Virginia Tech, Guns and Torture

"The second question you asked was a theological question. And I get that asked every time there is a tragedy. And you properly ask that question over and over again. And I say things that always get incredible uproars because people don't think. And it's as simple as this: God is not in control of everything. I know that's going to sound like heresy, because we love to say in the midst of everything that's going on, "Oh God's in control, God's in control, God's in control," but that's absolutely absurd. God did not bring about Auschwitz. God does not bring about these horrible events on this planet. They are the doings of human beings in most instances. May I say this: It's obvious that God is not in control, by God's own choice. When God created Adam and Eve, He gave them freedom. Now, you can't give your children freedom, and still say you're in control of them…"

Tony Campolo's podcast on the Virginia Tech tragedy covers several questions:

• How can God allow such a thing to happen? Campolo explains that God has given up much control in order to allow us, His children, to be free. In Campolo's words, "what we do with that freedom has been horrendous, but it's also been glorious."
• The legitimate question asked by the parents of US soldiers "Where's the outcry for our fallen?" And where's the outcry for the many thousands of fallen Iraqi civilians?
• The power of lobby groups such as the NRA over politicians through financing.
• The strong connection between the NRA and the religious right in the US, and the difference between the potentially violent outlook of many Christians with that of Jesus' teachings.
• US patriotism being placed as an idol above Jesus.
• Accountability for US soldiers who massacre Iraqi civilians, in contradiction to the Geneva accord, and the unquestioned support for these obscenities by US citizens. "In fighting the dragon, we have become the dragon."

I deeply respect Tony Campolo, and have begun listening to his collection of podcasts found on his website. They're worth checking out, as is his book, Speaking My Mind.

Brian McLaren Writes to Barack Obama

Photo by Robert F. Riberion

Tell us, as you just did in your campaign-launch speech, inconvenient truths – that we and our leaders have a habit of making mistakes and blaming others – whether it's in New Orleans or Baghdad. Tell us the truth about our past – from our own original genocide and ongoing apartheid regarding the Native peoples of this land, to our profoundly unacknowledged and unhealed legacy of slavery and racism, to our failure to care properly for this beautiful part of God's green earth, to our desperate and shameful violations of our own principles and ideals around the world, from Congo to Chile, and from Central America to the Middle East.

And of course, please tell us the truth about the hope that comes through truth-telling.

This is an excerpt from Brian Maclaren's open letter to Barack Obama. It shows a lot of faith on McLaren's part in Obama and other candidates to be real agents of change for the first time in almost a decade. A faith that I'm guessing is felt by many Americans, as it is by those of us north of the border. Let's hope the candidates come through.

Torture on TV Rising and Copied in the Field

I've taken this entire post from the Human Rights First website.

U.S. soldiers are imitating torture techniques from TV.

They are in serious need of clear guidelines.

Click here TODAY to demand oversight from Congress!

The Problem: Torture on TV on the Rise
The number of scenes of torture on TV shows is significantly higher than it was five years ago and the characters who torture have changed. It used to be that only villains on television tortured. Today, “good guy” and heroic American characters torture — and this torture is depicted as necessary, effective and even patriotic.

The Impact: Soldiers Imitate What They See on TV
In interviews with former interrogators and retired military leaders, Human Rights First learned that the portrayal of torture in popular culture is having an undeniable impact on how interrogations are conducted in the field. U.S. soldiers are imitating the techniques they have seen on television – because they think such tactics work. Listen to former interrogators describe the problem.

The Background: U.S. Policy Shifts Ushered in Abuse
Hollywood writers, of course, did not create the environment that led to the torture and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere; the U.S. government created this environment by authorizing coercive interrogation techniques, departing from the long-held absolute ban on torture and cruel treatment, suspending the Geneva Conventions, and by assigning soldiers to tasks for which they were not trained. »more

What Can Be Done: The Primetime Torture Project
Human Rights First has launched a project that seeks to limit the impact TV has on the way interrogations are conducted in the field and also the way Americans view torture. Working with military educators and prominent Hollywood producers and writers, Human Rights First is developing a training film aimed at educating junior soldiers about the differences between what they see on TV and the way they ought to act in the field. Human Rights First is also working to encourage those with control over creative content in Hollywood to consider portraying torture in a more nuanced, more responsible fashion. »more

Nichols For His Thoughts

This entire article is written by my friend EternaLee, a talented writer and insightful Christian. I feel compelled to re-post the entire article. You'll see why when you read it.

Shakespeare once wrote, “This above all: to thine own self be true,And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.”

These days Canada persecutes, er, prosecutes someone like that. Orville Nichols, a marriage commissioner in Saskatchewan since 1983, could not stay true to himself or his heartfelt faith, to marry two homosexuals in 2005. For this, he may be fined $5000, then either change his mind or lose his job.

At one time, Saskatchewan Justice Minister Frank Quennell said it was desirable to protect the religious freedoms of commissioners like Nicholls. Sometime later, he changed his mind, forcing all of them to do same-sex marriages. Three of the eight provincial marriage commissioners actually took the Saskatchewan government to a human rights tribunal over being forced to marry homosexuals. They lost their cases. Freedom of religion and conscience had no place in the public sphere. Only clergy would be exempted.

Now Nichols himself has been brought before human rights tribunal—by the homosexual couple he refused to marry. Nichols hoped at the very least commissioners like him, hired before same sex marriage was legalized, could have freedom of conscience. But while the case was still being heard, public officials with interests in the case were already shooting that smallest of concessions down.

Janice Gringell, a lawyer for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, said it didn’t matter that same-sex laws were not in force when Nichols signed on as a marriage commissioner in 1983. Because he was an agent of the state, he would have to follow the state’s laws without discrimination. Tom Irvine, lawyer for Saskatchewan Justice, told the media the same thing.

"I couldn't sleep or live with myself if I were to perform same sex marriages," Nichols told the tribunal. "I don't have a problem with them getting married,” he explained, “but I can't perform the service.” As a man of daily Bible reading and prayer, the seventy year old could not solemnize a marriage so against the faith he said took “first place” in his life. Nor did his faith allow him to lie and say he was unavailble that day. Instead, he referred the homosexual couple to another colleague.

His conscience mattered none to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. It's seeking an order to stop Nichols from discriminating against same-sex couples. It also recommends a $5,000 fine. They also kept the names of the homosexual couple from publication. However, we know one of them is a 51 year old father of three, who spnet seventeen years married to a woman.

In 1999, Parliamentarians overwhelmingly supported traditional marriage, and pledged to do all in their power to preserve it. A few years later, many of those Parliamentarians voted against the wishes of their constituents, and passed a motion to make it law! Today, a strong majority would support a law codifying freedom of conscience for clergy, at least. But as we all know, one judicial “interpretation” could put those laws through the shredder.

For Christians like me, it’s hard not to think of other times our rights were similarly eroded. Soviet Union, Nazi Germany—both were Christian societies before other forces came to dominate. Incrementally, the power of the state silenced and subjugated all who opposed their ideology. Today secular humanism with its creed of human rights is doing with communism and fascism did before them—seeking to silence the faithful in the land through unjust laws.

Orville Nichols can live with himself, even if the justice system can’t live with him. In reality, his fidelity to his conscience actually had him on the path of true justice. Nichols and many others would rather fight an injustice system doomed to fall than give consent by their silence. History will vindicate them, as it did the opponents of Marx and Hitler. But for our nation’s sake, I hope it’s sooner rather than later.

The Changing Of The Guard

With yesterday's election has come a changing of the guard. My sincere hope is that this is much more than just a shift from Liberal to Conservative, or Left to Right, but a change in the fundamental morality of our government.

I don't expect every Conservative MP to share my values, but it will be nice to at least have them represented on Parliament Hill. Take same-sex marriage. It doesn't matter whether I am for or against it, the Liberal government never gave me, or any of it's 30 million constituents an opportunity to even discuss it.

Or abortion. In the last two months, Martin has repeatedly accused Harper of having a hidden agenda, perhaps to change our abortion laws. Well, I wouldn't mind a few changes. Whether pro-life or pro-choice, I believe the vast majority of Canadians would be appalled to know that in Canada, abortion is legal right up until the woman begins giving birth. I think all but the most extreme would be willing to discuss some limits on that. Perhaps our new government is a first step toward a more moderate abortion policy in the distant future.

The Conservatives have for years been painted by the media as extremists, but the platform they ran on in this election has been very balanced. Perhaps we have become so used to gun-registering money-stealing constituent-ignoring pro-everything Liberal extremism, that we've forgotten what Normal looks like.

I, for one, can't wait to take a fresh look.