Catholics and the War
November 18th, 2007 at 09:07am Mark Noonan
The priest of my parish once opined in my hearing that the war is a “stupid war”. It was in the nature of an offhand comment, but I think it touched upon a core belief of this good priest - that war is stupid, and thus this war is stupid, too. I cannot believe that this priest so filled with love of God and neighbor would think that the people who fight the war are stupid, or that those who agree with the war policy are stupid. Still, it cannot be ignore that throughout Catholic history, war has been held to be a regretable necessity at best, and an incredible evil at worst. What about the Crusades? A long-delayed counter-attack - most of the time, the Church from the get-go was working to limit war in one way or another - the first bit of arms control was the Church’s attempt to ban the use of crossbows, after all, as an un-Christian weapon. It also cannot be denied - or ignored - that both the late, great John Paul II and the current Pope Benedict XVI have not had kind things to say of our effort in Iraq.
Since the start of the Iraq campaign, when lefty commenters discover I am Catholic, it follows swiftly that they will quote John Paul II or Benedict the XVI and then ask how I, as a Catholic, can support something supposedly condemned by such high authority. Quite simple - because these fine Popes are, in my opinion, wrong and I am completely free to disagree with them on the matter of the war in general and the liberation of Iraq in particular. Here are some words from Father Neuhaus on the matter:
The statement (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship - PDF) goes on to say: “We do not have specific competence in political, economic, and military strategies and do not assess particular tactics, but we can, as teachers, share a moral tradition to help inform policy choices. Our Catholic teaching on war and peace offers hard questions, not easy answers. Our nation must now focus more on the ethics of exit than on the ethics of intervention.”
Exactly. People may argue until the cows come home about the rightness or wrongness of what was done in 2003, but the question now is what is required for a “responsible transition,” recognizing that such a transition entails many considerations, including stability in the Middle East, the credibility of American power in world affairs, and the prospect of securing a government of law and basic decency for the Iraqi people.
In other words, not only does the Church not condemn the initial action of 2003, but it also does not command anything like the cut-and-run demands of the American political left. In fact, it would be morally wrong for America, at this point, to precipitously withdraw. We must focus on the exit, but the exit may take quite a long time and actually require a great deal more fighting before it can be completed. And focus on the exit we have - the whole program of American strategy in Iraq is to focus on the exit. But it is to be a responsible exit which improves the situation, not make it worse.
As the statement notes, the Church does not have the competance to rule on matters of political expediency or military strategy - it is, after, a group dedicated to the worship of God and bringing people to salvation; this long and difficult task means that the Church has little time to study the campaigns of Patton or the particulars of American internal politics. It is refreshing, by the way, to have an organization which will say where it is unable to judge. The Church judges matters of faith and morals. I cannot deny the Trinity and remain a Christian - a matter of faith. I cannot deny that extra-marital sex is disordered - a matter of morals. But in matters of politics, economics and war, it is up to me to act as my conscience - instructed by the Church on faith and morals - dictates. My Catholic-instructed conscience tells me that as hard as the task is, we must fight until victory is achieved - not just in Iraq, but in the entire War on Terrorism.
Entry Filed under: Religion, War on Terror
59 Comments
1. Boink Blogs&hellip | November 18th, 2007 at 9:12 am
[…] and the War Mark Noonan added an interesting post today on Catholics and the WarHere’s a small readingThe priest of […]
2. AgentFear | November 18th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Your comments seem a valiant stab at justifying a immorally wrong “war”, or just another way to allow yourself to sleep at night without incredible guilt.
If this “war” was just, right, and unequivocally correct in a battle against evil, then your comment would not be needed.
My take is, you seem to still be justifying our actions, and placating your conscience.
For example: “Quite simple - because these fine Popes are, in my opinion, wrong and I am completely free to disagree with them on the matter of the war in general and the liberation of Iraq in particular.”
Ok, they’re wrong and your right. That was easy now, wasn’t it? Starting to feel a little better?
Oh we can “argue until the cows come home about the rightness or wrongness of what was done in 2003…” how simple, how easy. Right, wrong, if doesn’t matter, what’s done is done.
Wrong. Wrong. It does matter. We did not go into Iraq to “liberate” it. That is a lie.
I think your statement, “not only does the Church not condemn the initial action of 2003…” implies that the Church condones the act. I did not read that in the text. Oh how we stretch the intent.
I somehow do not believe in anyway, shape or intent the Church condones a “war” on terror. A war that never ends. A war that feeds on itself.
As long as you can sleep at night my fine Christian. Sleep well.
3. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
So why do you attack and hate the Left for saying this war is stupid, yet have no problem when this priest says the exact same thing?
4. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
USA,
I don’t think I’d ever say a bad thing about a lefty who thinks the war stupid or wrong or something that we shouldn’t have done. Those are legitimate positions to hold - I consider them wrong, but I’m not all-knowing and thus am in no position to say a person cannot hold such opinions. My condemnations of the left are over people like our friend Agent, who believes absurd conspiracy theories about the war - who not only doesn’t understand what is happening, but refuses to try to understand.
I understand the revulsion against war - I share it. But some times there is a war to fight, and it must be fought. Pretending it can be otherwise is foolish. You can tell me endlessly how foolish it was for us to go into Iraq - I disagree, but you are free to tell me how wrong you think I am. On the other hand, we are there, now.
The correct moral position vis a vis Iraq is not how to “end” it, but how ensure that good comes out of it. A precipitous “end” to Iraq really only amounts to America abdicating its moral duty in Iraq. Much as you might want it to be that way, it isn’t Bush’s war - it is our war, America’s war. And America must do the right thing - and that means leave a better place than we found.
5. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
The issue is the war was started in the first place. And people who don’t understand responsibility want to divert the issue to “we are there now, get over it”. What you want is mad men who started this war to get away with displacing millions of people, ruining millions of lives; killing untold thousands of innocents, which you want to lie and make a small amount as possible. All to avoid the responsibility and subconsious guilt you have for supporting the bankrupt ideologies and morons who caused this in the first place. Your a criminal who wants to get away with murder and death. So you lie to get your way. You repeat word for word the lies given to you from the morons and liars you support: “We’re there now (haha), get over it”, “No it’s not 200,000 people dead it’s only 10,000.”
6. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Everyone,
“I don’t think I’d ever say a bad thing about a lefty who thinks the war stupid or wrong or something that we shouldn’t have done.”
LIE.
“My condemnations of the left are over people like our friend Agent, who believes absurd conspiracy theories about the war - who not only doesn’t understand what is happening, but refuses to try to understand.”
LIE.
“Pretending it can be otherwise is foolish.”
LIE.
“The correct moral position vis a vis Iraq is NOT how to “end” it”
LIE.
“it isn’t Bush’s war”
LIE.
Mark you can be out-debated extremely easily. On all these issues. But every lefty you have ever met has done this for you and it doesn’t get you any closer to opening up your eyes. Or any other psychopathic Conservative. Just shows how mindless you are, and your cohorts. And how being uneducated can ruin people’s lives if these people are allowed to vote or worse, be in charge.
7. Jeremiah | November 18th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
I somehow do not believe in anyway, shape or intent the Church condones a “war” on terror. A war that never ends. A war that feeds on itself.
AgentFear,
You need to come to an understanding of justifications of war in a Christian aspect before you can make a Judgement, which you clearly are lacking.
We are fighting a noble war for two primary purposes.
1. From a Christian standpoint, we know that Murder is clearly wrong, thus, we don’t just stand by and watch as our brothers and sisters in Iraq get slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands. No, the Christian thing to do is to step into action and provide safe havens for our brothers and sisters in harms way.
2. Since we know Murder is wrong, and that God in the beginning ordained punishment for Murder, then it is duty carry out God’s will–Genesis 9:6 ‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.’
So, that is the Lord’s Justice– those who commit Murder in wickedly purposes such as the Muslim Jihadists, will receive the same in return.
Immediately following the Ten Commandments (Sixth commandment–Thou shall not murder.)God institutes the Death Penalty for murder/crimes commited against humanity–Exodus 21:12–Anyone who strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death.
Jeremiah
8. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
I found this and it is a good example of what conservatives stand for:
“Learned people will be ridiculed and put to shame; the word of the wealthy person will be the only law.”
It’s exactly what Mark does.
9. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
“We are fighting a noble war for two primary purposes.”
LOL. You couldn’t stand debate.
10. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
USA,
Your comment is beneath contempt and unworthy to be responded to.
11. Jeremiah | November 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
USA,
You may laugh and scoff at those of us who are supporting the war, but one thing is for sure–The Troops are the ones who know the reasoning for the war first hand, and you will never take that away from them. They just laugh at you and move on with life, while you remain under your rock.
Read this young man’s account!
Freedom’s Fight!
Jeremiah
12. Bigfoot | November 18th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Mark you can be out-debated extremely easily.
USA, you did not come even remotely close to out-debating Mark. You merely offer unsupported accusations of lying.
You and Mark have some obvious differences of opinion, and you have every right to disagree with him, but no right to accuse someone of lying when the facts don’t back it up.
So I’ll give you one fact: Congress voted to give President Bush authorization to invade in 2003, and despite the criticism from some of its members, and despite accusations that they were “misled” about the WND, has continued to allocate funds for the war in Iraq. That fact alone makes it America’s war, and not merely George Bush’s war. I would also remind you that Congress passed the Iraqi Liberation Act back when Bill Clinton was president.
13. LewWaters | November 18th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Perhaps some may appreciate revisiting why we are at war in Iraq. A lengthy read, but well worth the time spent, if you desire truth and education on the subject.
Shattering Conventional Wisdom About Saddam’s WMD’s
The author, John Loftus, concludes, “On a personal note, as a Democrat, it gives me no pleasure to concede that Bush and Blair were right. As a lawyer, I must conclude from this new documentary evidence and my own interviews that the leaders of the Coalition were completely ignorant of the underground Iraqi WMD facilities, but, in hindsight, I must concede that the discovery of Saddam’s secret nuclear program now provides sufficient legal justification for the use of force.”
14. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
“USA, Your comment is beneath contempt and unworthy to be responded to.”
LIE. The TRUTH is beneath contempt for you?…Is that what you said? You copped out. Since your ideas failed you. I am worthy, THAT’S why you cop out. Don’t you forget that and I won’t forget your a coward whos ideas can’t stand up to a challege, you failed sir. You folded when a challege to your beliefs were shown to the light.
“You merely offer unsupported accusations of lying.”
Ignorant Sir, if you’d like to notice or not, nutcase, I said I COULD, and HAVE, out debated Mark everytime on every issue he brings forth, and over and over again. I can do this with any of you psychopathic coward lying conservatives. And I don’t bother because it doesn’t open his eyes. I have every RIGHT to accuse someone of lying if he is!!!
Bigfoot your so far out of touch I don’t need to waste my time explaining every last detail to you if I don’t think you still won’t understand after I do, do I?
Jeremiah,
What makes you think I’m under a rock!?!
15. AgentFear | November 18th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Your right Jeremiah, I do not understand YOUR “Christian” aspect of the war.
Where were you Jeremiah, when Saddam was killing and gassing his own people and we did nothing about it. We paid him money which aided him in amassing the arsenal he had. Donald Rumsfield shook his hand.
Where were you when the incredible looting was going on at battles onset. Treasures and literature of a nation. And we just stood by and watched.
We did not go into this “war” to save the Iraqi people. Somehow I remember this thing about WMD. I remember Rumsfield saying: “We know EXACTLY where the WMD are.”
I remember Bush at the press dinner joking with the audience “where are those WMD? Over here? Under there?”
I did not find that funny.
Jeremiah, this war is a very serious issue indeed. I read you have no wife, no children, You seem to be of age, HOW ABOUT YOU GO OVER TO IRAQ AND LEAD THE CHRISTIAN BRIGADE. (I read Matt’s bio, he seems of age too. Christian and Jew arm in arm battling the evil that is known as islamofascism)
Show us your faith there Jeremiah.
OT-I wish you well on your Blog. You won’t have Mark to baby you anymore. But then again, you have the button now don’t you. I won’t be participating on your blog, (not that you care), I don’t care to be preached to. (By you)
Remember Jeremiah, practice humility. For a preacher, or a preachers son, you don’t seem to possess very much. I find your preaching hollow and arrogant. Get over yourself.
But, i honestly, really, do wish you success with your blogging en devours. Make a lot of money. You could be the next Blackwater Christian leader like Eric Prince.
16. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Oh really Lew, Saddam had WMD? Saddam was a threat to the United States? That’s news to everyone in the world, you should get that out! LOL, joke.
17. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Mark - clearly you have the right to your opinion regardless of what the pope, your priest, or any other religious figure would say about it. I am a little surprised that you feel the need to make that post even - surely that goes without saying (it seems to bother you quite a bit though no?)
At any rate Mark - what is very telling is your lack of response to Agent Fear or USA. The “that argument is so stupid I won’t respond to it” argument is pretty week. If its truly so easy to refute why not?
I think Agent Fear has it right on the button…
Happy Birthday (tomorrow) Mark.
18. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Bigfoot you want a little taste of what it’s like to be out-debated, is that what you want? Let’s see how you react:
In ref. to your “fact”: Who’s crazy idea was it to invade a country? Congress didn’t think that up, the BUSH ADMINISTRATION (who all have psychopathic personality disorder) they thought that up! So your silly claim that because the (REPUBLICAN)congress made the mistake of blindly following the idiots ideas some-how, you claim, makes it “Americas war”, is false. Really do you think because if those 435 people agree(agree for the reason of control and power), then it’s “the War” of entire population of America?…that’s insanity, considering that the people in cogress don’t represent the views of the people. Sure that’s there job in writing, but that’s not real life, once they get in there they can do whatever they want and be lead by boeing or oil companies or halliburton or there own parnoid mundane control-obsessed conservative views! Or their blind following of the number one irresponsible psychopath, just like you guys do!
USA
19. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
LiberalT,
WHY? READ THE POSTS! I ALREADY EXPLAINED WHY YOU DUMMY! THE EXPLANATION OF WHY WAS ALMOST MY ENTIRE POST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
20. bongoman | November 18th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
And if it is our very presence that is triggering violence and death, then surely it is immoral to stay?
Read what a British General had to say about their withdrawal from Basra here
This is a British General’s view.
21. Retired Spook | November 18th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Lew, what a fascinating article. Thanks for the link.
22. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
oh sorry liberalt, that last post was a total mistake. You know I thought you were attacking me, when you were not. I’m so used to dealing with insanity, and so angry at it, I thought you were another crazy person attacking me. if mark put a way of deleting posts…..i would delete _MY OWN_ post!
23. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
USA I agree with you. you must have misread my post
24. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
I hate you you sickos, REtired SPook Jerimiah Mark and Matt. And I hate you for real reasons, being incredibly stupid and not being able to function at human or humane level is just one reason. Your such a task for intellegent people, and such a waste of time talking to, but I’m stubborn and keep trying to save you, and save ourselves(humanity) from you.
25. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
liberalT,
yep.
26. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
liberalT,
Why comment? Because a lot of people don’t understand what a “just war” is, nor do they understand Christian teaching about war - and, also, as I said, I get a lot of “the Pope says X, why don’t you agree?” sort of comments. So, I thought people might be interesting.
As for USA - what am I supposed to do when someone makes unsupported accusations that I am a serial liar? What I am supposed to do with a person who says he hates me? I don’t hate him, but USA’s comment was, indeed, beneath contempt.
As for Agent Fear - not much different…just paranoid ramblings.
27. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
bongo,
And it worked splendidly - in Baghdad, however, it was the lack of US troops on the streets which fueled the violence. Things are never quite a cut and dried in war as the left thinks they are.
28. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Lew,
Great stuff - unfortunately, none of the critics will pay the least attention to it.
29. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Mark - a lot of people don’t understand a lot of things. That isn’t an excuse for not explaining your position. They aren’t simply making random and unprovable accusations as you would suggest. They are saying , in effect “if you believe this war is just and the pope is incorrect give me an argument as to why”. The argument that people don’t “understand what just war is” and therefore I won’t provide an explanation of why I believe the war is very weak indeed.
It is - quite literally - “i’m right - you are wrong and you wouldn’t understand so I won’t tell you why”. I think you lost the ability to take that seriously once you got out of the second grade.
30. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
LiberalT,
Huh? I’m not entirely following you - I have carefully laid out why I think we should stay in Iraq. Many is the time I have laid out why I think the liberation of Iraq a just cause…but what is particularly at issue for the moment is the way USA just said that my opinions are lies.
A lie is a deliberate statement of something known to be false when it is stated. How do I answer such a charge when USA is saying that my assertion that it isn’t Bush’s war is a lie? He’s not saying that I’m mistaken - or even saying that I’m an idiot. He’s saying that I know it is Bush’s war and with malice aforethought am trying to convince people its not.
You let me know how I’m supposed to respond to that.
31. Jeremiah | November 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Where were you Jeremiah
AgentFear,
Where were you when Saddam was starving and torturing his own people, literally beating them until their bones were broken? Where were you when Saddam was feeding their babies to the lions?
I thank Almighty God that we finally got a President who had the guts to do what was right, and said— NO MORE!!!!!!!
Humility? Yes, I pray for you, AgentFear, is the only form of humility that I can give for a person who’s head is stuck in the sand…because I sure can’t talk to you!!
Only YOU can make a difference and pick yourself up out of the mirey clay that you are in, and get a brighter outlook on life!!!
Jeremiah
32. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Mark,
if your assertion that this isn’t Bush’s war. Then present information which would indicate that people other than Bush or those in his administration planned and executed the war. Whose war is it then? America’s - 70% of Americans don’t agree with the War? Congress? Congress has tried to end it several times by voting for time tables for withdrawals? Just whose war is it.
I am not sure you completely understand what a lie is btw. I mean - on paper it seems you do but then things you do seem to belie this understanding. As an example - when discussing how the San Diego Chargers were going to do this season your statement was (at the beginning of the season) ” we all know that the Chargers will go 14 -2 this year”. Now, the statement in and of itself is rather ignorable. Except if you consider it with other comments you have made to me. Like ” we all know Osama bin Laden is dead” and “we all know that human caused global warming isn’t true”.
Now - when I say something like “we all know” I really mean it. Like “we all know that 1+1=2″ . Apparently you don’t. I mean with the Chargers losing again today they are 5-5 - not only impossible for them to go 14-2 - but its not even clear they will be over .500 at the end of the season. But “we all knew that they would go 14-2″.
So you will have to excuse me when you make statements like this and you don’t give any evidence for them. I tend not to believe you anymore
33. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
LiberalT,
I’ve never said that we all know bin Laden is dead; I’ve never said that we all know that human caused global warming isn’t true; if you think my little talk about how my Chargers will sweep all before them was a serious statement of fact then you’re a very strange person. You want it to be that I’ve said things which allow you to disagree with my position, but no matter how much you want me to be as you wish, I will actually be as I am.
As for it being Bush’s war - polls don’t matter, veto’d votes in Congress don’t matter; all that matters is that in accordance with longstanding US law and UN declarations, the United States liberated Iraq. That makes it America’s war. That you don’t want it to be so doesn’t change the facts.
34. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
uh - actually you did Mark. Unfortunately your archive search doesn’t search comments only original posts - but you responded to me some time ago that you didn’t comment about a bin Laden video because “we all know he is dead”.
Here is a similar comment
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/archives/2007/07/new_bin_laden_v.html
as to the Iraq war - you make my case for me. If it wasn’t Bush’s war then polls would matter and the votes in congress would matter. They don’t matter precisely because it IS BUSH’s war..
Check mate - twice in one post. So sad..
35. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
LiberalT,
From this:
You get the idea that I’ve said that everyone knows bin Laden is dead? Seems a bit of a stretch, if you ask me.
Polls don’t matter because we’re not governed by them - we’re a nation of laws, not of men…and the properly passed, Constitutional law is that we are at war…via Constitutional means you may undo that, but until you do, we remain at war - America’s war.
36. liberalT | November 18th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
no - as i said it was an exact quote from another comment. And even in the quote you state “The man is dead; probably killed fleeing our troops in Tora Bora in late 2001 or early 2002″. I am not sure where the stretch is.
But congress NEVER declared war! So it can’t be America’s war.
We aren’t a nation of men? Hmm could have fooled me. Here I thought democracy was doing the will of the people not about procedural law…
37. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
LiberalT,
You say I said something - I said I never said it. It is incumbant upon you to prove it, or apologise.
Until you provide proof or apology, any comments you make on this blog will be “unpublished”.
(Ed. Note: Naw, we won’t do that…but, criminy! How long am I to put up with being called a liar? One of the things I’m really making an effort at is to be truthful in all things I say. Of course, I’m also praying for patience, and maybe this is God’s way of giving me the opportunity to show it?)
38. AAR | November 18th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Unfortunately, it is far too easy for Democrats (Liberals) to use religion against Christians — perhaps even the majority of Christians. Why do we constantly hear Democrats and atheists ask: “What would Jesus do?”, “Is that the Christian way?”, “What does the Bible say?”, “Is that what God would want?”, and the many similar comments? That is but one technique Liberals use to turn Christians’ beliefs and values into weapons against them — misleading, diverting, and focusing their attention away from the bigger and real issues!
All too often, Christians who oppose Liberalism and most of the liberal agenda will be mislead into voting for the very Democrats who work to undermine and destroy Christianity and those things in Christians believe.
Christians must learn that — not only do politics and religion mix — but they must mix. If Christians fail to do so, Liberal politicians will attack and destroy the very things and way of life in which they believe! That’s exactly the problem we are seeing in America today — Christians are sitting back and listening to the PC from Democrats (Liberals) rather than standing up and fighting for their own beliefs, values, and their agenda!!!
Christians need more politically astute leaders, and they must learn to look at the forest — the total picture — and stop allowing Democrats to mislead them with a single tree or even a branch! Democrats (Liberals) are NOT your friends or supporters!!!
Muslims are blowing themselves up for their religion while Christians sit complacently by and allow Democrats (Liberals) to undermine and destroy theirs!!!
WAKE UP Christians… and FIGHT for Christianity!
AAR
39. Casper | November 18th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
AAR,
So are you saying that you shouldn’t be asked to match your actions to your beliefs? Are you saying that the only way to defend Christianity is be be unchristian?
If that is the case, then what is the point of being a Christian?
I personally believe that if we lower ourselves to the level of those that oppose us that they win.
40. Mark Noonan | November 18th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Steve,
Just for thinking the war wrong? No. Never said any such thing. For holding stupid opinions about the war? Oh, sure, I’ve done that.
41. Casper | November 18th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Mark,
So what is the difference between thinking about something and having an opinion about it?
42. Casper | November 18th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
LewWaters ,
That is a very interesting link. Thanks for posting it.
43. AAR | November 18th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Casper,
No, that’s not what I said.
I said Christians must look at the whole forest, not just a few individual trees!
In terms of the Iraq war, would it have been “more Christian” to allow Saddam and his sons to torture and kill several hundred thousand or million more men, women, and children? Would it have been “more Christian” to have continued the UN sanctions which were estimated to be killing several thousand children per month? Would it have been “more Christian” to permit Saddam to pay the families of suicide bombers to kill more Israeli families? Would it have been “more Christian” to allow Saddam to resume production and the use or potential use of WMD in the future? Is it “more Christian” to ignore the Democrats’ words, actions, and deeds which have aided, provided hope, and encouraged terrorists to kill and wound thousands of our soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi families, and has extended the war?
Is it “more Christian” to vote for a Democrat who would surrender the Iraqi people to the terrorists and defeat America — to stop the war for their own political gain — while supporting those same Democrats who want to appoint judges and pass laws which undermine Christians and their traditional values, remove prayer from public events, remove crosses and the Ten Commandments from public view, remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance and our money, remove anything related to Christianity from Christmas, prevent even the discussion of Intelligent Design in our schools insisting that only godless Darwinisim be taught, want to make “gay marriage” legal, provide birth control to 11 year old kids without the knowledge of their parents, provide abortions to kids without the knowledge or consent of their parents, etc., etc., etc.
Before a Christians votes for a Democrat in the name of a few individual trees, they must first look at and fully understand the forest!
Democrats (Liberals) are NOT the friend or supporters of Christians!!!
AAR
44. Casper | November 18th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
AAR,
So if your definition of being Christian is that we intervene anywhere that dictators are abusing their population, why aren’t we in the Sudan, Saudia Arabia, or China?
I can’t define what being a Christian is, but I doubt that if Christ where alive today he would support either of our parties.
45. USA | November 18th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
“Steve, Just for thinking the war wrong? No. Never said any such thing. For holding stupid opinions about the war? Oh, sure, I’ve done that.”
Stupid opinions? Your really digging a hole for yourself. From your hostility when people bring proof against you, is a good example why I think you willfully lie. I can’t believe your ignorant of the wrongness of all the claims I said are lies, because the left has educated you on every one. You would be really stupid indeed if you couldn’t learn wouldn’t you?
To me, there are three options to this issue:
1. You willfully lie.
2. You’re an extreme moron.
3. You’re unconscious of your lying.
This really goes for all conservatives. This is how normal people view conservatives. You guys need our help. And we need to save people from you conservatives so you don’t destroy the world, or destroy people’s lives because of the above three options. Think about it please.
46. LewWaters | November 18th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
USA, you really should at least try to read an article before running off at the mouth about it.
As others saw, the article, not written by me, is filled with enough declassified information to encourage a Democrat to change his position. Then again, a stauch anti-war advocate like Brian Baird did too, after traveling there and meeting the people on the ground. Oh, he met with those he wanted to at random, not who others set him up to meet, according to his email to his consituents.
Interesting stuff, try reading it before you blow a gasket.
47. Retired Spook | November 18th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
This is how normal people view conservatives. You guys need our help. And we need to save people from you conservatives so you don’t destroy the world….
Oh, stop, USA, you’re killin’ me. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
Ha Ha Ha…….pauses to catch breath…Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha……oooooh, man, sides are aching, falls on floor, actually ROTFLMAO!!! Ooooh, TOO MUCH!!
Thanks, USA, always great to end the day with a good laugh. Too funny!!
48. Jeremiah | November 18th, 2007 at 11:49 pm
we need to save people from you conservatives so you don’t destroy the world
USA,
Oh, so you make an assumption, turn it into an accusation, and then use it as an excuse to say that “We need to save people from you Conservatives”???
Who are we threatening … Ooooh, I get it now, you want to protect the Terrorists! That’s it!!!
That’s what you’ve always been about!!!
Jeremiah
49. USA | November 19th, 2007 at 12:24 am
So Mark I explained why this IS Bush’s war in my post to Bigfoot. What’s your rebuttal to that?
Retired Spook, What’s funny psychopath? You think life is a joke, or are you just a mindless coward laughing nervously at a serious comment? or both? Ask yourself, I already know.
Jerimaah, Who wants to protect terrorists? Do you really think there are Americans who want to protect terrorists?…Or do just want to cop out because your beliefs are so weak they can’t stand up to an arguement? Don’t you know that I’m aware of such infantile attempts at rumor spreading against the people like me who will discredit you over and over.
Lew, If your article held had any credibility the community at large would know about it.
CONSERVATIVE RESPONSES:
Laughing/Your funny. “Your comment is not worth answering.” & Your a terrorist lover.
What’s happening is the learned are being ridiculed and put to shame.
USA
50. Mark Noonan | November 19th, 2007 at 12:42 am
Casper,
Easy:
Someone who is thinking about it might say, “I believe we should have stayed out of Iraq because we could better have employed our military and diplomatic power doing ‘X’, instead.”
Someone with a stupid opinion about it might say, “We’re fighitng for oil.”
51. Mark Noonan | November 19th, 2007 at 12:44 am
USA,
I guess I didn’t make myself clear:
You are unworthy of a response by me.
I’ll let you know if anything you ever post is worthy of a response.
52. LewWaters | November 19th, 2007 at 12:50 am
Like I said, USA, you really should read the evidence a Dmeocrat Lawyer uncovered and wrote about. Perhaps there was ample reason he wrote what he did and faces the condemnation of the rest of you.
As for credibility, take that up with the Democrat party the author belongs to.
53. AAR | November 19th, 2007 at 12:53 am
No, Casper, I am not saying, proposing, or advocating that we intervene militarily anywhere dictators are abusing their citizens. To the contrary, while there might be exceptions, I would not generally support military action solely for that purpose; nor would I have supported the Iraq war if that were the major justification and purpose. I have discussed on other threads at least some of the many reasons why I supported the Iraq war and still do.
However, for those Christians who cannot understand the reasons Saddam and his regime had to be removed, I am pointing out that there are hundreds of thousands, even millions of reasons (people) for which Christians should be able to support the war at least enough not to feel compelled to help Democrats defeat America, and so that they don’t feel they must vote for the very Democrats who are undermining and attacking Christianity, Christian beliefs and values.
AAR
54. Tractatus | November 19th, 2007 at 11:32 am
I don’t think I’d ever say a bad thing about a lefty who thinks the war stupid or wrong or something that we shouldn’t have done.
Is that so?
Looking at it, it becomes a matter of prayer to assist me in stifiling the desire to go on a rant, and then find the first Congressional war critic I can and beat the heck out of him. And I’m talking about stringing together paragraphs of obscenities, and then finding such an elected critic of the war and sending him to the hospital…for a month.
Well, I guess in a certain way, impotent threats from an impotent man aren’t quite the same thing as “saying a bad thing.” They are funnier, though, and are still among the litany of things that disprove your delusions.
55. Mark Noonan | November 19th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Tract,
That isn’t saying something bad about critics of the war - that is saying how I must turn to God for the patience to deal mercifully with people who are obtuse and hate-filled. As it is, since I wrote that, I have been graced with a great deal of patience, and I don’t even think of doing that sort of thing anymore.
56. Almiranta | November 19th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Mark, come on, admit it. You are really writing the posts supposedly by USA, in kind of a Nixonesque Dirty Tricks effort to make the radical Left look even stupider and goofier than AgentSmear manages to do.
Love what passes for debate technique and intellectual political discourse by the inaptly self-named USA—just call everything a LIE.
But then the word works for him. Only three letters, one easy syllable, not too challenging, and really nasty. Couldn’t be a better fit.
57. Mark Noonan | November 19th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Almiranta,
I do wonder sometimes if USA is a conservative out to make liberals look incredibly stupid…
58. Almiranta | November 19th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
I just slogged through a book recommended to me, a tome called Eat, Pray, Love.
It is about an egocentric Lefty who thinks her personal journey is fascinating. Actually, I found some things to like about the book.
But in her self-congratulatory account of her amazing spiritual journey, in which she “sat in the hand of God” and repeatedly achieved gandiose spiritual enlightenment, she somehow never bothered to try to show how she could be so spiritually enlightened and, by implication, superior, and still brag about a sister who said, while pregnant, that she did not care of her child had birth defects as long as it was not a Republican.
See, to too many who feel intellectually and spiritually superior, there is no conflict between this vastly higher plane of existence and at the same time proclaiming (and I paraphprase here…) “I don’t care if my baby is mentally deficient or has flippers coming out of its shoulders and hips, as long as it does not believe in small government and an originalist view of the Constitution.” (Spare me THAT kind of “mother love”)
I often encounter people who are smug about their place in the universe and at the same time intolerant of different points of view. And they never seem to see the conflict.
This priest, as a person and as an individual, can think whatever he wants to think, but he should not present his personal views as being in any way enlightened or influenced by his spiritual standing, as the two are so often at odds with each other.
59. LewWaters | November 20th, 2007 at 2:20 am
For any who didn’t save ot have he chance to read the article I linked to in comment #13, it has been removed from that site. However, it is still up at Front Page Magazine.