March 15, 2006

 

Whose side are YOU on?

.
Mark's comment below and subsequent post warrant keeping his comment spot uncluttered, so I'll continue the discussion here.

Is it any less presumptuous and asinine of the Left to believe that God is on their side? I think it's a fair question.

Your initial interpretation seems to miss my love of irreverent humour with a rather Dylanesque humourlessness. You know I can get cranked up about the war, but if I was wanting to concentrate more on that message than Jones’ madcapness, I would have posted up the lyrics to Masters of War or indeed With God On Our Side. And dammit I WILL have it both ways (help me out here Wiggy) !

Others on the Left think that the idea of God being on any side is presumptuous.

I’d like to think that kind of common sense trumps any ideology (good luck with that, Tim).

He isn't exactly always about peace and love. There's a healthy dose of justice involved in his thinking, at least where some people are concerned.

I just can’t get on board with an Almighty who goes smoting about the cosmos.

A different god for every occasion. This would solve a plethora of problems in the thinking that is occurring over at O'Tim's, wouldn't it?

While I question your assessment that there is a litany of dysfunction in the thinking in my bloggerhood (I hope I just invented that word!), I confess that I (and presumably Mr. Jones) might find your proposal for polytheistic convenience on occasion useful and potentially quite hilarious. Good job!

However, as an avowed pantheist/deist (*cat escapes from bag*) I have to go with what Jeff Kos said:

“God is watching us... from a distance.”

So now as I'm leavin' I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin' ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head and fall to the floor
If God's on our side He'll stop the next war.


Goddamn, well I declare! Have you seen the like?
Their walls are made of cannonballs, their motto is
"Don't Tread On Me."

Peace.

Comments:
"I’m just can’t get on board with an Almighty who goes smoting about the cosmos."

Each to his own. However, you should know that in Judaism, shadenfreude, or the act of taking pleasure in the misery of others, is expressly forbidden. This extends even to acts that are necessary for self-defense. We are taught the story of G-d admonishing the Israelites who rejoiced at the destruction of Pharaoh's army in the Red Sea by saying "Rejoice not, for these are my children, too." It is a powerful lesson that devout Jews take to heart. There is never any joy in killing. All life is, above all else, the most sacred thing to a Jew. More's the reason I increasingly take issue with what I and many others perceive to be the ignorant stance of the radical Left's position with regard to Israel.

"Goddamn, well I declare! Have you seen the like?
Their walls are made of cannonballs, their motto is
"Don't Tread On Me.""

Jerry Garcia, by the way, was apolitical by nature.

Great lyrics, that to me speak of one's ability to defend oneself when attacked. In what you may well think is MY dysfunctional thinking, absolute pacifism is an innapropriate response to the problems occurring with the fundamentalist Islamic world. I've written plenty about it, search my archives for "relative pacifism", if you care to know more aboout my thoughts on the subject.

Absolute pacifists have not cornered the market on a desire for peace. They have, however, left everyone else holding the bag of shit that is created by all of those in the world who do not care for peace, while sanctimoniously pointing the finger.

I mean no offense, I merely speak plainly for myself, as you do for yourself. This is how I feel.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this whole topic I guess. But then I'm used to that by now with my Deadhead brethren.

Peace (would sure be nice).
 
I think we are mired in a Judeo-Christrian tought process.
Zen Buddists might say: Meet kindness with kindness. Meet cruelty not with vengence, but with justice. I think maybe the teaching of Jesus may have been tempered with this. "Turn the other cheek" doesn't mean be a doormat, but it does mean "try to understand the anger of your enemy, If it is unjust, then, force to repel it is just. However, force as a first resort is wrong. First , try to communicate, empathise, understand..."
Mark, you have to admit, them there Sholin priests would kick ass if fucked with, no?

Definition of a "Holy" war:
"My imaginary friend is stronger than your imaginary friend".

Face it, we have NO IDEA if God is on someone's side. If he were on our side, don't you think we'd have this mess wrapped up by now? It's been 3 years, and Jeez,WWII only took 5.
 
Face it, we have NO IDEA if God is on someone's side. If he were on our side, don't you think we'd have this mess wrapped up by now? It's been 3 years, and Jeez,WWII only took 5.


In WWII, we went after the ACTUAL ENEMY, which was easy because it was made of governments. This time, we have a covert organization to go after, so our leaders create lies to make it seem right to go after a government that had nothing to do with the attack, and leaving the organization that DID alive. That's why this will take longer. If you wish to hit a target, you need to aim at it. There ARE people who want to kill us for not being Muslim, as Mark said. Isn't it a shame we didn't keep after them, instead of pursuing the nation building policy that smart administrations have always avoided?

As far as God is concerned, all the religions say that God created the entire world and all on it. For anyone to think that God would then choose sides is self serving and pathetic, IMO. Our wars are probably proof to God that we just aren't mature yet.
 
Well said JtT! Here here!
 
Jerry Garcia, by the way, was apolitical by nature.

T'was Robert Hunter what wrote those words, and you may know he is a bit more politically vociferous than Garcia.

Great lyrics, that to me speak of one's ability to defend oneself when attacked. In what you may well think is MY dysfunctional thinking, absolute pacifism is an innapropriate response to the problems occurring with the fundamentalist Islamic world.

Great lyrics, indeed. But which to me ridicule "the like" who seal themselves (and others perhaps unwilling) in overly defensive postures. I'm with Uncle John, who has "come to take his children home."

To clarify, I don't consider myself an absolute pacifist. I do hold that concept on my idealistic "Things That Would Be Nice But Probably Won't Happen In My Lifetime" list, if only because I truly believe that somewhere down the line humans will be able to achieve it.

The reality of the enemies we face makes it impossible now, I admit. But I still take issue with the neo-con's pre-emptive attack theory. One big difference between Mark and me is his Zionist passion which, while I recognize Israel's right to exist, I think his "big picture" thinking is clouded by the situation in the Middle East.

I find the neo-cons to be dichotomous in that objectivist/capitalist philosophy (of which I'm no big cheerleader) is generally against pre-emptive acts against one's enemies. And I agree with Joe that our pursuit of terrorists has morphed into an unwise policy of using our country's resources to "make" the world safe. I've said before that there is a lack of coherent strategy in the Bush administration which I feel that, if we "stay the course," will lead to a grossly unmanageable amount of hot spots around the world.
 
"One big difference between Mark and me is his Zionist passion"

I don't expect that anyone who is not a Jew would understand my "Zionist passion". I do, however, expect that anyone with a odicum of intelligence and common sense would see clearly that terrorism is absolutely NOT merely a "situation in the Middle East." and that global terrorism and the majority of problems associated with fundamentalist Islamic terrorism have little or nothing to do with the existence of Israel, or the Bush administaration and the US, for that matter. Consider this:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21611

"Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is.

The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel.

The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel.

The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel.

Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of Israel.

Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel.

Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel.

The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel.

The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on.

The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel had joined the Arab league and an independent Palestine had existed for 100 years." Professor Haim Harari

In like manner, we found ourselves firmly entrenched in Afghanistan immediately following the 9/11 attack on the US, an attack that had nothing to do with Israel in spite of bin Laden's ridiculous demands that we discontinue support of Israel as well as a war that many on the left point to with glee as a "just" war to which they were allegedly not opposed. Forget for a minute that I personally find this to be a load of horsepucky as I saw the protests for "No War" during the build up to trounce the Taliban.

Once we went after Saddam, the Left immediately used that as a staging greound for all manner of anti-Bush sentiment. I am not a Republican, I do not support Bush, but there are many valid reasons for us to be in Iraq. Using it strictly as an anti-Bush platform and ignoring the threat posed in the region by groups that were most definitely operating out of Iraq under Saddam is one of the most short-sighted strategies imaginable.

"which, while I recognize Israel's right to exist,"

Nice to hear considering it is a legitimate state that was created by a majority vote of the UN, despite accusations to the contrary in recent years.

"I think his "big picture" thinking is clouded by the situation in the Middle East."

It most assuredly is a big picture and the Middle East, as the birthplace and religious center of Islam is central to it. If that's cloudy thinking, I shudder to think what the alternative viewpoint is.
 
I would actually consider ALL religions dysfunctional (including the one I was raised with) except, of course, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Yar.

Why would SOME people opposing the war in Afganistan mean that OTHERS couldn't support it sincerely? Not all liberals agree on everything, and the same is true with conservatives. Real ones, anyway.
 
Bush has cultivated a cult of personality, Much like Kim Sung Il or Adolph Hitler. Loyalty is more important than the law, the truth, or the country. I'm seeing more and more entrenchment on the far right who think that 70% of the US populace "just does not get it". In reality, they are the ones who just don't get it. Let them all descend into the bunker and commit suicide, just don't take the country with you.
Mark, Islamic terrorism is not a problem with the core beliefs of that religion, but a twisting of it for the nefarious ends of those who are in power in the region. If Israel dried up and blew away tomorrow, they would have to invent another "threat". It's just like the Nazi's excuse that the Jews brought the holocast upon themselves because they were responsible for the death of Christ. Also, look at other twisting of religion ranging from the inquisition to the Salem witch trials. I know you have all read my post about Rick Jason. Here is a quote from "Scrapbooks of my mind":
"Although we were Jewish, it meant nothing to me, even less to Grandpa. He was a self-styled atheist and had raised his five children that way. His reasoning was that if there were no religious differences among men, most all of the wars would have been averted. And if there was a God, what kind of God would permit brother to slay brother in the name of a different way of worship? My father and his brothers and sister had had no religious training to speak of, so as I grew up, I knew I was Jewish but it didn’t have a deep impact on me. I think some friends of mine, and of my parents, went to temple, particularly on the high holy days, but I never set foot, except once, inside a synagogue until I was well into my teens. You can’t miss what you’ve never had."

There is a lot of truth in that. Most wars could be avoided if as Lennon said "and no religion, too".
I'm sorry, but justifying killing in the name of God, what the heck is up with that? It's the whole "my imaginary friend is stronger than yours" thing. I believe that there is someone on the other side, but I don't think killing each other is part of His plan. I often wonder why He lets things happen the way they do here. It is the reason that I never go to church, because when a group of people get together, they start twisting Him into what they want,and what He wants immediately is out the window.

I have been in the OR many times watching open heart surgery,(service heart lung machines) and I'll tell you something; those doctors are the closest thing I have ever seen to God in our world.
 
Mark, I read Prof. Harari's speech and it was very compelling. A lot of what Harari said reveals to me hypocrisy in the Bush foreign policy.

I disagree that there are "many valid reasons for us to be in Iraq," and that the Left is using the war "strictly as an anti-Bush platform and ignoring the threat posed in the region by groups that were most definitely operating out of Iraq under Saddam."

As I've told you before, I probably know just enough about the Middle East to be dangerous.

Perhaps your previous suggestion for us to agree to disagree is wisest.
 
I see tyour blog is back, and intact. God must be on your side.
 
"I would actually consider ALL religions dysfunctional (including the one I was raised with)"

Except the part about "the one I was raised in", what experience with all of the rest do you have to lend credence to your sweeping assertion that they are all dysfunctional?

I don't see that a lot of religions are dysfuunctional. I see that the way many of their adherents choose to practice those religions is dysfunctional.

The core values of most religions that I am aware of are not "slaughter thy neighbor for not believing".
 
God must be on your side.

Yes, he is my co-pilot. Now where are those sexy stews with our martinis?!!
 
You sure SHE isn't on your side, O'Tim?

SHE might take exception to your sexy stew remark!

Bwahahahahahaha!
 
Welcome back, O'tim. I tried earlier to come over but your blog was acting up.
 
Apparently I am on a server that has been giving Blogger much trouble (hundreds of others on Blogger help are bitchin' about it). They say they have it fixed but it's still acting up once a day on average. I've been having to go in through my manage page and republish just for me to view it. Damn free blogs!
 
You get what you pay for and G-d can't help you now!!!
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?