Religious Absolutism
The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…" Yet under the Bush administration we see how the "Christian Right", which is neither, has a strangle hold on the President's agenda. A recent story from Reuters details former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s thoughts on this issue.
"I worked for two presidents who were men of faith, and they did not make their religious views part of American policy," she said, referring to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, both Democrats and Christians.
"President Bush's certitude about what he believes in, and the division between good and evil, is, I think, different," said Albright, who has just published a book on religion and world affairs. "The absolute truth is what makes Bush so worrying to some of us."
I believe that any from of absolutism is unhealthy. Whenever one refuses to see or consider that they may be wrong, or at the very least not 100% correct on something dialog ends. Given Bush’s seemingly messianic visions of what he thinks the Middle East should be is it any wonder the mess it is. I see very little difference between Bush’s crusade against the Arab world and those of the medieval crusaders. Both were told by Christian leaders and believed it was their destiny and legacy to save the Middle East from itself. Both sacrificed resources, human and material to the point of near destruction of their governments. Both will go down in history as barbarous.
It has been said that those who do not study and learn from history are condemned to repeat its mistakes. Napoleon attempted to invade Russia in the winter and lost his army. Hitler followed in Napoleon's footsteps and received the same fate. Bush is on the same path. Many have tried to conquer the Middle East to only come home in failure. Perhaps if Bush paid more attention to history rather than the lies of the "Christian Right" he you and I would not be in this mess. Then again, perhaps he is as ignorant and foolish as many critics make him out to be.
"I worked for two presidents who were men of faith, and they did not make their religious views part of American policy," she said, referring to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, both Democrats and Christians.
"President Bush's certitude about what he believes in, and the division between good and evil, is, I think, different," said Albright, who has just published a book on religion and world affairs. "The absolute truth is what makes Bush so worrying to some of us."
I believe that any from of absolutism is unhealthy. Whenever one refuses to see or consider that they may be wrong, or at the very least not 100% correct on something dialog ends. Given Bush’s seemingly messianic visions of what he thinks the Middle East should be is it any wonder the mess it is. I see very little difference between Bush’s crusade against the Arab world and those of the medieval crusaders. Both were told by Christian leaders and believed it was their destiny and legacy to save the Middle East from itself. Both sacrificed resources, human and material to the point of near destruction of their governments. Both will go down in history as barbarous.
It has been said that those who do not study and learn from history are condemned to repeat its mistakes. Napoleon attempted to invade Russia in the winter and lost his army. Hitler followed in Napoleon's footsteps and received the same fate. Bush is on the same path. Many have tried to conquer the Middle East to only come home in failure. Perhaps if Bush paid more attention to history rather than the lies of the "Christian Right" he you and I would not be in this mess. Then again, perhaps he is as ignorant and foolish as many critics make him out to be.
posted by AzLib at 9:53 PM
<< Home