Friday, February 21, 2003
Joe Q. Public vs. The Church (on Iraq)
posted by Kensy |
While surfing around the BBC site today, I saw this page containing the views of people around the world on the moral basis for a war in Iraq. While it was heartening to see that most people were staunchly against the war at present, the statements made by some people made me think.
Certainly, a moral case has been made for a war against Iraq. ... As far as the moral authority of the Catholic Church to interject its opinions, it lost most of its credibility with me when I learned how little its hierarchy did to protect innocent young children. No, I do not think their opinion counts for much in this matter. - Kathryn O'Brien, USA
Like many others in the US, Kathryn has confused the message with the messenger. 2+2 = 4 no matter who says it - even Jack the Ripper. In other words, it's not the moral credibility of the person making the case, but the credibility of the case itself that is to be considered.
No one will thank the US and its allies more than the Iraqi people for a military intervention that removes Saddam's regime from power. The only thing required for evil to prosper, is for good men to do nothing. - Ian Raine, UK
Agreed. But good men do not have to go to war in order to do something. As to the Iraqi people being happy - that is something one has to see. After all, it is not Saddam who is blamed for a decade of embargoes and prevention of life-saving medicines making their way to Iraq.
I find it strange that President Bush insists that we must get rid of dictators and yet when the UN disagrees with USA it refuses to accept the democratic decision. That is what democracy is all about, being able to accept decisions you don't agree with as long as they are made in a democratic way. USA may be a democracy but internationally they are dictators that must be obeyed or you will have to face the consequences. Yes Saddam should be kept under close inspection but lets do it in a democratic way, no single country has the right to attack another. - Per, Sweden
Don't tell me about God. Read your history: Do you know how many people have been killed just because they answered the God question wrong? - Sid, Canada
What can we tell you about? On what basis should this war be fought? On the basis of democracy? On the basis of a technical violation of Resolution 1441? How many people have been killed because they answered the "Do you support the US" question wrong? Vietnam? What about the US threat to withdraw aid from Turkey unless it agreed to let the US use it for military operations?
It started of as a WAR against TERROR and no link was found, then it became a WAR against WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD) and no WMD where found. Now it is a Moral War, whose morals are they? Tony Blair's, where was Tony Blair's morals when Madeleine Albright said that the death of 500 thousand Iraqi children was a price worth paying for the sanctions continue. - ibrahim uddin, Netherlands
Right again. However, ibrahim makes the mistake of judging the credibility of the argument by the credibility of the person arguing for it.
Whose "moral" standards are we using here? From a Christian perspective, if we are using God's standards, then why is it wrong to bomb Iraq and yet continue aborting unborn babies by the thousand in our own country? As a Christian, I believe that if we apply God's standards to one thing it should apply to everything else, something that I'd like both government and church leaders implementing in their respective policies and theology. - Matthew Hughes, Wales , UK
And finally - the modern dilemma. How little we value the dignity of human life today! If one can abort unborn babies, why should one flinch from killing babies who are born disabled? See where the argument goes ...