Where is the Clergy on the issue of Torture?

[Bandit]

Why have we not heard from the Church? It would seem to be a natural for them. It is all about morality. Is it Moral to torture people? Their silence is deafening. Come Pat Robertson, speak up, James Dobson, Rick Warren, why all of a sudden you have nothing to say? Jesus is a great fan of Torture, I believe, but I could be wrong. Please speak up and show some guidance on this very important issue..What would Jesus say?

[rcrush]

1. You expect the child molesters to say something?

The church does its own torturing.

[Occam Bandage]

21. The OP didn't list one Roman Catholic. nt

[rug]

46. Didn't mention these either.

http://www.witnesstorture.org/taxonomy_menu/4/9

[Shell Beau]

56. Apparently "the clergy" and "the church" define all churches and

their clergy. :eyes:

[melm00se]

52. hmmmm...

let's see what the modern Catholic Church actually says regarding torture rather than just making shit up:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2005-12-13-pope_x.htm

Pope Benedict XVI's top official for justice issues said Tuesday that torture was unacceptable for extracting information that might thwart a terrorist attack.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2007/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20070906_pastorale-carceraria_en.html

"I reiterate that the prohibition against torture cannot be contravened under any circumstances." - Pope Benedict XVI, September 2007

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
In carrying out investigations, the regulation against the use of torture, even in the case of serious crimes, must be strictly observed... - Pope JOHN PAUL II

http://www.americancatholic.org/news/newsreport.aspx?id=485
Christians are called to cooperate for the defense of human rights and for the abolition of the death penalty, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment - Cardinal Renato Martino

[HereSince1628]

2. Render unto the torturer that which is the torturers and unto the offering plate 10%

Call me cynical, but I don't think that as a group they strenuously object.

[antigop]

3. They are too busy trying to get people to sign petitions protesting Obama's Notre Dame appearance

Yes, I got the e-mail from rightwing fundie relatives.

And your question is absolutely SPOT ON. I have asked the same thing.

[Orsino]

4. Many religions have embraced torture as a means of quelling dissent.

A government that gives sufficient lip service to their gods will be given a lot of leeway.

[sampsonblk]

5. Hung over from the last tea party, unfortunately

They should be ashamed. They have a moral obligation to speak up. If it was about abortion or gay people, you couldn't get them off the dm TV. So where are they now?

Good post.

[Cass]

6. WP: Religious Leaders Urge U.S. to Ban Torture from June '06

Religious Leaders Urge U.S. to Ban Torture

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 13, 2006; Page A04

Twenty-seven religious leaders, including megachurch pastor Rick Warren, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel and Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, have signed a statement urging the United States to "abolish torture now -- without exceptions."

The statement, being published in newspaper advertisements starting today, is the opening salvo of a new organization called the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, which has formed in response to allegations of human rights abuse at U.S. detention centers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Titled "Torture is a Moral Issue," the statement says that torture "violates the basic dignity of the human person" and "contradicts our nation's most cherished values." "Nothing less is at stake in the torture abuse crisis than the soul of our nation. What does it signify if torture is condemned in word but allowed in deed?" it asks.

The signers come from a broad range of denominations and include notable religious conservatives, such as the Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals; Archbishop Demetrios, primate of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America; and the Rev. William J. Byron, former president of Catholic University.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/12/AR2006061201484.html

Also found these...

On June 23 Bishop Wenski and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops took a significant step toward conveying those teachings, issuing “Torture is a Moral Issue: A Catholic Study Guide.” The 39-page guide was produced by the USCCB’s Office of International Justice and Peace, of which Bishop Wenski is committee chairman, in collaboration with the Catholic Leadership Council within the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (nrcat.org).

Concerned primarily with the possible use of torture by the U.S. government and secondarily with similar action by more than 150 other governments, the guide is intended to “prompt thinking and reflection on torture.”

The guide continues a thread of public discussion by the bishops about torture. That most recently included a letter by Bishop Wenski to U.S. senators, urging them to pass the Intelligence Authorization Act prohibiting torture as an interrogation technique. The USCCB also encouraged Congress to adopt similar legislation in the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act.

http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/15441/

The National Association of Evangelicals has endorsed an anti-torture statement saying the United States has crossed "boundaries of what is legally and morally permissible" in its treatment of detainees and war prisoners in the fight against terror.
...
The statement, "An Evangelical Declaration Against Torture: Protecting Human Rights in an Age of Terror," was drafted by 17 evangelical scholars, writers and activists who call themselves Evangelicals for Human Rights. The board of the National Association of Evangelicals, an umbrella group, announced late Sunday that it had endorsed the document.
...
The NAE says it represents 45,000 evangelical churches. However, it does not include some of the best-known conservative Christian bodies, including the Southern Baptist Convention and Focus on the Family.

http://www.christianpost.com/Society/Ethics_rights/2007/03/evangelicals-condemn-torture-12/index.html

[Stuart G]

8. How about right now???

[jberryhill]

20. Right now? I'm sure they still want torture abolished, and sinners forgiven

That last part being pretty much the standard Christian schtick.

Jesus had a pretty clear statement on the subject while being tortured you know... he asked forgiveness for his torturers.

Not a good direction for a criminal justice system, though.

[Winterblues]

17. Those are very important statements and very welcome but I think

they need to come forth again. Now that there is the beginning of public debate over whether we should torture to get valuable information or not. Republicans are justifying their usage of torture by saying valuable information was obtained. We as a "Christian Nation" should receive guidence whether this is Proper Moral thinking... Isn't that what Pastors in a "Christian Nation" are supposed to do?

[jberryhill]

82. Yes, they should support the death penalty for torture

Just like 18 USC 2340A states.

[ninety lives]

7. The media doesn't like covering religious figures

The media doesn't cover the opinions of religious figures a whole lot, unless they are being controversial.

That goes whether they are right-wing, left-wing, somewhere in the middle or apolitical.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. Warren has a TV show that is his own to do with as he wishes

Does he not? The clergy also tend to have congregations to which they can speak without any media approval at all, do they not?

[salguine]

9. Given the positions of organized religion on a host of issues, I really

don't give a shit what the Clergy, as a whole, thinks about pretty much anything.

[timtom]

10. AMEN!!

And that includes my church...

[Peacetrain]

11. Clergy who??, churches are not interchangable.. But here are the two I am connected with

http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2009/01/president-obama-bans-use-of-torture.html

http://www.umc-gbcs.org/site/c.frLJK2PKLqF/b.3908825/k.5301/United_Methodists_Do_Not_Torture/apps/ka/err/error.asp?c=frLJK2PKLqF&b=3908825&en=8gLJKRMsF6LELWNEKaIELUNzHjIRKXNFIlLSJZOHJqK3F&err=C

Just for edification.. The UMC the UCC calls for action against the country going to war etc, seems to have been forgotten.

We of the UCC, even had our commericals pulled from media because we said all people were welcome to our church.

So if you do not mind, please do NOT hit with such a broad brush.

Some of us have been in the trenches fighting the good fight, while others talk about it.

The fact that the media, refuses to report what happens in our congregations should shed some light on the subject for you.

Just saying

[polmaven]

31. Thank you, Peacetrain...

It is really difficult to convince some folks that the media focuses on the more outrageous "clergy", while the real mainstream is ignored.

I am UMC, and that statment taken from the 2004 Book of Discipline is repeated in the 2008 edition. Before he was named as Bishop for the New England Conference, our Bishop was President of the UM Council of Bishops, and, in early 2003 requested a meeting with Bush to express their opposition to an invasion of Iraq. He was denied that meeting.

"The Church" is not the Dobsons, Robertsons, etc. named in the OP. Those are the ones that get attention, but represent only a tiny minority of people of faith in the world.

[Peacetrain]

33. Hi polmaven, my son is UMC,

Worship as often with the UMC as I do with the UCC's. If I remember correctly the UMC was going to put both Bush and Cheney on trial for breaking with the Book of Discipline back in 02 I think.

[AspenRose]

42. That is correct, sort of

There was a petition started by members of Bush's church, Highland Park UMC in Dallas, to have both Bush and Cheney disciplined for their war stance.

http://www.petitiononline.com/tmrloc03/petition.html

The UMC General Board of Church and Society's leader has been so outspoken in his stance against Bush, he was targeted by the conservatives for ridicule and harassment.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1020-02.htm

WARNING: American Spectator link
http://spectator.org/archives/2006/05/30/fellow-methodist-demands-bush

Just do any search on the right-wing conservative Institute on Religion and Democracy website and you'll see the ridicule and vitriol directed at him, for speaking out on progressive issues.

http://www.theird.org/Page.aspx?pid=183


And the progressive Methodists are still at it, since Bush has chosen his presidential library be at SMU, a Methodist school.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/02/umc-bush-library/


And for some perspective re: who was for the war, and who was against it:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1102-07.htm

Pope John Paul even said if Bush went to war, he went without God.

http://atheism.about.com/od/popejohnpaulii/a/iraqwar.htm

[polmaven]

43. That was a proposal...

for ex-communication purposes. It has been proposed several times since then as well, including in '07, at the NE Annual Conference.

"General Conference is held on a quadrennial basis, the last being in 2008. That tends to be somewhat more conservative, but the '07 New England proposal was sent to the '08 General. I do not think it was acted on, though. I am not a delegate, so I am not really sure how that works.

[jberryhill]

81. Do the UMC and the UCC support enforcement of the federal anti-torture statute?

Do you believe these churches want this US law enforced:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002340---A000-.html

18 USC § 2340A. Torture

(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

----

I'm willing to bet that neither the UMC nor the UCC wants to enforce that anti-torture law.

You pick the amount.

Because if it comes to enforcement of that US law, I would like those churches to butt out.

[JerseygirlCT]

83. Thanks, Peacetrain

It's too often forgotten that all religious leaders do not speak or act with the same voice. And that some really walk the walk wrt issues like torture and unjust war.

[eShirl]

12. "Quaker Initiative to End Torture" (Religious Society of Friends)

http://www.quit-torture-now.org

http://www.quit-torture-now.org/Pages/QuitWebEndorse.html

(note that the "power structure" of the Religious Society of Friends is from the ground up, not top-down as in apparently most religious entities)

[Peacetrain]

13. Yes the Quakers have been very active, and they were targeted also

by the Bush administration..

[Beer Snob-50]

15. this is something that disturbs me about the catholic church

of which i am a member. they come down hard on democrats concerning the sanctity of life and yet sit idly by while the government, in our name, tortures other human beings.

[rhett o rick]

88. But these so-called "human beings" are non-Christians. That might be part of it. nm

[Bluenorthwest]

16. The clergy and the bulk of the 'faithful'

See their religion as being only about attacking gay people. That is the whole expression of any morality their 'faith' brings them. Note the President brings up his 'faith' when he talks about equal rights for all Americans being a bad thing, but not a sign of that faith is heard when the subjects of torture or fraud are broached.
I'm really sick of hearing constant anti-gay rights crap foisted by religionists who can not manage to say a word about torture. Sick of Obama barfing about his so called faith only when it comes to opposing equal rights, never when it comes to waterboarding, renditions, wiretapping, Wall St Fraud....what kind of a faith is that, which casts a sanguine eye toward torture, but has a coronary over love?
Having studied the Bible, I know what Christ taught about the treatment of prisoners. He said it is the same as treatment of him, Jesus. So according to Jesus, we've been waterboarding Jesus, and the faith community, including Obama, is not lead to speak out against waterboarding the savior, but they get all fired up at the notion of a loving gay family. I know what that faith teaches, and I call them all out as hypocrites and fakes and torturers of the Christ himself. But hey, let's look forward and focus on stopping 'gay marriage'!
The least among us. Bashed to the wall. Hung from the ceiling by chains. Christ being sleep deprived. This all gets a sanguine reaction from the Faith Based administration, even as they spend time adivising groups how they can discriminate against gay people with tax dollars. That is the whole of the faith of these people. Dollars, discrimination and waterboarding the Christ.
I clearly say they are not me. I stand with the Christ of the Waterboard. Not with his abusers, not matter who wrote their notes from home.

[jacksonian]

18. for some, religion means I've got a club to bash you with

and note the silence from these people on health care as well -

Jesus taught that providing heath care was secondary to cost concerns, right?

[AspenRose]

77. Google is your friend...if you really are intellectually curious

http://www.umc-gbcs.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=frLJK2PKLqF&b=3631941&ct=6879849

"The United Methodist Church General Board of Church & Society (GBCS) supports the repeal of the Bush administration’s expansion of the 30-year-old “Provider Refusal Rule.”

GBCS has been concerned that the expansion, which was implemented during the Bush administration’s final days, could negatively affect both men’s and women’s access to critical health services.

The United Methodist Church strongly believes health care is a basic human right. Our Social Principles state that providing the care needed to maintain health, prevent disease and restore health after injury or illness “is a responsibility each person owes others and government owes to all.”

During his ministry, Jesus personified this basic human right by providing healing and care to those he met, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, gender or station in society."

[JerseygirlCT]

84. While I agree with the frustration in the rest of your post

Your broad brush topic sentence is a "fail" to use the common term.

It's not supportable, even if it feels good to throw it around. But in the long run, those kind of statements don't help the cause any, because they make the rest of what you have to say more easily dismissed.

[jberryhill]

19. "What would Jesus say?"

That's a fairly simple question to answer:

"Your sins are forgiven. Go and sin no more."

It's probably not the answer most here, including me, want to hear.

[Winterblues]

23. In Other Words it is a SIN.

Jesus was good to forgive sins but he acknowleged they were indeed sins. I am not sure the justice system is quite so forgiving..

[jberryhill]

24. The justice system wasn't forgiving in his case...

...but dragging Jesus into a question of prosecutorial prerogatives doesn't strike me as a good idea in the first place.

It's not like he said "Forgive them for they know not what they do" after anyone stopped crucifying him. That was his direct personal response to torture - while being tortured - so the story goes...

We might want to get a second opinion from Thor or Odin on this one.

Under federal law, by the way, torture resulting in death can result in the death penalty, and I'm pretty sure I can guess the position of a variety of religious organizations on that.

[sampsonblk]

34. "Jesus was good to forgive sins but he acknowleged they were indeed sins"

Well said.

[jberryhill]

38. Okay, so we acknowledge torture is bad, and "move forward"

Is that it?

[sampsonblk]

68. NO.

Just another one of those critical biblical thingies.

Forgiving a sin does not cause the act to become okay. Its still a sin. That's the point.

It has nothing to do tortures or politics.

[jberryhill]

73. "Forgiving a sin does not cause the act to become okay. Its still a sin."

Oh, I agree with that completely. A good deal of DU does not agree with that.

But let's be really clear about the stakes....

18 USC § 2340A. Torture

(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.


Now, a lot of these "religious groups" that the OP wants to sound off on this issue are not favorably disposed to the death penalty.

My only point is that I would just as soon see this handled as a legal issue, and not a religious one, since these religious groups oppose the law that you'd like to see enforced here.

[sampsonblk]

27. Huh?

I don't get your point.

[jberryhill]

28. Jesus Pardoned Torture

The OP asks "what would Jesus say" about the subject.

Jesus would be interested in forgiving torturers and having them pardoned. The story claims that he requested forgiveness for people who were actually engaged in torturing him at the time.

Jesus isn't the best character to drag into a discussion of how to appropriately prosecute crimes.

[sampsonblk]

35. Then I dissent

Jesus asked for forgiveness for them "for they know not what they do." That's critical.
This current crop of mofos know exactly what they were doing. And to this day, they still think it was great.

[jberryhill]

37. What didn't they know?

So, tell me... They didn't know they were crucifying some guy and poking him with a spear?

They didn't know that?

Under what circumstances does this Jesus withhold forgiveness?

People went nuts over Obama's reference to "good faith" reliance on DoJ opinions.

And you are telling me a "critical" qualifier in Jesus' statement is "they know not what they do."

I gotta ask, what is it they didn't know, in order to qualify for this pardon.

[sampsonblk]

41. Yes. I am saying that's a critical qualifier.

You decide. I am not a preacher. These are Jesus' words - in context.


Luke 6: 47-48

47 - And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to His will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48 - But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.


---/-/---

[jberryhill]

44. That's not the relevant torture passage.....

You're waffling:

Luke -

23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.


We are talking about people actively engaged in crucifying him. What is that they "didn't know"?

You say it is a "critical" qualifier on whether someone should be forgiven for torture, so it would be good to define the scope of it, no?

Using the passage you cited, then it would appear that having a clearance decision from the DoJ should be an effective defense, since they were indeed given a formal opinion by the relevant authority. The passage you cited is generally about "ignorance of the law" defenses.

[sampsonblk]

47. My passage explains what your passage means - The Will of God

First, Jesus' pronouncements about how we are supposed to act are always relevant. In the passage I posted, he is telling how forgiveness and salvation work with regard to how much the sinner knows.

Secondly, in my passage, it explains exactly what your passage means.

47 - And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48 - But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes...

Your passage isn't a pronouncement. Its something Jesus did.

To paraphrase: If they knew it was sinful and did it anyway, then they are to be punished severely. But if they didn't know it was sinful, then they will still be punished, but lightly.

Did the Romans know that they were offending God? That they were sinning? According to the story, no.

Did the Bush people know that what they were doing was evil? Damn right.

[jberryhill]

76. But they weren't acting in ignorance....

My goodness, they were handed a memo from the US Department of Justice that said it wasn't legal.

Now, elsewhere in the thread, you confine inherent morality to the express pronouncements of God.

The opinion of the DoJ is the gold standard here.

It would be like Moses having a third tablet saying, "And, about that 'Thou shalt not steal' bit - shoplifting is okay if the item is under $10."

At that point, stealing things under $10 is no longer a sin.

But we don't need to go that far.

We have an express example of excused torture by none other than Jesus himself.

The Romans thought they were acting in accordance with good old Roman law, and the CIA was expressly told what they were doing was legal by the authority responsible for enforcing criminal law in the US.

The larger bottom line - this is a legal issue, not a religious one, since Jesus apparently wants to forgive torture under circumstances that I wouldn't agree with.

(and the "know not what they do" bit is clearly in reference to them not knowing he was the Son of God, although it's not like nobody told them that - since it was what he was convicted of saying)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

51. "for they know not what they do."

i.e. they thought he was just another serf, rather than the son of God.

Ergo, Jesus pardons torture.

Shouldn't be surprised. He spoke out in favor of slavery, and that's a form of torture.

[sampsonblk]

53. NO.

The Romans did not believe in God. That's why he said they knew not what they were doing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. They believed in lots of Gods.

And you're really not addressing the point. The romans thought he was just a loony serf with a God complex (which he pretty much was, assuming he existed), and that's why Jesus forgave them.

[Shell Beau]

57. "which he pretty much was, assuming he existed"

Well thank you for clearing that up. I was so unsure about Jesus.

:eyes:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. You're welcome.

I hope you don't feel like you've wasted your life, or anything.

[Shell Beau]

60. Quite the opposite.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

61. That's great.

Have a bless-ed day.

[Shell Beau]

62. Will do!

[sampsonblk]

63. Whoa.

The issue was: what's the reason Jesus asked forgiveness for his torturers. The answer is because they did not know that they were sinning before God (of Abraham). If they had multiple gods, that just reinforces my point.

I am sure they did think he was loony, but that is not relevant where salvation is concerned.

Just my opinion.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. Nevertheless, he's defending torturers.

And using a rather similar argument to "they thought it was legal when they did it."

It means that torture is only bad because God says so, not because it's inherently wrong.

[sampsonblk]

66. What makes any act inherently wrong?

We all have our own moral compass. I don't know what yours is. But for me, if God said something is wrong, then thats what makes it inherently wrong. And that's the only thing that makes an act inherently wrong. But to each his own.

Secondly, there is a massive difference between thinking something is legal vs thinking something isn't sinful. Plenty of legal acts are sinful, like adultery. And plenty of illegal acts are not sinful. Like smoking weed.

Ignorance of the law is supposed to be no excuse. But ignorance of sin, according to Jesus, makes all the difference in the world.

[jberryhill]

80. "We all have our own moral compass"

Indeed.

And we all have our own legal compass.

So, if you are handed a formal opinion by the DoJ saying something is legal, you conclude... what?

It is the precise analogy of what you said, "if God said something is wrong, then thats what makes it inherently wrong".

So if the DoJ said something is legal, then..... what?

That's an authoritative pronouncement on criminal law.

[sampsonblk]

91. In that case, I would have refused to do it

None of those devils ever served in the United States military. None of those devils ever served anyone but themselves. So ir Al Gonzales or some of these other wackos tell me I can torture people, I would refuse immediately.

[LanternWaste]

67. I imagine many people believe

I imagine many people believe their own interpretations, inferences and textual criticisms are both valid and without error.

[sampsonblk]

92. you "imagine"...?

There are standard interpretations, and there are radical ones. I like to ask for an explanation of a person's reasoning, so I can know if they are a wacko or not.

[Occam Bandage]

22. Which clergy of which church? The fact that you've capitalized 'church' implies

that you mean the Roman Catholic church, but you go on to call on specific evangelicals.

[Bill McBlueState]

30. I was wondering the same thing

Non-religious people would do well to educate themselves about how Christianity works. To rant about "the Church" and then list a string of figureheads from various Protestant sects is pretty ignorant. I mean, the denominational structure of Christianity is really complicated, but we're surrounded by them in the US, so why not bother learning a little?

I would argue that it's unhelpful to even use the term "the Church" -- you're saying that the capitalization implies the Roman Catholic denomination, but I hardly see why this is a reasonable assumption.

[unc70]

25. "United Methodists Do Not Torture" - Official position and call to action

The United Methodist Church is actively opposed to torture and other violations of human rights.

http://www.umc-gbcs.org/UMsDoNotTorture

[Soylent Brice]

26. K&R

hypocrisy at it's best. a shining moment for fundies everywhere.

[mikelgb]

29. When they feel the pain, they know god loves them. Atone.

[Bill McBlueState]

32. Most nondenominational clergy probably like torture

That's where you typically get the rah-rah "Go USA" militarism.

But as noted upthread, the mainline Protestant denominations are anti-torture. It's too bad they're on the losing side of the PR campaign the evangelicals have been waging for 30 years.

[Gregorian]

36. Torture is the little pile in front of the big pile that is the invasion. Where were they for that?

A few million people hit the streets, and then went back to work.

I'm sorry for being such a long range looker, but torture is just the tip of the invasion iceberg. And there wasn't an outcry in unison from the churches.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

39. All the mainstream churches protested the Iraq War before it started

But that was on p. 23 of the B section.

Do you really think that if it's not covered on CNN then it didn't really happen?

Also, there are even more varieties of Christians than of Democrats, but despite repeated explanations, DU non-believers keep treating Christianity as if it were a monolithic organization with a united political agenda.

Talk about erroneous beliefs!

[Gregorian]

50. I know. All of that is true.

I appreciate your monolithic statement. It is exactly what I've seen.

And I realize there were churches that got cash for preaching Bush. But my comment was more toward a massive and continuous flood of churches screaming thou shalt not kill.

It is what it is. And thank god we seem to be making some progress through the mud and lies and death.

[Shell Beau]

59. It is disgusting. To assume all churches and clergy are

the same as Pat Robertson just shows complete ignorance.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. Here's where the Episcopal Church is:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_97609_ENG_HTM.htm

The Episcopal Church has taken a stand against U.S.-sponsored torture. The 75th General Convention, meeting on June 21, 2006, agreed to Resolution D020 which, in part, called on the Episcopal Church to "to acknowledge and confess that our government's participation in the war in Iraq has resulted in…illegal confinement without representation or formal charges and torture."

Executive Council, meeting in Portland, Oregon, in March 2007, passed Resolution NAC019 condemning the use of torture and the practice of extraordinary rendition and calling on the U.S. government "to renounce and cease the use of these practices in order to be in compliance with the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment or Punishment," to enact "policies to prevent the use of these practices both domestically and abroad," and "to provide just compensation for the victims of torture and their families."

NAC019 also committed the members of the Episcopal Church, including military chaplains, to support "U.S. military and civilian personnel who refuse to obey orders to practice torture or engage in extraordinary rendition or who face discipline for exposing such illegal conduct."

OK?

[TNOE]

89. The Baptist Churches didn't

They sent out videos on how "right" the Iraq War was - and how God wanted us to invade - and how God put Bush in the White House - and what a great "christian" man he was. And would proudly declare their support of him from the pulpit and admonish anyone else who would dare vote for a democrat.

I agree its not fair to paint with a broad brush - but there are an awful lot of churches and pastors who have a lot to answer for, in myu honest opinion, and I can't help but wonder how they reconcile all the current information they are just now learning, with their actions over the past 8 years. I suspect the answer will be to ignore reality completely.

[bullwinkle428]

45. The Unitarian Universalists condemned the Military Commisions Act

("torture is oak-ily doak-ily") back in 2006!!!

"The General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations called for the end of American-sponsored torture in 2005. The UUA has repeatedly taken strong stands defending civil liberties, most recently with a Statement of Conscience in 2004."

http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/6348.shtml

I'm with you on Warren...that piece of crap never met a camera he didn't like, so his silence on this issue is deafening to me.

[Wizard777]

48. Remebering Lynndie England.

Tried and convicted of torture for following orders. Forced to give birth to her child in prison. A new born Son that will be 11 years olds before he sees his mother outside of a prison. That's where I am on torture right now.

[rhett o rick]

87. There you see we do take torture seriously. We prosecuted Ms. England. What more can we do??

:sarcasm:

[kwassa]

49. Guess what? We have heard from the Church on the issue of torture after all

whichever church you mean by Church, it appears many have taken very public stands a long time ago.

Some people simply aren't listening!

[AspenRose]

79. They don't want to listen.

It's much easier to be intellectually dishonest and lump the majority of those mainstream churches who have taken stances, with the few fringe elements who have not, and say they're all alike.

Also makes it easier to justify looking down on all Christians, if you have bias against Christianity to begin with.

These threads are usually nothing more than a clarion call for those of no faith to come and have a free-for-all to bash their fellow DUers of faith, who are usually more than willing to help point them to resources to help give them answers to their questions.

You'll notice this is a hit-and-run by the original poster.

[kwassa]

90. yes, it is a hit-and-run

and reflects the remarkable thoughts of some progressives that they have something important to say about the subject of religion while knowing next to nothing about it. Where else is ignorance considered a valid intellectual statement?

[Shell Beau]

55. Which church? I am guessing the answer

may be different depending on which group of people you ask. The people you have named certainly don't speak for my church.

[Ocracoker16]

65. For the record

I am Episcopalian. My church has a large banner outside that says "Torture is wrong" We put it up about 8 months ago. Other Episcopalian churches in the area have them as well.

I know that many other Protestant mainline denominations are concerned about torture as well. Please be more specific in the future when making generalized statements like that. Evangelicals aren't the only Christians in America.

[sampsonblk]

69. Very good thread

Thanks

[spanone]

70. i've asked this question....is this not a human rights issue?

[TWiley]

71. Most fundamentalists support bushco policy

Many fundies are terrified of death and can justify torture if it makes them feel "safe". Maybe it is part of their belief system as they relish the torture and murder of Jesus to keep them "safe" from hell.

[nichomachus]

72. They're way too busy fighting the horrible evil of gay people

living in a loving committed relationship to bother themselves with petty issues like torture and murder

[guitar man]

74. I think this video explains it well

A very clear-cut explanation of the Clergy's views on torture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY

[spanone]

78. perfect

[leftofthedial]

75. burning witches

torturing Jews and pagans to death

pillaging the "holy land"

molesting altar boys

buying personal jets with widows' social security checks



you know, the usual.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

85. dolan is too busy blocking gay marriage in ny to worry about torture

gotta get your priorities straight

[Hekate]

86. "The" Clergy? "The" Church? In this country we have multitudes. You really need to be specific...

You named several from the fundies, but they by no means speak for all churches, all Christians, or all religious people.

Quakers, Unitarians, Jews, and Buddhists come immediately to mind as those who condemn torture.

Hekate