January 27, 2003
PEACE FOR US, DEATH FOR THEM:
'A River of Peaceful People' (Mary McGrory, January 23, 2003, The Washington Post)Danny Maguire, age 19, a college student with wide green eyes and face fuzz that may be a beard someday, rode a bus from Kansas City, Mo., for 23 hours. He hoped that the president, who makes much of his faith, was taking in the fact that the march was faith-based: The Catholic bishops, the National Council of Churches and many rabbinical organizations were opposed to an attack on Saddam Hussein.Maguire is a history student, but his real passion is social justice, and his patron saint is Dorothy Day, the Catholic radical who took the Gospels literally.
Ms Day was a great woman and a genuine Christian pacifist. But most will be familiar with the Star Trek episode, City on the Edge of Forever, where Joan Collins played someone similar, who Captain Kirk had to make sure died, lest her activism lead to the United States staying out of WWII and Hitler winning. Ms Day, you see, was so serious about pacifism that she opposed America's entry into WWII, even after Pearl Harbor.
That's a perfectly honorable position and one with which I'm broadly sympathetic, but, as Pat Buchanan found out a few years ago, very few other people are. Before she starts speaking in such hushed tones about Ms Day and those who follow her example, Ms McGrory should probably explain to her readers why she's okay with the prospect of leaving folks like Hitler and Saddam in power to continue their murderous reigns.
There's nothing wrong with opposing war so long as you're willing to accept some measure of responsibility for the deeds of such men, the murders that you're willing to let continue. But it is this willingness that so often makes pacifism the moral low ground, rather than the high ground, and the failure to even wrestle with the reality comes close to making the position despicable.
Posted by Orrin Judd at January 27, 2003 10:16 PMMcGrory might also want to reconcile the view she has of Day with the latter's stand on abortion
.
Nah. That would be like asking Mo Dowd to do the same thing when she invokes Day...
I won't diss religion as long as you guys
are doing such a good job.
The religious have a particular obligation to be serious about their beliefs.
Posted by: oj at January 28, 2003 6:56 AMThe mostly anti-war stance by some religions, along with the abuse scandals, has made it hard to stay actively religous
Posted by: AWW at January 28, 2003 7:11 AMI am somewhat ashamed of the automatic contempt I feel for anyone of whom it can be said, "his real passion is social justice."
Posted by: David Cohen at January 28, 2003 8:13 AMDavid:
As we've discussed here before, social justice is antithetical to freedom.
The part about the face fuzz and the green eyes was particular touching; and for me, the most cogent part of McGrory's argument.
Posted by: Barry Meislin at January 28, 2003 1:28 PMOrrin, I am as serious about their beliefs as they are, if not more serious.
But results count, too. The record of Christianity on liberty, just in the last 75 years, to take it no further back, is as bad as it can be.
Harry:
Is there an unfree Christian nation? Is there a nation that's free that isn't either Christian (Judeo-Christian) or a former colony of a Christian nation?
Tonga, Russia for part one.
Thailand, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan for part two.
