bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘HOMOSEXUALITY’

THE AMERICAN AYATOLLAHS: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on February 27, 2014 at 12:17 am

On February 18, 2012, GOP Presidential candidate Rick Santorum warned about the “phony theology” of President Barack Obama.

Rick Santorum

“It’s not about you,” Santorum told supporters of the right-wing Tea Party in Columbus, Ohio. “It’s not about your quality of life.

“It’s not about your jobs. It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology.”

Which raises an interesting question: What would a Bible-based agenda mean for the country?

The death penalty would be vastly expanded to cover such “crimes” as:

  • Sabbath-breaking: Because the Lord considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.  (Exodus 31:12-15)
  • Adultery:  If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10)
  • Fornication: A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.  (Leviticus 21:9)

A Biblical-era stoning

  • Nonbelievers: They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
  • Homosexuality:  If a man also lies with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death.  Their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20-13)

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution–which forbids slavery–would be repealed. The Bible not only permits slavery but lays out rules for its practice–such as:

  • When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. (Exodus 21-7)
  • However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. (Leviticus 25:44-45)
  • Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. (1 Peter 2:18)

Almost all scientific progress would be discarded, since most of its findings conflict with the Bible:

  • One generation passes away, and another generation comes: but the earth abides forever. (Ecclesiastes 1:4). This claim is totally contradicted by what astronomers now know about the eventual fate of the Earth: In about 7.6 billion years, the sun will exhaust its nuclear fuels.  This will vastly increase its heat and gravitational pull, and at least Mercury, Earth and Venus will be vaporized.
  • The Bible speaks of a world where physical laws are often violated by the will of God.   Thus, Jesus turns water into wine and raises Lazarus from the dead; Jonah lives inside a fish for three days; Noah dies at 950 years; and demons are exorcised.
  • In Biblical times, mental illness was seen as a manifestation of demonic possession.  Today we know that mental illness has nothing to do with evil spirits.

Laws guaranteeing equal rights for women would be repealed:

  • I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (1 Timothy 12:10)
  • Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:22)
  • A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. (1 Timothy 2:11)
  • But if…evidence of the girl’s virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her father’s house and there her townsman shall stone her to death. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)

Military conflicts would be fought without regard to the Geneva Convention–as the Israelites did:

  • “You are my battle-ax and sword,” says the Lord.  “With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms…. With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens.  With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers.”  (Jeremiah 51:20-23)
  • Samuel said to Saul, “This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” (1 Samuel 15, 1-3) 

Yes, a nation governed by “a theology based on the Bible” would be one far different from the United States we know today.

Since a number of Old Testament practices might lend themselves to easy abuse, this is not a matter to be taken lightly.

THE AMERICAN AYATOLLAHS: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy on February 26, 2014 at 12:31 am

Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, America’s most famous preacher, spends a lot of time thinking about who qualifies as a Christian–and who doesn’t.

Franklin Graham

He said just that on the February 21, 2012 edition of the MSNBC show, “Morning Joe.”

First, however, he offered his views on the relative Christian dedication of the major contenders for the Presidency in 2012:

President Barack Obama: “Islam sees him as a son of Islam…. I can’t say categorically that [Obama is not Muslim] because Islam has gotten a free pass under Obama.”

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich:“Newt’s been married several times… but he could make a good candidate. I think Newt is a Christian. At least he told me he is.”

Former Pennsylvania U.S. Senator Rick Santorum: “His values are so clear on moral issues. No question about it. I think he is, no question, a man of faith.”

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney: “I’m just saying most Christians would not recognize Mormonism. Of course they believe in Jesus Christ, but they have a lot of other things that they believe in, too, that we don’t accept theologically.”

Thus, Graham had no problem in pronouncing as “saved” a notorious multiple-adulterer like Gingrich, or a rights-denying religious zealot like Santorum.

But he clearly refused to pronounce as “saved” a longtime church-goer like Obama or a Mormon like Romney (whose faith, most evangelicals like Graham believe, is actually a non-Christian cult).

Toward the end of the program, Mike Barnicle, one of the panelists interviewing Graham, said: “You must spend a big part of the day checking out what you conceive to be people’s depth of faith, in terms of measuring.”

“This is my business,” replied Graham. “You guys go through newspapers every day. I look at a person’s political interest, but more importantly I look at their spiritual interests….

“You have to go by what a person says, and how they live their lives… Are they faithful church goers? Or do they just go when the cameras are on them?”

Another man who dedicated his life to judging the religious commitment of others was Bernard Gui, the chief inquisitor at Toulouse from 1308 to 1322.

Bernard Gui

His inquisition of those suspected or accused of heresy led to over 900 guilty verdicts. Of those convicted during examination by Gui, 42 were executed–by being burned at the stake.

Gui closely studied the best methods for interrogating “heretics.” He set forth his findings in his most important and famous work, Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis. or “Conduct of the Inquisition into Heretical Wickedness.”

In this, he offered a vivid example of how such interrogations might go. The following is taken from that manual:

Interrogator: You call your faith Christian, for you consider ours as false and heretical. But I ask whether you have ever believed as true another faith than that which the Roman Church holds to be true?

Accused Heretic: I believe the true faith which the Roman Church believes, and which you openly preach to us.

Interrogator: Perhaps you have some of your sect at Rome whom you call the Roman Church. I, when I preach, say many things, some of which are common to us both, as that God liveth, and you believe some of what I preach. Nevertheless you may be a heretic in not believing other matters which are to be believed.

Accused Heretic: I believe all things that a Christian should believe.

Interrogator: I know your tricks. What the members of your sect believe you hold to be that which a Christian should believe. But we waste time in this fencing. Say simply, Do you believe in one God the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

Accused Heretic: I believe.

Interrogator: Do you believe in Christ born of the Virgin, suffered, risen, and ascended to heaven?

Accused Heretic: (Briskly) I believe.

Interrogator: Do you believe the bread and wine in the mass performed by the priests to be changed into the body and blood of Christ by divine virtue?

Accused Heretic: Ought I not to believe this?

Interrogator: I don’t ask if you ought to believe, but if you do believe.

Accused Heretic: I believe whatever you and other good doctors order me to believe.

Inquisitor: Those good doctors are the masters of your sect; if I accord with them you believe with me; if not, not.

Accused Heretic: I willingly believe with you if you teach what is good to me.

Inquisitor: You consider it good to you if I teach what your other masters teach. Say, then, do you believe the body of our Lord, Jesus Christ to be in the altar?

Accused Heretic: (Promptly) I believe that a body is there, and that all bodies are of our Lord.

Interrogator: I ask whether the body there is of the Lord who was born of the Virgin, hung on the cross, arose from the dead, ascended, etc.

Accused Heretic: And you, sir, do you not believe it?

Interrogator: I believe it wholly.

Accused Heretic: I believe likewise.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISN’T FREE

In Bureaucracy, Business, Entertainment, Social commentary on December 19, 2013 at 1:10 am

There are several reasons to not watch “Duck Dynasty”:

  • You might be opposed to duck hunting–and the fact that the family of Phil Robertson has grown wealthy by selling duck-calling products.
  • Or you may be disgusted at the sight of long hair and beards, which the males in the Robertson family wear with abandon.
  • Or you might be turned off by the sight of so many shotguns and rifles, which the family loves to display.

These are perfectly legitimate reasons to switch channels when this A&E “reality series” comes on.

But there’s one reason that shouldn’t apply: Blacklisting Phil Robertson, the family patriarch, because he expressed his opinion during a Gentleman’s Quarterly (GQ) interview.

GQ itself best summed up the image and values of the Robertsons: “a family of squirrel-eating, Bible-thumping, catchphrase-spouting duck hunters.”

Duck Dynasty Promo.jpg

So when A&E signed them up in 2012, the network should have known what it was promoting–and that the words “politically correct” didn’t apply.

Thus, the network shouldn’t have been surprised when Robertson, asked during an interview for his views on homosexuality, frankly stated them.

At 67, he is an unabashed Christian fundamentalist and a proud member (along with the rest of his family) of the White’s Ferry Road Church of Christ.

Phil Robertson

“It seems like to me, a vagina–as a man–would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” said Robertson, a Louisiana native.  “That’s just me.  I’m just thinking.  There’s more there.  She’s got more to offer.

“I mean, come on, dudes!  You know what I’m saying?  But hey, sin: It’s not logical my nam.  It’s just not logical.

“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong. Sin becomes fine.  Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.

“Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers–they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

The First Amendment to the Constitution declares, in part:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech….”

Thus, the most important legislative body in the nation is strictly forbidden from interferring with the rights of Americans to express their opinions.

Unfortunately, the Founding Fathers didn’t have the foresight to imagine wealthy conglomerates such as A&E usurping powers that were denied to Congress.

Thus, when the issue of GQ hit the newsstand–and the Internet–A&E quickly announced that it was indefinitely suspending Phil Robertson from appearing on the “Duck Dynasty” series.

“We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty.

“His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.”

The network stated that the rest of the family (who almost certainly share his views, but haven’t done so publicly) would remain on the program.

Of course, the homosexual/lesbian/transgender community were outraged by Robertson’s views–which were precisely those of an Old Testatment-quoting patriarch.

And they have every right to be upset.  They have long been and continue to be targets of abuse–much of it violent.  And no doubt they see Robertson’s views as justifying further such abuse aimed at them.

And they weren’t shy about expressing their views about Robertson–and his beliefs.  According to a statement released by GLAAD (formerly Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation):

“Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe.

“He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans–and Americans–who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples.

“Phil’s decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families.”

From a First Amendment perspective, so far, so good–two diametrically opposing opinions on a vital social issue.  May the best argument win.

But according to A&E, there can be only one prevailing view on homosexuality–whatever view the network’s topmost officials decide is correct at any given moment.

This is the liberal version of the 1950s “Red Scare” reign of Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy.  Anyone accused of being a “Communist,” a “Comsymp” or “fellow traveler” could suddenly find himself out of work.

This was especially so in the area of television–where simply being labeled “controversial” could earn you a pink slip.

Love him or loathe him, Robertson has never hidden his views from anyone.

A&E surely knew what it was getting when it signed him and his Louisiana family up for this “reality series” which brings in huge profits from its 14 million viewers.

Only when those profits are threatened by the public statement of views that A&E officials surely knew long ago has the network tried to distance itself from its ratings-winner.

A TALE OF TWO MORMONS – PART TWO

In History, Politics, Social commentary on June 6, 2012 at 12:00 am
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
–Eleanor Roosevelt

The Mormon church has come out four-square against same-sex marriage.  In doing so, its leaders claim to be acting in “defense of traditional family values.”

But there was a time when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was viewed by most Americans as an abomination, and its practice of polygamy as evil as that of slavery.

That time existed just slightly more than 100 years ago.

From 1862 to 1887, the church came under increasing pressure from the Federal Government to outlaw polygamy.

On October 6, 1890, church president Wilford Woodruff issued “The Manifesto,” which ended the church’s official support of plural marriage.  It directed Latter-day Saints to enter only into marriages recognized by the laws in the areas where they resided.

And it left “a mark of Cain” on the sons and daughters produced by polygamous marriages.  They would have to live with the shame of emerging from unions their own church had now outlawed.

And the practice of polygamy continues–even if not condoned by the Mormon church.  In 1998, a New York Times article estimated that, throughout Utah, those living in polygamist families number about 40,000 people, or about 1.4 percent of the population.

Those who practice polygamy know they are breaking the law–and can be prosecuted and imprisoned for it.  And those who don’t practice polygamy but come from polygamous families feel the same as those whose parents never married.

Like families living under false identities in the Federal Witness Security Program for Mafia informants, they must be extremely careful about whom they confide in.  An honest statement to the wrong person could expose their family to ridicule, shame and/or even prosecution.

It is, in short, precisely the same set of circumstances homosexuals have long endured throughout the world, including within the United States.

Some of these sons and daughters of polygamous families are themselves Mormons in good standing.  Some of them attend the church’s center for public education, Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, Utah.

One of these was a young man I’ll call Daniel.  He attended BYU in the early 1970s.  Daniel was a bushy-haired student who wore plastic-rimmed glasses that gave him an owl-like appearance.

He was outgoing but socially inept, often cutting his fingernails during church sacrament service.  Those who partook of the offered bits of white bread and paper cups of water checked their samples for stray nail-bits.

But Daniel carried a secret shame known to only a few of his closest friends.  He came from a polygamous family, and it shamed him.

One weekend, he decided to visit his parents, who lived in Saint George, Utah–a spot where many polygamous families reside.  While eating dinner, a heated argument erupted between Daniel and his parents over their practice of polygamy.

Filled with shame and rage, Daniel decided to leave home that very night.  Without thinking of the distance between St. George and Provo–about 260 miles–he set out on foot.

At some point, he found himself walking along the side of an open highway.  A truck loomed out of the darkness and smashed into him.

The funeral ceremony featured a closed casket.

But the children of polygamists aren’t the only ones forced to live a double-life as members of the Mormon Church.  Other Mormons are gay.

An unknown number of them attend Brigham Young University.

One of these was a young man I’ll call Jim.  A Drama major, Jim seemed to have everything going for him–he was handsome, charming, played the guitar, and had perfect pitch.  Women flocked to him.

But Jim had a secret: He was gay.  And in the early 1970s, to be gay in the United States–especially in conservative states like Utah–was to risk arrest and imprisonment for sodomy.

So when two police officers knocked at the door to his apartment one day, Jim knew the end had come.

He proved to be only half-right: The officers had come to report that his parents had just been killed in a car crash.

Jim didn’t know what to feel: Relief that he wasn’t going to be arrested, or shame that disaster had befallen his parents instead of him.

Eventually Jim graduated from BYU and married–in a Mormon temple ceremony no less.  But he couldn’t escape the same-sex attractions that tormented him, and he drifted into a series of affairs.

His wife, who was deaf–and possibly beset with feelings of inferiority of her own–somehow put up with these infidelities.

In the mid-1990s, Jim contracted AIDS–and died.

Those who point accusing fingers at others always stand at risk of having such fingers pointed at them.

In Adolf Hitler’s Germany, even high-ranking Nazi officials could be destroyed by the accusation of Jewish ancestry.  Those officials in the Mormon church who now point similarly accusing fingers might well take notice of this danger.

A TALE OF TWO MORMONS – PART ONE (OF TWO)

In History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on June 5, 2012 at 12:00 am

Mitt Romney has made clear where he stands on the subject of same-sex marriage: “Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman.”

But slightly more than a century ago, he might well have defined marriage as: “A relationship between one man and several women.”

When he is officially nominated as the Republican candidate for President, Romney will become the first Mormon nominee from a major party.

Mitt Romney

omney cites his religion as central to him and his family.

Beginning in 1966, he served two and one-half years in France as a missionary.  Upon returning home, he attended Brigham Young University, in Provo, Utah, earning a Bachelor degree in English in 1971.

And he married his childhood sweetheart Ann, who had converted to Mormonism.

After the Romneys moved to Boston, Romney assumed a significant leadership role  in the church.  He served as a ward bishop from 1981 to 1986.  He devised Sunday services and, as a home teacher, counseled families in need.

From 1986 to 1994, Romney presided over the Boston Stake, whose more than a dozen congregations in eastern Massachusetts totaled about 4,000 members.

But Romney–aware that millions of evangelical Christians believe that Mormonism is a non-Christian cult–has chosen to speak little of his religious beliefs during the 2012 Presidential race.

But even if, later in the campaign, he chooses to do so, there is a hidden side to Mormonism that he will not talk about.

Mormons–who officially refer to themselves as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints–pride themselves as champions of “family values.”

But within their ranks are members of two groups that stay well-hidden from public view: Polygamists and gays.

Officially, there are no practicing polygamists in the Mormon church.  “Plural marriage” was banned by the decree of its fourth president, Wilford Woodruff, in 1890.

The practice was publicly announced in Utah in 1852, some five years after the Mormons had arrived there, and eight years after the murder of Joseph Smith, the church’s first “prophet.”

Brigham Young, president of the church from 1847 to 1877, was its most famous polygamist, marrying a total of 55 wives.

Brigham Young

The church came under increasing pressure from the Federal Government to end polygamy.  On July 8, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act into law, which forbade the practice in United States territories.

Then in March, 1882, Congress passed the Edmunds Act.  This amended the Morrill Act and made polygamy a felony punishable by a $500 fine and five years in prison.

It also revoked the right of polygamists to vote or hold office and allowed them to be punished without due process. Even if people did not practice polygamy, they would have their rights revoked if they confessed a belief in it.

Finally, in 1887, Congress passed the Edmunds-Tucker Act, which extended the punishments of the Edmunds Act of 1882.  In July, 1887, the U.S. Attorney General filed suit to seize the church and all of its assets.

The church faced a real possibility of being destroyed as a viable legal entity, as it was faced with disenfranchisement and federal confiscation of its property, including temples.  Its top leadership went underground to avoid arrest and prosecution.

On October 6, 1890, church president Wilford Woodruff issued “The Manifesto,” which ended the church’s official support of plural marriage.  It directed Latter-day Saints to enter only into marriages recognized by the laws in the areas where they resided.

Wilford Woodruff

Woodruff wrote in his diary: “I have arrived at the point in the history of my life as the president of the Church … where I am under the necessity of acting for the temporal salvation of the Church.”

Officially, Mormons hold that on the night of September 23, 1890, Woodruff received a revelation from Jesus Christ that the church should end the practice of plural marriage.

They utterly reject that mounting pressure from the Federal Government had anything to do with the timing of that “revelation.”

Today, members of the church universally echo Mitt Romney’s views on marriage: “Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman.”

And they know that any Mormon found engaging in polygamy will face excommunication.

But there is still an ugly underside to the church’s polygamous heritage.

The 1890 Manifesto caught polygamy-practicing Mormons utterly by surprise.  While it forbade future polygamous marriages, it did not dissolve those that had already occurred.

And it left “a mark of Cain” on the sons and daughters produced by polygamous marriages.  They would have to live with the shame of emerging from unions their own church had now outlawed.

And the practice of polygamy continues–even if not condoned by the Mormon church.  In 1998, a New York Times article estimated that, throughout Utah, those living in polygamist families number about 40,000 people, or about 1.4 percent of the population.

Members of polygamous sects also live throughout the Rocky Mountain states–Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico and Wyoming.

One of the sons of such a family attended Brigham Young University in the early 1970s.

THE AYATOLLAHS AMONG U.S. – PART FOUR (OF FIVE)

In History, Politics, Social commentary on February 26, 2012 at 1:41 am

On February 18, Rick Santorum warned about the “phony theology” of President Barack Obama.

“It’s not about you,” Santorum told supporters of the right-wing Tea Party in Columbus, Ohio. “It’s not about your quality of life. It’s not about your jobs. It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology.”

Which raises an interesting question: What would a Bible-based agenda mean for the country?

The death penalty would be vastly expanded to cover such “crimes” as:

  • Sabbath-breaking: Because the Lord considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.  (Exodus 31:12-15)
  • Adultery:  If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10)
  • Fornication: A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.  (Leviticus 21:9)
  • Nonbelievers: They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
  • Homosexuality:  If a man also lies with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death.  Their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20-13)

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution–which forbids slavery–would be repealed. The Bible not only permits slavery but lays out rules for its practice–such as:

  • When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. (Exodus 21-7)
  • However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. (Leviticus 25:44-45)
  • Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. (1 Peter 2:18)

Almost all scientific progress would be discarded, since most of its findings conflict with the Bible:

  • One generation passes away, and another generation comes: but the earth abides forever. (Ecclesiastes 1:4). This claim is totally contradicted by what astronomers now know about the eventual fate of the Earth: In about 7.6 billion years, the sun will exhaust its nuclear fuels.  This will vastly increase its heat and gravitational pull, and at least Mercury, Earth and Venus will be vaporized.
  • The Bible speaks of a world where physical laws are often violated by the will of God.   Thus, Jesus turns water into wine and raises Lazarus from the dead; Jonah lives inside a fish for three days; Noah dies at 950 years; and demons are exorcised.
  • In Biblical times, mental illness was seen as a manifestation of demonic possession.  Today we know that mental illness has nothing to do with evil spirits.

Laws guaranteeing equal rights for women would be repealed:

  • I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (1 Timothy 12:10)
  • Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:22)
  • A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. (1 Timothy 2:11)
  • But if…and evidence of the girl’s virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her father’s house and there her townsman shall stone her to death. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)

Military conflicts would be fought without regard to the Geneva Convention–as the Israelites did:

  • “You are my battle-ax and sword,” says the Lord.  “With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms.  With you I will shatter armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer.  With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens.  With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers.”  (Jeremiah 51:20-23)
  • Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the Lord sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the Lord. This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” (1 Samuel 15, 1-3) 

Yes, a nation governed by “a theology based on the Bible” would be one far different from the United States we know today.

Since a number of Old Testament practices might lend themselves to easy abuse, this is not a matter to be taken lightly.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 824 other followers

%d bloggers like this: