Faith in the News

Del · Post by **Del** » Fri May 01, 2009 12:54 pm

Feeling evil today, Thoth?

You are almost bordering on scandal.... you frequently joke about the hours that Copts spend at the Divine Liturgy. I wonder if our Protestant brethren understand why we should do this?

TomT_90GT · Post by **TomT_90GT** » Fri May 01, 2009 1:19 pm

TNLawPiper wrote:Do you think the techniques outlined by the Geneva Conventions, as authorized by the Army Field Manual, are insufficient? That's all Obama wants.

Remember Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq? An Army interrogator convinced an associate to roll on al-Zarqawi by building rapport and familiarity with the guy, and al-Zarqawi was killed shortly thereafter. If we have CIA agents, FBI agents, and Army interrogators telling us and providing evidence that "enhanced interrogation techniques" are generally unnecessary, are we really going to doubt their experience to give deference to Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney?

If we need to use those techniques, we should withdraw from the Geneva Conventions and throw away the Army Field Manual, because both prohibit waterboarding.

Back to the original point, however, it's unfortunate to see churches justifying and supporting this behavior. A church's loyalty should be to God alone, despite how much they may love America.

Any nation signing and adhering to the Geneva Convention should ABSOLUTELY have their legitimate prisoners of war treated by those standards. Any terrorist, who are not acting on behalf of any nation, let alone not a signatory, have no rights under the Geneva Convention.

And no, I don't see why the Military, CIA, etc should be limited to what is described in the Army Field Manual. Unless the other side wants to first publish THEIR field manual by which they too will limit their actions.

In a conventional war, conventions apply; in a dirty street fight with knives and chains, kicking and gouging, it's every man for himself...the other guy doesn't play by any rules and shouldn't expect his opponent to limit himself.

Thoth · Post by **Thoth** » Fri May 01, 2009 1:46 pm

Del wrote:Feeling evil today, Thoth?

You are almost bordering on scandal.... you frequently joke about the hours that Copts spend at the Divine Liturgy. I wonder if our Protestant brethren understand why we should do this?

Having taught Sunday School for about 15 years now, I have seen true evil in the guise of innocent children. I can not see how a Christian could not be for torture (or at the very least strategic wedgies).

To put thing in to perspective a little paraphrase blurb from "Journey Back to Eden" By Mark Gruber O.S.B.

When some monks ask me to celebrate Mass for them, I worried about what they will think of the typically quick Western Liturgy. So I sang all the prayers—instead of reciting them—and packed the service with as many traditional devotions and hymns as I recalled. After an hour and forty-five minutes, I concluded the Mass, and the monks gratefully spoke of its beauty—but complain that it was over when they were just getting started!

Also, I personally might be at church a little more frequently or earlier than the average congregant since I am tonsured reader and have various liturgical duties (luckily I received my tonsure when I still had hair or the bishop would be hard pressed to find something to cut)

Though I can't see anyone disagreeing with spending time in church for a purpose.

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Fri May 01, 2009 5:54 pm

I cannot believe that torture is endorsed by anyone - Christian or not. I mean, good Lord 'n butter! I was married once and learned all about the evils of enduring pain! Aren't most evangelicals married? Seems to me that they should know better.

wosbald · Post by **wosbald** » Fri May 01, 2009 6:55 pm

+JMJ+
First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.

Torture is generally frowned upon to when used to force a confession for the commission of a crime.

Torture is forbidden by the Geneva Convention because both sides are supposed to abide by the rules of war. Torturing a POW is considered not in accord with honorable rules of war, since it is (ostensibly) known that the enemy will mount legitimate offensives and campaigns against military targets and will not engage in "total war". Gaining information by torture is "against the rules."

Torturing terrorists is not used to gain a confession to a crime, but is used to prevent a crime. This is a much different scenario.

However, this begs another question as to why terrorists want to blow us up. Many of the the "terror states" were once allies or, at least, states with which we had relatively amiable relations.

Let's not kid ourselves. We are not Christendom. Mohammedans don't want to blow us up because they hate Jesus Christ. They want to blow us up because they hate American Imperialism and our support of the Jewish Occupying Force.

Monarchist · Post by **Monarchist** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:00 pm

Personally, I believe torture is a relative thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-38oelOufDc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7lMhuIsfh4

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:22 pm

wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.

?

How is torture not intrinsically evil?

ChildOfGod · Post by **ChildOfGod** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:51 pm

UncleBob wrote:
wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.
?

How is torture not intrinsically evil?

Unc, don't think me sweet on torture, but I could see the greater good of millions justifying the suffering of one who is confirmed to have evil intentions against the millions. i.e. absolute confirmation that a terrorist in hand has critical information regarding an eminent attack which can be thwarted.

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Fri May 01, 2009 8:07 pm

ShellBriar wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.
?

How is torture not intrinsically evil?
Unc, don't think me sweet on torture, but I could see the greater good of millions justifying the suffering of one who is confirmed to have evil intentions against the millions. i.e. absolute confirmation that a terrorist in hand has critical information regarding an eminent attack which can be thwarted.

It is still an evil act even if it does save many. Still, this is a hypothetical situation and torture is generally thought to be a punitive act rather than crime prevention.

Del · Post by **Del** » Fri May 01, 2009 10:27 pm

UncleBob wrote:
wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.
?

How is torture not intrinsically evil?

Agreed. Bona fide torture - the intentional infliction of prolonged pain and harm - is contrary to the dignity of the human person.

Christians should not indulge in torture as punishment, or even as a threat to control the populace.

Harmful torture is too evil to use, even as an emergency interrogation technique.
=============================
Frankly, I'm not sure why we should even need water boarding.... I don't know anyone who can resist sodium pentothal.

Preacherman · Post by **Preacherman** » Fri May 01, 2009 10:39 pm

Del wrote:Christians should not indulge in torture as punishment, or even as a threat to control the populace.

Tis a truth you have just uttered, Del, hold that thought!!!...

Del wrote:Frankly, I'm not sure why we should even need water boarding.... I don't know anyone who can resist sodium pentathol.

I don't much care for the havoc skateboards cause, but surfing seems to be a rather harmless sport - and, Del, I'm shocked at you promoting drugs...

wosbald · Post by **wosbald** » Fri May 01, 2009 10:39 pm

+JMJ+
The problem is that, like capital punishment, it is not intrinsically evil.

To argue that it shouldn't be used because it is imprudent or unnecessary is another argument entirely.

Del · Post by **Del** » Fri May 01, 2009 10:58 pm

Thoth wrote: Also, I personally might be at church a little more frequently or earlier than the average congregant since I am tonsured reader and have various liturgical duties (luckily I received my tonsure when I still had hair or the bishop would be hard pressed to find something to cut)

Though I can't see anyone disagreeing with spending time in church for a purpose.

you have just gifted CPS with with a new turn of phrase!

From now on, whenever someone is just plain thinking too hard about a simple concept, I'm gonna say, "Don't torture your tonsure about it!"

Walkman · Post by **Walkman** » Fri May 01, 2009 11:04 pm

wosbald wrote:First off, torture is not intrinsically evil. It is evil or not depending on circumstances.

No, torture is intrinsically evil.

Roadmaster · Post by **Roadmaster** » Fri May 01, 2009 11:30 pm

Walkman wrote:No, torture is intrinsically evil.

+1

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Mon May 04, 2009 7:44 am

Map of Sin in America

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Mon May 04, 2009 7:49 am

Twitter in Church

ATexanLostinVirginia · Post by **ATexanLostinVirginia** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:03 am

UncleBob wrote:Map of Sin in America

That's very interesting! I'd like to see all there methods behind this and when they are getting there statistics from. I don't necessarily find any of the maps surprising.

It probably wouldn't be Politically Correct - but It would be very interesting to see this same maps compared to some maps of Social and Demographic trends. I'd guess that you would notice some very tight trends with how the demographics affect the charts on sin... Which only means that they are largely cultural issues.

I'd also guess that pollers in the south were more honest about their "sins" than were some other regions - I don't know?? That's why I'd like to know how they came to all their conclusions - i.e. what data is it based off of & how did they attain it.

Hitchh · Post by **Hitchh** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:49 am

wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
The problem is that, like capital punishment, it is not intrinsically evil.

To argue that it shouldn't be used because it is imprudent or unnecessary is another argument entirely.

I can agree with your conclusion but your comparison is off line.

TomT_90GT · Post by **TomT_90GT** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:15 am

UncleBob wrote:Twitter in Church

Okay, I'm nowhere near converting back to the Catholic faith, but this does make me wag my head at where the Protestant/Evangelical churches are heading in the name of conforming worship to the world. The church we are members of (but sad to say, infrequent attenders of) opened a Starbucks lounge in the lobby. Ostensibly, it was supposed to be a place to meet and have coffee with others. But people have started bringing coffee into service with them as well. But who am I to cast stones? My wife and I regularly watch Dr David Jeremiah on Sunday morning as we sit enjoying our coffee AND breakfast.

Maybe we should start putting those electronic surveying devices in the pews too...you know, the ones they do audience reaction surveys to where you twist a dial to indicate from 1 to 10 and the overall results get logged. Then the congregation could be REALLY involved and provide realtime feedback on how they are enjoying the sermon, the music, etc. Or maybe we hook them up to digital pulse monitors on their fingertips to measure heart rate. Of course, you'd have to wonder about the real slow ones (trained athelete? parishoner falling asleep? or bored with service?) and the real high ones ( exciting dynamic worship music or sermon? Or did Johnny spot his latest crush Mary over in the pew to the side...and she winked at him!?).

Yeah, I think with all the merchandise tables and areas in our churches, and the coffee shops being set up, etc...makes me wonder if Jesus walked through if He'd be okay with it, or have to fashion another whip and drive 'em all out. Now THAT would be something to tweet about.