Thursday, November 17, 2005

IRD Press Release on the War

I found this press release in my in-box:

UNITED METHODIST BISHOPS OPPOSE IRAQ WAR, IGNORE HUMAN RIGHTS

The Council of Bishops of the United Methodist Church, at its November meeting, nearly unanimously approved a resolution condemning the U.S. military presence in Iraq. A separate unofficial statement, signed by over the half of the active U.S. bishops, even more harshly denounced the “unjust and immoral invasion and occupation,” while charging that Americans are being “sent to Iraq to kill and be killed.”

At the same meeting, the bishops approved a brief statement on the crisis in Darfur. They urged prayer for the situation, but pointedly refrained from criticizing the Islamist Sudanese government for its genocidal campaign against the Darfurians.

The United Methodist Church has 8.2 million members in the U.S., including both President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney.

“How woefully absurd,” commented the IRD’s United Methodist spokesman Mark Tooley, “that church prelates condemn the United States for attempting to build democracy in Iraq, but refuse to condemn the Sudanese regime’s deliberate destruction of hundreds of thousands of lives in pursuit of an Islamic theocracy.”

Tooley also noted that the bishops even-handedly “lament the continued warfare by the United States, coalition forces, and the insurgents” in Iraq.

“No doubt, these bishops, if transported back in history, would have impartially ‘lamented’ the ‘continued warfare’ between Allied and German forces in Normandy in 1944, while blaming the plight of millions of victims of fascist aggression on the United States,” Tooley suggested. “These bishops, like other politically outspoken officials of mainline denominations, seem to be incapable of criticizing any government in the world except for the United States and its closest allies.”

The bishops’ official statement on Iraq faulted the U.S. government for claiming that Saddam Hussein’s regime had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda. It also blamed the United States for the “denigration of human dignity” and “gross violations of human rights of prisoners of war.” There was no mention of Saddam Hussein’s human rights record nor of the type of repressive regime that would result if the insurgents in Iraq prevailed. The statement urged the withdrawal of all U.S. military troops and bases from Iraq while seeking a greater United Nations role.

In the unofficial statement, signed by 96 active and retired bishops, Iraqis were described as “needlessly” dying. But the bishops did not identify who was killing the most Iraqis (i.e., the insurgents), nor did they describe how this killing would stop if the United States were to withdraw. Neither of the statements from the bishops mentioned the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed by Saddam’s regime or the millions who were oppressed by it. Nor did either mention the national elections held in Iraq since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Nor did either acknowledge that the United States is spending tens of billions of dollars on Iraqi schools, hospitals, electrical grids, water supply, and other infrastructure.

The official Council of Bishops statement partially quoted the United Methodist Social Principles, which call war “incompatible” with the teachings of Christ. But it neglected to acknowledge the very next sentence of the church’s Social Principles, which states that war might be justified in cases of genocide, brutal suppression, and aggression.

“There are many intelligent arguments that the bishops could have deployed against the Iraq war,” observed Tooley. “But the bishops made none of them. Instead they fell back on a superficial anti-Americanism, which assumes that all global evils, everywhere, are somehow traceable to the United States. Even more sadly, the bishops express no interest in human rights, except as a point on which to criticize the United States for its treatment of prisoners.”

8 comments:

Beth Quick said...

Ugh. I just find IRD's reporting-style so sensationalized. I really don't mind having good conversation or even heated arguments with people who disagree with me on viewpoints. But I really dislike when people try to persuade others to their views by giving such a skewed presentation of facts. (Ie- Tooley suggests that the COB and other leaders never criticize "any government in the world except for the US" - He ought to check out our Book of Resolutions for starters. Then move on to pesky statements from GBCS. Maybe he doesn't count criticizing Israel as different from criticizing the US...) (yes, I certainly can think of many organizations on the Left that I think are as guilty of this practice.) This article is not as bad as others from IRD, but I generally find it bad journalism to quote single words from primary sources. Talk about being easy to take something out of context.

Sorry for rambling. IRD gets me all worked up.

Anonymous said...

Reading this made me wonder how I can take anything the bishops say seriously. Only the most partisan of people can deny WMD,s or an AlQueda connection. The 9-11 commision report talks of a connection between Iraq and AlQueda although no evidence of involvement with 9-11 itself.if people look beyond the sound bites there is plenty of evidence of WMDs maybe not in the quantity we thought was there but then you hear of Jay Rockefeller all but telling them to move their stash of WMDs. In short if as a group of leaders (UMCbishops)your going to make a statement you shoud know what your talking about first

gmw said...

IRD annoys me. The way they approach and put articles together makes it hard for me to take them seriously.

Michael said...

It may go without saying that the bishops can fearlessly confront the US government for two reasons: 1) it is increasingly popular to bash and blame President Bush, perhaps reflecting a growing impatience within the US population about this war that has no apparent end in sight, and 2) their very LIVES are not on the line. Little chance that they will be dragged away in the middle of the night and locked up or killed for opposing their government.

John said...

Ha! That's right Michael. The Bishops appear disinclinded to help Iraqis gain the basic freedoms that they themselves enjoy. I guess that's Christlike. Somehow.

Anonymous said...

Like it or not, the bishops stance is consistant with the UMC's stance on war- we only support it in cases of clearcut self-defense.

Ps. There were NO WMDs in Iraq. This is why Bush's popularity is taking such an abrupt nosedive.

Michael said...

The bishops must then be as adament towards the situation in Darfur, North Korea, and other nations where innocent thousands are imprisoned, raped, and slaughtered. The United States is not completely innocent of anything, but the US is also not the root of all evil in this world. The misery that currently exists was in place long before Christ was crucified. It's not new. It's just easy to direct our frustrations at the president - whomever may be holding the office - because they are easy targets and will not likely fight back.

Michael said...

The United States is not the root of all evil that exists in the world. The bishops say little about the fact that there have been two national elections in Iraq since the US invaded. They say little about Darfur. They say little, if anything, about the starving masses in North Korea and the government that holds them hostage.

President Bush and the war in Iraq is too easy - and safe - a target because of the evidence of a growing impatience with the war.

I will also say this about your statement of WMD's: if you have hard evidence that someone lied, produce that information so that criminal proceedings may begin.