www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Hotel Rwanda and why I switched parties

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know whether this topic will survive but I'd still like to start it.

My wife and I just came back from the theatre where we watched "Hotel Rwanda". It confirmed for me why I'm no longer a Democrat and why I think President Bush is correct in his efforts in the Middle East. In fact I hope he carries this effort to some places in Africa as well.

With power comes responsibility. Call it neo-con if you like. The point is the principle has always been the same. With power comes responsibility. If we don't want the responsibility then let's voluntarily give up both the economic and military power. The Libertarians, in my estimation, are wrong. If we have the power we can't simply say that when people are brutalized on a massive scale as it was true in Rwanda, and in many other nations, it is their problem. Let them kill each other and be done with it. We cannot sit back and watch evil people destroy a weaker group. Nor can we hide behind the fact that at times we have been wrong. We were wrong to run rough shod over the American West. Admitting that fact does not release us from the responsibilities of saving people in Iraq or in Sudan.

I was pastor of the United Methodist Church in 1994 and remember how dismayed I was with our inexcusable inactivity in the face of Hutu atrocities. While nearly 1 million mostly Tutsies were butchered we sat back and debated whether or not the UN should be the group to do something and the UN refused to do much of anything. After seeing the inactivity of Mr. Clinton and the uselessness of the UN I still voted for the dope in 1996, a moral laspe I have wept over many times since. But the Rwanda massacres had planted a seed in my heart and mind that by 1997 bore fruit. Since that time I have never voted for a Democrat and unless that party gets a brain and a heart I never will again.

Mr. Bush is right in his vision whether or not it works and whether or not Iraq was ever a direct threat to us. I hope he goes after Sudan. I hope that his efforts with the rest of the Muslim nations that are now brutalized by tyrants meet with success.

Dan L

Bravo! Good editorial.

I think we came to a halt with politics for Lent. But I can understand you frustrations after watching that movie.

Pani Rose

I apologize if my statement seems to encouage discussion or opinion, I really did not intend it that way. I read what Don wrote and truly thought he expressed himself well, hence the word editorial. I guess being raised Southern Baptist and having a preacher for a dad, I can relate to his feelings about Rawanda.

Dear Administrator please remove my statement in the previous message if you feel I have used words to encourage discussion.

Also, I was really trying to point out that we had halted these discussions for Lent. Sorry for any confusion I have created.

Pani Rose

Pani,

My frustration with many geo political situations got the better of me. I ask that the Administrator please remove my post as well. Please, forgive my political intrusion into the Great Fast.

Dan L

Dear Dan,

I don't find your ideas and opinions scandalous.

What I find personally scandalous and quite curious are those who write on Christian forums of apostolic and conservative churches, yet advocate every liberal agenda that goes against basic Christian and Catholic teaching through the ages.

In Christ,
Alice

I would like to point out that there are many Catholics and Orthodox who are not right-wing or conservative in their politics but are still good Catholics and Orthodox Christians!!!

Dear Brian,

Personally I am not even into politics and I have voted both Democrat and Republican over the years, depending on the issues, however, if I remember correctly, when I held nothing more and nothing less than the moral opinion of my Orthodox Bishops (SCOBA) and the RC church about homosexual marriage on this forum, I inflamed some posters.

I still have not gotten over that shock.

In Christ our Lord,
Alice

P.S. If the anger these positions arouse is because they inadvertantly endorse any particular political party, then I am sorry as that is not my intention-- but, on the other hand, that is a reality of life and conversation in our world today.

Alice, you keep right on posting your feelings about homosexual marriage. Know that the world hated Christ before it hated you - he said so himself!

Alice,

Since this is still up I will respond to you. Thank you for your support. However, I'm not apologizing for my position. I'm apologizing because it is understood that we would try to avoid too much political talk during the Great Fast. I think we agree that it is very difficult to avoid touching upon that subject because many ideas if not most ideas have political ramifications.

The events in Rwanda in the mid 1990s had a profound effect upon me and nothing anyone says will change that. I'm much more aware of the evil of tyranny and of the need for help that people who suffer under it.

For approximently two decades the Sudanes government have butchered its own people with barely a wink from anyone. Colin Powell did use some words against that particular butchery but we've done nothing. I'm ashamed of our government for not intervening there and I think if the UN had a usefulness during the Cold War it has outlived its usefulness, it is corrupt and should be abandoned.

Dan L

Alice,

One of our Forum participants reported your post (which I quoted above) as possibly being uncharitable. Since the moderator of the Town Hall forum has not weighed in with a comment I will speak to this complaint.

You are correct in suggesting that one cannot hold a liberal position on issues like abortion or special rights for homosexual behavior (because such positions are in direct opposition to the formal teaching of the Church). But your choice of words (being scandalized by those advocating liberal agendas on Christian forums) is very broad. It seems to suggest a blanket condemnation of all liberal positions as unacceptable for Christians to hold. Further, and more importantly, such a suggestion about specific Forum members seems to cross the line into uncharitableness.

We obviously must accept the Church�s positions on issues to which it has spoken authoritatively (or risk loosing our salvation). But there is freedom to hold liberal or conservative opinions on other issues (i.e., how best to help the poor, matters of economic policy, etc.). I suggest that in future posts you state your thoughts more clearly so as to avoid being seen as uncharitable in your remarks.

Admin

Dear Administrator,

We all, of course, accept your ruling here.

But I will say this in Alice's defence - she DID qualify what she meant by "every liberal agenda" in terms of ideas that "go against" church teaching.

I think she was crystal clear on that.

I don't think that ways to help the poor can ever be considered as ideas that "go against church teaching."

Unless, of course, one advocates armed insurrection against the upper classes!

"Class conscious we are
class conscious we'll be,
Until our feet our standing
On the necks of the bourgeoisie!"

Have a nice day!

God bless you, Alice!

Alex

Alex,

I agree. But there seemed to be a suggestion that members of the Forum were advocating agendas that are directly against the formal Teaching of the Church.

I admit that different people will interpret Alice�s post in different ways. It is difficult for me to address all of them. It behooves all of us to go the extra distance in expressing ourselves clearly. I�m sure that our politically liberal posters do not hold liberal positions on issues to which the Church has spoken clearly. Because they do they most likely do not consider those issues in discussions of liberal vs conservative whereas politically conservative posters see such issues as the heart of liberalism.

Admin

Dear Administrator,

Yes, and it is a difficult issue all around.

I don't know about YOUR liberals, but OUR liberals up here do indeed hold positions that are against "current" Church teaching.

They say that teaching can be changed in time.

In addition, it does not help from church officialdom up here agrees with the government of the day on positions that are likewise questionable, as we've discussed.

Frankly, and I'm not generalizing, but I've yet to meet a liberal Christian who doesn't at least believe that this or that church teaching could not be "updated" or otherwise altered as it appears "wildly conservative" or words to that effect.

If by "liberal" we mean "social liberal" then I've no problem with such.

In fact, the other day, I met my homeless friend and counted how much I had in my wallet. I gave him half of what I found there.

If you want to call me a Christian Socialist, then that's fine too . . .

Alex

Dan, in general I found your post to be unreasonable at best and ignoring basic historic fact.

How then do you respond to our lack of response in Darfor? There have been plenty of genocides this administration has turned its back on.

There are plenty of Republicans who I can put into your category.

If power is all we are worried and concerned about, that cannot in any way be considered Christian. Perhaps that is one reason why this country leads the world in infanticide. Where are our shows of power? With more family planning funding than any previous administration? Please be realistic and reasonable, and this probably doesn't belong here during the Great Fast.

Dear Diak,

I promised not to post on the Forum during the Great Fast.

Happily, I'm not in the Great Fast as yet . . .

Alex