
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.
37 posted on 04/13/2003 9:38:48 PM PDT by Restorer (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
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.
38 posted on 04/13/2003 9:41:51 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: willyboyishere; Restorer; skr
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#
39 posted on 04/13/2003 11:21:23 PM PDT by DED (Liberals Never Learn. *LNL*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DED
"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.
40 posted on 04/13/2003 11:46:54 PM PDT by willyboyishere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson