Birds of a Feather; Environmentalists and Fundamentalists

Many of today’s environmentalists are concerned about the state of our planet and if it might be too late to fix things.  Apparently the problem we face is that the greatest threat to our planet is mankind itself, and with our depraved nature there is little hope for the future.

The general consensus among this group is that early in the Earth’s history the world was pretty much perfect. Man even knew how to live harmoniously with  all of nature. This changed when man’s arrogance, pride and selfish tendencies began to exact their toll on the natural balance. War, famine, pollution, poverty as well as natural disasters became the norm. Now the Earth is worse than it has ever been and apocalypse looms on the horizon.  The extinction of humanity may be inevitable and in fact a good thing for the rest of the world.

Many of today’s Christians are concerned about the fate of the Earth and don’t believe that there is any chance of saving it. The problem apparently lies in the fact that man is the root of the problem and his depraved nature leaves little  hope for the future.

The general consensus among these folks is that early in the Earth’s history the world was perfect. Man even knew how to live in harmony among all of God’s creatures. This changed when man’s arrogance, pride and selfishness brought sin into the world.  War, famine, pestilence, poverty and natural disasters became the norm. Now the world is worse than it has ever been and apocalypse lies just around the bend. The inevitable extinction of most of mankind will be the result and this will pretty much be a good thing for the world. 

So what’s the beef?

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

The Architects of Fear (Our Drug Prohibitionists)

There is an old “Outer Limits” episode called “The Architects of Fear” in which some scientists decide on taking drastic measures in an attempt to prevent the Cold War from erupting into nuclear holocaust. They choose one of their own, played by Robert Culp, to undergo an experimental genetic mutation that results in his transformation into a hideous alien being. A crash landing of his ’space ship’ near the UN is staged , the idea being that he would then engage in such mischief as to create a world wide panic over alien invasion. This would hopefully encourage the warring factions to put aside their differences and unite behind one common cause; the defense of the Earth.This is not a novel idea, but merely a creative Sci-Fi spin on what demagogues and tyrants have known for so very long; It is much easier to control your subjects by giving them a common enemy than it is to maintain a constantly high level of coercion and oppression. People throughout history have proven themselves to be easy pawns at the hands of master propagandists.

The Jewish Holocaust during World War II is the classic example at how unwitting dupes can be conditioned to perpetrate atrocities, just so long as the trains run on time. Many of the Nazi’s may have actually believed their imbecilic theories of a master race and the sub humanity of the Jews, but plenty of them (Albert Speer for one) felt that it was an unfortunate but necessary situation, expedient for the success of the German state. Though this despicable period in history is perhaps the nadir of ‘civilization’ it is certainly not unique.

Thank God this kind of thing can’t happen in America. But of course it can happen and it has happened. American power brokers, both private and political, have used the xenophobic tendencies of our citizens to justify stealing land from the Native American nations while simultaneously increasing their own power base. Many a politician was able to capitalize on the racial bigotry of white Americans as well as the mindless fear brought on by ignorance and propaganda, to advance their own agendas.

“But we are more enlightened now and it is obvious that these examples of fascist demagoguery are far behind us. ” I would disagree. For years now there has been a class of people that have generated such fear among our populace that our police forces have been encouraged to grow dramatically (especially the secret police), that writs of habeas corpus have been suspended and we have willingly sacrificed our protections against unlawful search and seizure. Mandatory and draconian punishments have been eagerly pursued and implemented and even convicted children are imprisoned for many years with no chance of parole. Who are these dangerous people?

In spite of the obvious excesses of the neo-Orwellian “Office of Homeland Security”, I am not talking about Islamic fundamentalists. No, these much more sinister people do not belong to an easily identifiable religion or political group nor do they consist of any singular ethnicity. They can be found at all levels of society, in all cities and towns and in most neighborhoods. In fact, I think some of these subversives may be my best friends!

I am talking about Dopers. Heads. Stoners. Tokers. Pot Heads. Kids and adults who either occasionally or regularly partake of cannabis to enjoy a sensation that is pleasurable, not unlike that of alcohol but with much more humility, much less violence and much less hangover.

Since the ‘War on Drugs’ there are more cops on the street, more people in prison and much more crime in our cities. Our country more closely resembles a police state than the old Warsaw Pact nations do. We have 19 year old kids doing mandatory 10 year sentences with no chance of parole because they were caught with LSD. Not guns, not knives, not low yield nuclear weapons. Acid.

We have parents who have had their cars seized and impounded by the local sheriff’s department because there was a joint found within. These legally stolen cars have proven to be a financial windfall for the state. What a great incentive for additional low risk police work!

There are more anti-drug laws on the books in the USA than there are in Holland yet our per capita drug consumption is higher. (As is our violent crime rate). We have even blithely ignored international law and invaded countries because of the excuse that they are exporters of illegal narcotics. Well then, what’s stopping us from attacking Canada?

The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be. (Lao-Tzu)

I don’t want to clutter things up right now with too many examples of government excess in fighting this conjured up and hyped up “War on Drugs”. Check out what the (very conservative) Cato institute has to say instead:

http://www.cato.org/dailys/3-03-97.html

…or this article by Larry Levine: http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/levine.secret.html

But I would suggest this; after all these years we still have this prohibition on drugs, this attempt to legislate morality, this ‘tyro-anarchy’, because it benefits people in power. It allows the government, both local and Federal , to consolidate power, to deprive people of due process, to ensure continued lucrative employment and to provide a scapegoat for social injustice that allows our self righteous citizenry to dodge their responsibility. As we sit back on a Sunday afternoon, enjoying our Budweisers and gin’n’tonics we can feel safe knowing that our tax dollars are at work providing today’s Elliott Ness with the means of protecting us from the likes of….Spikoli?  From Ridgemont High? Makes me feel much safer, dude.

History has taught us that prohibition does not work. Unfortunately there are too many piglets fighting for their place at one of the many anti- drug enforcement teats to ever expect this country to come to their senses.

“Scarecrows and magic and other fatal fears do not bring people closer together. There is no magic substitute for soft caring and hard work, for self-respect and mutual love. If we can learn this from the mistake these frightened men made, then their mistake will not have been merely grotesque. It will have been at least a lesson—a lesson at last to be learned’

(from the closing narration; “The Architects of Fear”)

Brian McLaren on the Iraq Problem

Over on Sojourner’s Blog,  Brian McLaren has made a good suggestion:

In his July 20 commentary, James W. Skillen of the Center for Public Justice struck a non-partisan note of honesty and balance that I wish I heard more often.

He summarized the basic narrative of the Iraq War that both our president and his party and many Democrats seem to share:

… first, America liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein; second, we returned sovereignty to the Iraqi people; third, sectarian violence tragically increased; and now, in the fourth phase, we are “deploying reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring security to their people.”

The elegant word Skillen chooses to describe this narrative is “delusional.”

He counters:

U.S. forces did not liberate Iraq; they wiped out its government, and the Bush administration then failed to exercise American responsibility to govern the country so it could be rebuilt and eventually governed by Iraqis themselves. We opened the floodgates to chaos, civil war, the death or flight of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, and a continuing influx of terrorists whom our ‘war’ was supposed to destroy. That is not liberation.

He follows with a withering critique of both the “stay the course” proposal of the executive branch and the quick withdrawal plans increasingly popular in Congress. Both lines of reasoning, he says, lay the blame for our dilemma on “the nearly powerless Iraqi government for not climbing out fast enough from the hole we dug for it.” We may well criticize the Iraqi government for taking a long summer vacation in the midst of its crisis, but that doesn’t negate our culpability for them being in this particular crisis in the first place.

He chooses another elegant word to describe a nation that creates a crisis and then blames the victims for it: “immoral.”

Delusional and immoral are strong words. Whether you believe the invasion was an ill-conceived and badly-planned mistake or you believe that the invasion was justifiable but the problems have been in the execution, either way, we’re in a mess. We need a way out.

A friend of mine says that we’re only as sick as our reactivity. If our reactivity to Sept. 11 played a part in getting us into this terrible situation, we will not be well served by reacting to the status quo with still more reactive behavior.

For those of us who supported the war, and for those of us who opposed it but failed to stand up and speak up strongly enough, this is not a time for reactive behavior. It’s an opportunity, as Senator Obama recently said, to be as in careful planning our next steps as we were careless in planning our steps in the past. With more foresight and forethought, with less blame-gaming and partisanship and more deliberate collaboration, we can take the next steps—whatever they will be—with more honor, intelligence, sanity, and responsibility, and less reactivity than we have employed so far. Voices like Skillens’ can slow us down to indulge in second and third thoughts, perhaps breaking the cycle of unwise and destructive reactivity into which we have plunged the Iraqis and ourselves.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2007/08/reactivity-and-iraq-by-brian-m.html

Brian McLaren (brianmclaren.net) serves as board chair for Sojourners/Call to Renewal. His next book, Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope, will be released in October.

What’s In God’s Name?

 I thought this was interesting: (from Radio Netherlands Worldwide)

 Let’s call God Allah

by Mohammed Abdelrahman & Nicolien den Boer*

14-08-2007

The Bishop of Breda, Tiny Muskens, wants people to start calling God Allah. He says the Netherlands should look to Indonesia, where the Christian churches already pray to Allah. It is also common in the Arab world: Christian and Muslim Arabs use the words God and Allah interchangeably.

Speaking on the Dutch TV programme Network on Monday evening, Bishop Muskens says it could take another 100 years but eventually the name Allah will be used by Dutch churches. And that will promote rapprochement between the two religions.

Muskens doesn’t expect his idea to be greeted with much enthusiasm. The 71-year-old bishop, who will soon be retiring due to ill health, says God doesn’t mind what he is called. God is above such “discussion and bickering”. Human beings invented this discussion themselves, he believes, in order to argue about it.

More than 30 years ago Bishop Muskens worked in Indonesia and, there, God was called Allah, even in Catholic churches. The Dutch should learn to get on spontaneously with different cultures, religions and behaviour patterns:

“Someone like me has prayed to Allah yang maha kuasa (Almighty God) for eight years in Indonesia and other priests for 20 or 30 years. In the heart of the Eucharist, God is called Allah over there, so why can’t we start doing that together?”

In the Arab world God is called Allah. The long history of Christianity in the Arab world led to the development of a rich Christian-Islamic theological vocabulary, which makes God a normal equivalent to Allah. Both Muslims and Christians use the word in the Middle East.

ar-Rabb
Apart from Allah, the term ar-Rabb (the Lord) is also widely used, although this appears far more often in the Arabic version of the Bible than in the Qur’an. In the Islamic context, references to ar-Rabb are normally found in the possessive form, such as Rabbi (My Lord). Interestingly, the word Allah was already in use by Christians in the pre-Islamic period.

Bishop Muskens proposal will undoubtedly receive a warm welcome from the Islamic community in the Netherlands. Particularly as it follows last week’s remarks by Geert Wilders about banning the Qur’an and, shortly before that, former Muslim Ehsan Jami’s comparison of Muhammad with Osama bin Laden.

Attention
Perhaps this is the reason Bishop Muskens’ remarks have received so much attention in the Dutch press. The bishop actually said exactly the same several years ago. He also suggested abolishing Whit Monday as a national holiday in favour of an Islamic religious day.

In the past, Bishop Muskens has offended many Muslims. In 2005 he said Islam was a religion without a future because it had too many violent aspects. The bishop is also responsible for a number of controversial remarks. He caused uproar in the Netherlands when he said the poor had a right to steal bread if they were hungry. And he put the Vatican’s back up with an appeal for the use of condoms in the fight against AIDS

http://www.radionetherlands.nl/currentaffairs/ned070814mc

 Well? What do you think?

Two Bottles of Adam’s Ale, Please! (Don’t Drink the Water)

I love it, I love it, I love it. I work in the food industry and for years one of my pet peeves has been the conspicuously ’sophisticated’ tastes of some of my clientèle. You know who I’m talking about; the gourmand who would ask if the beef was prime (at what I was charging? c’mon), the aesthete that would send the trout back to have the head removed, the bar denizen who would call for Absolut in his Bloody Mary (who can tell, with all the Worcestershire, Tabasco and horseradish?).

But the ones who really got my goat were the bottled water drinkers. Convinced that tap water was going to kill us all (too many chemicals, likely tainted, or even recycled urine) they would lament the fact that I did not carry their brand of designer water. After giving in to market demands (I’m not a complete fool, there is some nice profit to be had off of this never ending fad) I would daily receive complaints that I was not carrying a specific brand. But who could keep up? In the nineties there was a new boutique water coming out every week. (Some went better with quiche than others did.)

Eventually the big beverage boys decided to get in on the act and Pepsi and Coke both came out with their own brands of bottled water. Why not? They could charge much more than their soft drink product. The water market was so upscale that the typical consumer wouldn’t even touch the cheaper brands. Gads! Not only that, it was cheaper to produce because it was essentially cola without the stuff that made it cola – carbonation, sugar, flavorings, preservatives and dyes. Still, many of these companies did find a way to sneak a fair amount of chemicals into this ‘pure’ beverage.

Bottled water has become such a status symbol that no self respecting business, professional organization, civic group or lobby would dare hold a meeting without a cooler full of bottles chilled and waiting for the program to begin. Ah, the poor old board room water pitcher. Where are you now?

It is de rigeur to provide bottled water at charity marathons and bike-a-thons and the Gatorade coolers are now filled with….Gatorade. The upwardly mobile athletes at these events typically vote Democrat, are health conscious and would choke at the idea of consuming the more dangerous variety of water that springs forth from the walls of every home in America. Something they have in common with the old John Birch Society, I guess. If only they knew.

According to an article in ‘American Demographics’:

Indeed, some 86 percent of Americans harbor concerns about the quality of their tap water, while 32 percent think their water is not as safe as it should be, according to a survey of 1,021 adults released in April by the Water Quality Association (WQA), a group representing makers and sellers of home water treatment systems. The concern rate goes up to 90 percent among Americans with kids under 12. According to a 1999 report by the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (NEETF), 91 percent of Americans cook with tap water, but only 75 percent actually drink it. Meanwhile, 65 percent take steps to drink purer water, either using filtration or distillation methods or by drinking bottled water. (Hmm, maybe)

Women constitute the majority of bottled water drinkers: 45 percent of 18- to 34-year-old women and 44.6 percent of 35- to 54-year-old women drink bottled water, according to BMC/MediaLink research, compared with just 35.3 percent and 34.5 percent of their same-age male counterparts. As one might expect, bottled water use climbs with income, says Gary Hemphill, senior vice president at BMC. Use also spikes at the younger end of the core group. Some 47 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds don’t think their water is as safe as it should be, according to the WQA survey, and 41.4 percent of the group drink bottled water regularly, reports BMC.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_2001_Oct_1/ai_79052846

I guess that it would be safe to say that the typical bottled water afficianado is fairly young, educated, fit, financially successful and concerned about their health as well as the environment. After all it is the well informed and sophisticated that are the first to identify and address those threats that many choose to ignore; pesticides, global warming, second hand smoke, the ozone layer, high fat diets, overpopulation, carcinogens in meats, fruits, fish, vegetables, bouillabaisse, high tension wires….and good old tap water.

NEW YORK (Reuters) – PepsiCo Inc. will spell out that its Aquafina bottled water is made with tap water, a concession to the growing environmental and political opposition to the bottled water industry. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070726/hl_nm/pepsico_aquafina_dc_1

 

You probably aren’t surprised that I am more than a little amused. Finally it is being revealed that the Emperor has no clothes. Under extreme pressure, Pepsi Cola is agreeing to post it’s water source on it’s packaging. And guess what that source is – the faucet. That’s right, both Pepsi’s Aquafina (nice Italian name) and Coke’s Dasani (even nicer- could be Italian, could be North African but whatever- it’s someplace hip) use the same dang water that most of use to wash our dishes (and our toes) in- Adam’s Ale. It’s even the same water that goes FLUSH! for most of us at least a couple times a day. The very same water I use to keep my petunias and my Fescue fresh and colorful as well as my sidewalk clear of grass clippings.

I might be going out on a limb here, but I bet that if you check the ‘fridge of just about any overly worried environmentalist that you will find a bottle or two of designer agua. Then check out the lackadaisical Joe Shmoe’s ice box and you’ll probably see a couple a liters of Dr. Pepper and a partial six pack of Bud. And it turns out that Joe might be the better steward!

And according to the article even those companies that claim to use spring water are only shipping water in from regions that are known to have reputations for ‘good’ tasting water.

Thank God! Now I can stop buying Perrier for my cats.

Usury: Another Sin the Church Chooses to Ignore

Wow! Someone is finally talking about one of my pet peeves. cut throat banking policies that go against every biblical teaching about money lending. On the blog “Decompressing Faith” Erin and friends provide a righteous rant against a travesty that has gone unchallenged for much too long.

www.erinword.com/2007/07/quick-rant-about-banks.html

Here’s what Cindy had to say:

 

“Last Christmas i got busy and lost track of when i made debits relative to deposits. (very very unlike me- i usually update the account every day). when i went in to the bank to have them explain all the charges I couldn’t believe what they told me.

Not only did they do as the article said, manipulate the posting order of debits and credits to maximize the potential for overdrafts but, GET THIS, they charge the $37.50 when the initial red debit was received electronically (but not yet posted) and then when they officially posted the debit the next day, they charged the $37.50 again. I went through it 3 or 4 times to be sure i understood them correctly. 2 charges for the exact same overdraft. And somehow they had manipulated the loopholes to make that legal!

Then they thought they would be able to coerce me to take out a loan that would cover potential overdrafts in the future, although it was clear from our account that by that time we were in no danger at all of overdraft. I remember when the bank would just move some money from your savings to cover overdrafts. No more. That’s far too resonable and good for the consumer apparently”.

Sound familiar? And then there is the credit card side of this business, luring people into taking loans with low interest rates and then jacking up the rates and hitting them with late charges, charging over limit fees after they drop the credit line (using the magic “Credit Report” as an excuse for doing so). They ain’t got nothin’ on Don Corleone. (Of course some of their victim…er, customers are weak and lack the discipline to handle credit responsibly. But isn’t there a moral prerogative in place here as well? What would we say if liquor stores made it a point of handing out coupons at AA meetings?)

I’ve said this before; if Business chooses to be ‘all business’, driven solely by profit, refusing to regulate themselves (as many other professions do) then eventually their customers (otherwise known as citizens) will step in and take away some of their freedom. Of course, the bankers are not breaking any laws and apparently they are not drawing much attention to what they do. But what would you expect from a culture that has elevated Donald Trump to the position of business role model, entertainer and sage.

 

Why is it that there are so many damn sermons about sexual immorality but never have I heard one against financial immorality? Didn’t any of these preachers read Ezekiel in seminary? Why are we constantly picking on prostitutes, alcoholics, drug users and porn addicts when these predators in Prada get to run around guilt free? And I’ll bet most of them are flaming heterosexuals.

 

Is it because they can be found sitting in the front pews? Is it because they make boatloads of money and are known to fill the offering envelope every week? OK, I’ll buy that. Expedience wins. But what about all the other bank employees, stockholders and shareholders? Shouldn’t they be made to feel a little hot under the collar about where they work or invest? I once sat in a church pew next to a very pretty, yet very overweight, young lady. I remember sweating nervously while our well intentioned young (and very thin) pastor gave a scathing sermon on the sin of gluttony.

 

No wonder our churches hold such little credibility with today’s ‘un-churched’.

10 Questions about Global Warming

Here’s a neat little 10 question quiz to test what we really know about global warming. You may be surprised with the results.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Now I know a lot of you will insist that this test is put out by the vast consumerist/carbon spewing/capitalistic profit mongering conspiracy of the Evil West, and perhaps it is. But will someone please dispute just the answers to the test?

The Myth of the Murderous Muslim

I found myself in the middle of a heated argument the other night with a very well educated person who was espousing swift, brutal and total military action against the Muslim world. What started the debate was his remark that the Crusaders had the right idea and it was a shame that they did not finish the job. Although this man claims to be an atheist, he believes that Christians have always held the moral high ground and if it had not been for the admittedly brutal martial actions of medieval Christendom there would be no Church today.

Of course my response was that the Crusades had clearly demonstrated that the authentic Church had gone underground, that what passed for Christianity in those times was an obscene aberration, an abomination. Generally, the past actions of the so-called Christian Church are no more laudable, in fact they may be more heinous, than anything that can be attributed to the Muslim extremists of today. And just as one should not condemn the Gospel for those who desecrate it in the name of God, we should be very careful when we hold the essence of Islam responsible for the murders and tyrannies committed by fundamentalist elements on their fringe.

Many say, though, that the violence and oppression that we witness today in parts of the Muslim world represents the true nature of Islam, that the Quran expressly directs the true believer to initiate violent Jihad against the infidels of this world. This view is based primarily on a common Christian practice that results in many confused religious minds – proof texting. Just as a reading of Genesis, Exodus or Deuteronomy outside the light of the remainder of scripture can result in rationalizations for slavery, pogroms and genocide, this same practice will often paint a picture of the Quran as a world conquering instruction manual.

Actions speak louder than words and throughout most of history institutionalized Islam has a much better track record than institutionalized Christianity. During the Dark Ages, Early Islam was the fount of philosophy, art, poetry, science and medicine as well as charity and religious tolerance. In Moorish Spain Jews, Christians and Muslims lived in relative harmony. It was the Christian conquerors who set about violently removing both Jew and Muslim from the peninsula. Around this same time Islam conquered what we now know as Turkey and to this day Istanbul is still the seat of the Eastern Church. When conquering the Indian sub-continent both Hindu and Buddhist were allowed to freely practice their religions. This should not be surprising because it is prescribed in the Quran as well as other Islamic teachings; “Whoever hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys God.” (Bukhâri) Unfortunately what little we know of the Quran is relayed to us in the sound bites of those with political agendas to meet.

An oft repeated complaint against the Muslims of this country is their apparent lack of voice in condemning the violent actions of their brethren. This accusation does not take into account the long lasting divisions that have existed throughout Islam as a whole; not all Muslims feel allegiance to those reactionary fundamentalists who are behind most of the violence. Those Muslims now living in our neighborhoods are usually there because they sought escape from religious extremists. Even so, doesn’t this criticism cut both ways? Where was the voice of Christianity during the Holocaust? Where was the American Church in the condemnation of the bombings of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Purportedly “Christian” nations deliberately and intentionally ordered the horrendous deaths of non-combatants with liquid fire and burning radiation. We were at war, some say, and regrettable decisions must often be made. Perhaps, but this is Christian hypocrisy nevertheless.

Within Christianity we have groups of people who will not equivocate when it comes to refusing to take up the sword; the Quaker, Amish, Mennonite and Bruderhof easily come to mind. The Jehovah’s Witnesses (some dispute their “Christianity”) were some of the first to be sent to the Nazi camps because of their outspoken pacifism. On the other hand, the majority of professing Christians will tolerate or even espouse violence, especially when it poses a threat to our own security. At times we will commit our lives, resources and energies in coming to the aid of oppressed people (Tojo, Hitler, Hussein and the Taliban all desperately needed to go) but mostly we ignore the plight of millions of others. We can only do so much, so when we do finally act it is only prudent that the actions coincide with our national interests.

But how does this permit us the moral high ground? Well, for one thing, we don’t hijack airplanes and fly them into crowded skyscrapers. Some might even suggest (mistakenly) that we don’t kill people that we are not officially at war with. And we certainly would not condone indiscriminate violence from our own people. But of course, neither do the vast majority of Muslims.

In World War II, during the Allied invasion of North Africa, the Allied and Axis powers played a bloody game of cat and mouse, overrunning desert territory one day, being expelled the next by superior forces. Many Muslim towns and cities endured an ever changing procession of conquerors; British, French, Italian, German, American. At no time were these people ever considered other than pawns in the greater scheme of the western powers. Their homes, mosques, hospitals, schools and farms were obliterated. Their wells were poisoned and their religious shrines turned to rubble. Many children not killed were left maimed and orphaned.

These people had the misfortune of their ancestors making their homes in lands that were to be later colonized by Europeans. European armies then laid waste to the region as they fought battles begun across the Mediterranean, battles that were of little concern to the Muslim. One of the many devastated Muslim towns, offering little more than strategic interest to both Allied and Axis alike, was Medina, the second holiest Islamic city, after Mecca. How would the perspective of a Muslim survivor of that period be any different than that of someone who survived 9/11? How can their objections have less value than ours?

Are we intellectually, culturally and morally superior to these people? Because we have knowledge of the ‘truth’ as we find it in our religious and cultural traditions does this automatically place all other people in the unfortunate position of being ‘losers’? It is interesting to me that many Christians reach back to those parts of the Bible that they would (incorrectly) take to condone war and violence, yet those same Christians accuse the Koran of being a violent book. Mohammed believed that Jesus was not given enough time on this earth to present a systematic process for following his path to God. Islam believes that God gave the Koran to the people to provide just such a framework. I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle, in the Gospels, and exclusive pursuit of either of the other two ways (though not without value) can often lead to distortion, misunderstanding, fundamentalism, legalism, judgmentalism and finally hatred.

As stated on Crescentlife.com, a Muslim webpage: “Terrorists who persecute innocent people because of their faith are not welcome – their use of Islam as a scapegoat, does not make Islam what they portray it to be. “ If we can agree with the spirit of that premise, and also see there can be a fine line separating terrorism and military action, then it may prove interesting when we apply this same standard to Christians.

*Why Won’t the Church Proclaim Freedom for the Prisoners? (Where’s the Justice?)

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

>A publicly traded corrections management company recently took a financial gamble and built a new multi-million dollar prison facility in Pennsylvania without any government contracts on the table. Within six months of opening they were filled to capacity, half of the inmates being drug use offenders shipped in from Washington DC.

>In Baltimore city most crime is committed by juvenile defenders between the hours of 4 and 10 pm. Schools in Baltimore city are closed promptly at the end of the school day, with chains on the doors. There is no money available for after school programs in Baltimore yet millions in local, state and federal moneys are being spent on expanding the overcrowded prisons and jails.

>In the period between 1980 and 2000 the state of Maryland increased spending on prisons by 101% while the expenditures for higher education rose only 22%. (In California it was 201% for prisons versus 1% on schools!)

>In 2000 the non-white population of the USA contributed to 30% of the general population while they made up over 70% of the Federal Prison Population.

>54% of the inmates in Federal prisons in 2000 were drug offenders

>On a percentage basis drug use among non-white USAmericans is no higher than the drug use of white USAmericans.

>There are three times as many people incarcerated in the USA today as there were in 1980. (When the nation’s “War on Drugs” began.)

>The USA (aka “the Land of the Free”) has the highest incarceration rate of any developed nation in the world, more than both Russia and China.

>The violent crime rate in America has steadily dropped. It stands at the lowest since the late 1970’s!.

(All this information is readily found on the internet but if asked I will provide you with references)

It would appear that perhaps the church should be spending a bit more time addressing these particular areas of concern. The evidence tends to suggest that the biggest threat to family values is coming from a direction other than where we are currently looking. (I guess it would depend upon which families we value the most.) Obviously the standard modern practice of attempting to legislate morality, criminalizing those who do not comply and then proceeding to punish them in an old testament fashion is failing. It is probably even contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

Jesus said he came to free the prisoners, not just those whom we have determined to have paid their ‘debt’ to society. Something is terribly wrong when the largest “Christian” nation on earth has so many people forcibly detained under such damnable conditions.

“Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”