Published: Thursday, Dec. 1 2011 12:00 a.m. MST
The reason we didn't do well in Viet Nam was partly related to our failure to
"win the hearts and minds of the people." The only way we
can do that in the future is to deserve to win the hearts and minds of the
people by understanding and addressing the high values we have in common. That
includes religion. If our military is being used for anything other
than the most moral purposes we stand to lose.
"Ignoring religion as part of foreign policy is simply unsafe, unwise and
ineffective."---While this is true, it doesn't mean
that we should be allowing religion to dictate our laws to us.Congratulations, Cardinal McCarrick for your common sense.
"The delegation spent several days persuading Muslim leaders to support the
hikers' release, focusing on the importance of compassion in Islam and even
quoting from the Quran."Two days later, the captives were
released."This story illustrates what all intelligent people
should knwo - that ALL religions share common beliefs about compassion and
kindness. And yes, even those without religious beliefs share in many of those
same values. These common values should be promoted and even exploited to
bring peaceful resolution to the world's problems wherever possible. Failing to
recognize the good that religion can do in the world and only focusing on the
negative side of religious practice where that exists, will surely result in our
own failures in promoting responsible governments everywhere.
So are you advocating government involvement in religion? That will be a
consequence of religion playing a de facto role in governmental functions. Or
are you saying religion should play an active role in government? Where is the
line? I suspect that you want the freedom of churches to do whatever they want
unimpeded and at the same time want the government not to interfere with what
the churches do. That was my takeaway when Dallin Oaks spoke on the subject a
while back. Churches want their cake and eat it too. They put their own
institutional purposes first, even above the interests of their members. All I
can say is be careful what you wish for. It will never work to have
churches/religions perform the role of governments. Cooperation is one thing,
but I think you are going beyond cooperation.
I'm confused - for the past several months there has been a continuous stream of
articles and letters talking about how religion is losing influence and that it
is under attack and that people are falling away from it and about how we are
all going to - ahem - in a handbasket because of the lack of religion in our
daily lives - and we are urged to look at the problems being faced worldwide
because people have moved away from religion and told that we must give religion
more consideration...now this story is telling us that religion is
gaining influence worldwide and therefore must be given more
consideration....So which is it? Is religion losing influence or is
it gaining influence? Because it cannot be doing both at the same time. (The conflicting stories almost make it seem as if we are being lied to
in order to promote an agenda - but surely religion would have no part in that,
Some people are so focused on having a totally secular State that they can't see
the role that religion plays in the lives of MOST people. Any government
official who thinks his job is to act in a secular world misunderstands both his
role and the lives of those with whom he must interact.People of
faith have changed the course of history, both here in the U.S. and in other
countries. Without Martin Luther King, Jr., would we still have "de
facto" slavery?People do not need government to tell them how
to be "good". They don't need the boot of government on their necks
to force them to be "charitable". What they need is for government to
recognize the role that religion plays in our lives and then have government
stay out of the way.Those who prefer to keep God out of their lives
may not be able to understand any of this. Unfortunately, too many who despise
God hold the scepter of power.
In other words, when we negotiate with the Mexicans we should speak Spanish,
when with Germans, German, Chinese, Chinese, etc. etc. The part I didnt find in
the article was that we should not speak Christian when we are talking to a
Muslim. It seems fairly obvious that to have any meeting of the minds you have
speak the same language. Fortunately for the U.S. that language is usually
Money, and thus most of our international agreements are written in that
language. Secularists, like me, are not going to argue against the
use of the other sides values and desires as negotiation tools. What we would
object to is the tendency of religion to use our government as a mouthpiece to
sell their religious product. Its sort of like the same issue as the highway
crosses. Religion should stand or fall on its own merit without the
use of government power and force.
@ Mike Richards: "People of faith have changed the course of history, both
here in the U.S. and in other countries. Without Martin Luther King, Jr., would
we still have "de facto" slavery?"You are half right
- the other half of the story is that it was good, Christian men and women who
were working against Martin Luther King, Jr. to keep the status quo.While religion can be a force for good, it can also be used for ill. For this
reason it cannot be given carte blanche.
'"People of faith have changed the course of history, both here in the U.S.
and in other countries." - Mike Richards | 9:37 a.m. Dec. 1, 2011 You are correct. 9/11 was one such example.
Ok. But stop thinking we've got the superior religion.
Isn't it strange how some people will mix words. "Religion",
"faith", "Christian" are not synonyms. Each of those words
mean something distinct. "Christians" don't offend or
hurt or make afraid. People of "faith" do not commit atrocities. Just
the opposite is true. Non-Christians offend, hurt and make afraid, even if some
of those non-Christians claim to be Christians. A Christian walks the walk.
Faith in not simply a belief or an understanding, it is an action that propels
us forward. Faith by itself means little, but faith in God means that we change
our lives to act and become as Christ is.Diplomats who enlist the
aid of people of faith will accomplish something. Secularists will ignore the
good that comes from proper religion, proper faith, and proper Christianity.
They will go about their business finding new and clever ways to put the boot of
government on our necks.
@ Mike Richards: So now you get to set the boundaries for who is and is not
religious, faithful, or Christian?That little church in Kentucky
that just voted to ban interracial couples from membership? They are just as
convinced that they are right and are doing God's work as you are convinced that
you are right and are doing God's work.And the fact that you claim,
"Non-Christians offend, hurt and make afraid, even if some of those
non-Christians claim to be Christians" is extremely offensive. There are a
great many non-Christian religious people in this world who do a lot of good and
the fact that you would discount them out-of-hand like that directly conflicts
your statement that Christians don't offend - unless, of course, you do not
count yourself as Christian....Everything in your 6:39 pm post
directly supports not involving religion in diplomacy. You are the best
argument against your position.
Kalindra,It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what
God thinks. He knows the hearts of all of us - yours and mine. He knows those
whom he can trust and those whom he will never be able to trust, those who
pretend to be on his side as a ploy to spread disharmony and disunity.
"All that matters is what God thinks."You don't know what
God thinks. You have managed to convince yourself that he thinks just like you.
"Christians" don't offend or hurt or make afraid. People of
"faith" do not commit atrocities."Hahahaha... tell
that to the gays in Uganda.
Mr. Bebyebe,Look at what you've written. It looks to me that you
have assumed that you know what God thinks. It looks to me like you have
decided for yourself that because you see God differently than others, that you
and God are united against anyone who thinks differently than you do.I believe that this thread has two major words, "religion" and
"diplomacy". I also believe that Mr. Mike Richards used diplomacy
when he wrote that it doesn't matter what he thinks and "All that matters
is what God thinks". That was a diplomatic way of saying, "You're
nuts for thinking the way you do". Of course he didn't say that. Diplomats
don't say what they think. People who believe in God don't say what they think.
Both religious people and diplomats try to show respect for other people. They
give others the benefit of the doubt. The overlook insults and crass
statements.Diplomats, together with help from genuinely religious
people, can solve a lot of problems. People who look for ways to insult others
I agree Bob, 376 million Buddhists can't be wrong.
Re: Mike Richards | 9:37 a.m. Dec. 1, 2011 People do not need
government to tell them how to be "good". They don't need the boot of
government on their necks to force them to be "charitable". What they
need is for government to recognize the role that religion plays in our lives
and then have government stay out of the way.What, then, does it say
for people who have to go to church every week to remind them to be good?
Seriously, I feel sorry for those who need a structured entity (Civil or
spiritual) to dictate behaviorThose who prefer to keep God out of
their lives may not be able to understand any of this. Unfortunately, too many
who despise God hold the scepter of power.Those who hold the scepter
of power think they are God regardless of denomination/sect or ideology.re: Mike Richards | 8:27 p.m. Dec. 1, 2011 "It doesn't
matter what I think." Does this mean you will stop posting?
re: BobP | 11:37 a.m. Dec. 2, 2011 I am sure they think that on the
streets of Tehran, Jakarta, Tel Aviv, Nashville, Lima, Rome, etc...?
'Unfortunately, too many who despise God hold the scepter of power.' - Hank Pym
| 1:23 p.m. Dec. 2, 2011 I, disagree. *'Religious
lobbying is changing political focus' - By Mercedes White, Deseret News -
11/21/11 'Number of lobbies has grown from 40 to over 200'
Some people CLAIM they do 'good' in their religion's name... *'Gay
man says 'reversal' therapy did not change him' - By Lisa Leff - Associated
Press - Published by DSNews - 01/20/10 'A gay man testified
Wednesday in a federal same-sex marriage trial that the "reversal
therapy" he underwent as a teenager to change his sexual orientation drove
him to the brink of suicide.' and cause, factual HARM.
Westboro Baptist church Inquisition, etc, etc. So, yeah. To
avoid Theocracy, I think goverment SHOULD remind religion what is 'good.' Otherwise: *'Roman Catholic Church Sex Abuse' - NY Times -
11/16/11 there is ZERO accountability.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments