God damn America (and Iraq)
No, no, no. Not "God Bless America"; God Damn America! That's in the Bible, for killing innocent people.
—Rev. Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ, 13 April 2003[1]
Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right, also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan.
—Gov. Sarah Palin at the Wasilla Assembly of God, 8 June 2008[2]
If, realizing your personal views are unable to stand on their own merits, you claim to have the all-powerful creator of the universe on your side, there isn't just something wrong with your arguments. There's something wrong with you. It should be plainly apparent, especially on this day, that such a belief is not only foolish, deeply flawed and shockingly arrogant, but also dangerous. And we should critically examine the statements for which they've solicited the approval of the supernatural.
Wright disapproves of killing innocents, and condemns the US for this reason. Palin either explicitly believes the Iraq War is part of God's plan, or hopes that God endorses it. Obviously, these are very different opinions. In a completely hypothetical sense, outside the context of a sound bite of a preacher shouting "God damn America!", it seems safe to assume most people would agree that killing innocent people is, if not inherently wrong and morally outrageous, at least undesirable. Taking into account the consequences of the Iraq War, the implications of Palin's beliefs are rather more troubling.
Did God plan for the US to wage a preemptive war, on the basis of incorrect evidence, against a nation that posed no actual threat? Did God plan for this war to cause the deaths of not only more than 4,000 American soldiers[3], but also over 87,000 Iraqi civilians[4]? Did God plan for this war to drain $648 billion from the US[5]? Openly and with certainty, Sarah Palin hopes He did, and she's not the only one. President Bush claims God told him to invade Iraq, and has stated that the Iraq War is God's will[6]. Is this the "change" Palin and Senator McCain will bring to Washington?
Of course, I'm not saying her allegedly God-backed claims are just as bad as Wright's. No, they're much worse. In any ethical system worth following, refraining from murdering innocents is vastly preferable to waging unnecessary wars with massive human and financial losses. It's interesting to note that in Wright's controversial sermon, he specifically mentions the use of God to justify military action:
That we say God understands collateral damage, we say that God knows how to forgive friendly fire, we say that God will bless the Shock and Awe as we take over unilaterally another country—calling it a coalition because we've got three guys from Australia. Going against the United Nations, going against the majority of Christians, Muslims and Jews throughout the world, making a pre-emptive strike in the name of God.
And in this case, Palin has no minister to distance herself from, because she's the one who made these statements. Wright isn't running for president; if a recording surfaced of Barack Obama yelling "Not 'God bless America', God damn America!", his political career would drop dead on the spot. Can we expect the media to focus on Palin's remarks for several weeks, until it becomes necessary for her to make a speech explicitly repudiating... herself? For some reason, that just doesn't seem likely.
At its core, this is about something far more important than political strategizing, media coverage, and even Iraq. This is about the very real possibility of having a vice president and potential president who believes the US is obligated to carry out any "task that is from God", and considers herself the arbiter of these God-given tasks. It's a nice trick for a politician: passing the buck to someone who can never be held accountable. We've already had a taste of Palin's estimation of "God's plan". Would you like to put her in the White House, and find out what other parts of God's plan she intends to implement?
Update: In her ABC News interview today, Palin opted for half-baked, noncommittal backtracking when asked about God's relevance to Iraq[7]:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said—first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side.
[...]
GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That, in my world view, is a grand—the grand plan.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. [...]
Note that she hasn't actually said anything new here, she only restated her opinions to give the appearance of a slight retreat from the certainty implied by her original claims. She still hopes the Iraq War is in alignment with God's desires, and speaks with great conviction about her idea of a "plan for this world"—again, endorsed by God. And it's obviously incongruous for her to say such a thing after claiming she "would never presume to know God's will". That's not straight talk, that's flip-flopping in the middle of a conversation.
What criteria, if any, would have to be fulfilled in order to conclusively indicate that the Iraq War does not have the support of God and is not part of God's plan? And if this were indeed the case, how would God's disapproval affect her views on the Iraq War? In other words, can her religiously influenced foreign policies be falsified? If so, what would she do? If not, what possible justification is there to elect a vice president with unfalsifiable political beliefs? These are the questions we must ask Sarah Palin. The world needs answers.
Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose, and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after having given him so much as you propose. If to-day he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, — "I see no probability of the British invading us"; but he will say to you, "Be silent: I see it, if you don't."
—Abraham Lincoln[8]
I'm not the only one concerned about this:
- Susan K. Smith: Palin's God
- Sharon Brous: Palin's God is Not My God
- Sachiko McLean: Palin's Church vs. Obama's Church
- Alonzo Fyfe: President Palin
- Starhawk: God On Our Side
Update, 14 September: Something relevant came up on The Hugh Hewitt Show on the 10th, during Hewitt's discussion with McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis[9]:
HH: There is also a double standard on Churches. Sarah Palin's Church, both of them, have been under enormous scrutiny by CNN and others over the last 48-72 hours. But Trinity Church is off limits, their bulletins, their preaching, et cetera. Is this a double standard that bothers the McCain campaign?
RD: You know, I would say beyond that, there's something going on in the media right now, and I've seen it on television in the last couple of nights, and that's literally an attack on Christianity itself. I mean, every one of these candidates are good Christians. There's no question about that. They all have something in common, and that may be one of the most important things they have in common. And yet, the news media has all of a sudden decided that they're going to start differentiating between their faiths. They're going to start differentiating between their beliefs and what Churches they go to, or what kind of education they got in religion, and what they believe about religion. [...]
Hewitt's evaluation is pretty much diametrically opposed to my own, and, at times, to reality, but Davis' claims are particularly worthy of attention. Literally an attack on Christianity itself? He's shamelessly employing a typical and rather dishonest religious defense—"Christian persecution" is effectively nonexistent in the first world, especially America. Moreover, he shouldn't pretend any candidate's beliefs are an accurate representation of the whole of Christianity; there are certainly a great number of Christians who would reject both "God damn America!" and the presumption that the Iraq War has any connection to "God's plan".
When a candidate willingly forges a connection between their religious views and their political stance, scrutiny of their faith is not only entirely justified, but absolutely imperative. If some variety of religious upbringing or education has led a politician to hope their deity of choice endorses a certain war, there's nothing wrong with criticizing that religion and its ill effects. For true believers, religion is deeply personal and of overwhelming significance: it's literally a matter of life and death. And if this influences their political views, we must question who they will prioritize: the god they worship, or the people they represent. "Country First", Rick Davis?
On the other hand, a candidate may have arrived at their various positions without any religious guidance, and now use religion as a shield, to deflect criticism by hiding behind a subject usually considered outside the bounds of polite discourse. In this case, they would simply be a common liar, which is a good deal more reassuring than someone yearning for power who actually believes their chosen deity has a plan for the world.
References
1 Wright, Jeremiah A., Jr. "Confusing God and Government." Trinity United Church of Christ, Chicago, IL. 13 Apr 2003.
2 Palin, Sarah. "Master's Commission Graduation 2008." Wasilla Assembly of God, Wasilla, AK. 8 Jun 2008.
3 Iraq Coalition Casualty Count. 11 Sep 2008.
4 Iraq Body Count. 11 Sep 2008.
5 Daggett, Stephen. "Costs of Major U.S. Wars." Congressional Research Service. 24 Jul 2008.
6 Cornwell, Rupert. "Bush: God told me to invade Iraq." The Independent 7 Oct 2005.
7 "Charlie Gibson Interviews Sarah Palin." World News with Charles Gibson. ABC. 11 Sep 2008.
8 Lincoln, Abraham. Letter to William H. Herndon. 15 Feb 1848.
9 "McCain-Palin Campaign Manager Rick Davis." The Hugh Hewitt Show. Hugh Hewitt, Rick Davis. 10 Sep 2008.
However, Palin actually asked her congregation to "pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
In context, the phrase "for this country" in Palin's second sentence clearly links it with the request that people "pray" in the first sentence. Also, the third sentence clearly indicates that people should pray that US military decisions are part of a "task" or "plan" from God, not that she knows that to be true.
Even though Gibson came under fire for his statement, the myth is still out there. Most recently, the AFP, a foreign wire service widely available on American websites, claimed without explanation that Palin "has previously remarked that US soldiers in Iraq were being sent on a task from God."
Source: http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2008/09/...palin-task.html
I'm not a supporter for Palin, by no means at all, but not for this reason. Please look a little bit deeper before making claims, rmuser. I love reading your writings, and this is the first time I've seen you make an inaccurate claim.