Christians and Gitmo

A fascinating article was published today by RelevantMagazine.com entitled "Are Christians Wrong about Gitmo?" The article was authored by Natalie and Tyler Wigg-Stevenson and cites two fascinating polls. The first was conducted by Mercer University in 2008 and concludes that a majority of white Southern Evangelicals thought that it was "often" or "sometimes" justified to torture suspected terrorists and that their faith had little to do with how they reached that conclusion. The second was conducted by Pew Research Center and concludes that a majority of respondents who claim no religious affiliation opposed torture. (Looks like the compassion award goes to the non-Christians yet again.)

The Relevant article, however, pushes beyond the rich ironies of these polls to make some strong claims. "The fundamental problem with Guantanamo, from a Christian perspective, is that it is a place outside the law," Natalie and Tyler write, claiming that Gitmo is inconsistent with the Bible's teachings on justice, law, authority, and judgment.

The point is made eloquently, but what is the solution? It begins with a reaffirmation of the values we hold dearly. "We owe it to our country, our church, and most of all to our God to state with courage and conviction that morality and justice are not luxuries—they are essentials," they say. "We believe these things not because they are easy or even self-evident, but because we are among those for whom 'Christian teachings or beliefs' form the foundation of everything we think, say and do."

I have often stated my opposition to torture, and I have done so without reservation. I think Gitmo is a blemish on America, and should be closed. I am, however, open to other opinions. What do you think about Gitmo/torture/this article?

The Most Stimulating 18-Minutes of Your Week

I have often used this forum to taut the work of Tyler Wigg-Stevenson and the Two Futures Project on several occasions, including my last post. This year, Tyler spoke at Q Conference. His talk, The Post-Atomic World, polled with the attendees at the greatest talk among an incredible list of speakers. In fact, it was the only talk I remember that received a standing ovation from a crowd that included some of the greatest writers, musicians and thinkers around today. As a follow up to my last post, I encourage all of you to watch Tyler's talk at Q last year. It's absolutely free to view, but I'm offering a money back guarantee that it will be the most intellectually stimulating 18-minutes of your week. It certainly changed my heart.

Post your response here.

Remembering Hiroshima Rightly

One of the hottest historical debates surrounding the nuclear issue is Hiroshima (and subsequently, Nagasaki). It was here in August 1945 that the United States dropped a nuclear bomb on the Japanese people and effectively ended World War II in the Pacific theater. Over 200,000 lives were lost and millions more were effected. Some historians argue that dropping the bomb was necessary to save the many more human lives--specifically, American lives--that would have been lost. Others argue that it was not necessary, and that dropping a weapon of mass destruction on innocent civilians is immoral.

Providing an interesting perspective on this issue is Tyler Wigg-Stevenson, a good friend of mine with the Two Futures Project. Today, he has published a guest column with Christianity Today online entitled, "Remembering Hiroshima Rightly." I encourage you to read it and leave comments here if you would like to share your opinion.

No Nukes for a Safer Tomorrow

Recently, I became a part of what I believe is one of the most important Christian movements in America. The Two Futures Project (2FP) is a non-partisan Christian movement seeking to abolish nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.  2FP does not call for America to disarm unilaterally, but rightly advocates for nuclear disarmament that is multilateral, verifiable, and irreversible.

As I stated at the official 2FP release, I believe nuclear weapons are unchristian. When necessary, wars should be fought by soldiers not declared on innocent civilians. Our God abhors the shedding of innocent blood. Nuclear weapons are only capable of widespread, indiscriminate killing and destruction of God's human and natural creation for generations to come. Furthermore, nuclear weapons are no longer an effective deterrant in a post 9/11 world. As nukes become more prevalent in our world, the chances of a terrorist gaining possession of one grows. And when a nation is attacked by a terrorist organization, there is often no one to bomb back.

Rather than unravel into a post of boring technicalities which you would almost certainly not read, I encourage you to digest the information on the website. (ALSO, WATCH THE VIDEO!) It is beautifully articulated by one of my best friends and the Director of 2FP, Tyler Wigg-Stevenson. Tyler has an incredible testimony that was recently published by Christianity Today and has done a wondrous job of outlining the path to a world free of nuclear weapons. His efforts have been endorsed by George Shultz, former Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan and Cold War architect, as well as John Stott, Leith Anderson, and Bill Hybels. You can also join this effort by signing on via the website. I strongly engourage you to do this.

While there are many hurdles that must be jumped to achieve this ambitious goal, a world free of nuclear weapons is possible. As Chuck Colson recently wrote in his BreakPoint column, we still have time to prevent nuclear disaster "but that commitment will only happen if the people insist on it. And for that, we need to be informed.” Take a moment to get informed, and then let me know what you think. 

(The 2FP website will answer many of your objections, so check it out first. Again, don't forget to watch the video.)

Polls Confirms Young Evangelical Shift

A new exit poll reveals that support for Barack Obama among younger evangelicals doubled when compared to John Kerry in 2004. Among the findings was this staggering fact: only 49% of young evangelicals now identify as "conservative" and over half favor either same sex marriage (24%) or civil unions (28%).

After reading the Faith in Public Life press release containing this information, I immediately thought back to an article I published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution back in April of this year titled "WWJD? Vote for Obama, More and More Young Evangelicals Say." I remember the emails I got telling me that I was crazy. People couldn't believe it, and more than one commented that even though young evangelicals said they would vote for Obama, many would change their minds when they actually stepped up to cast their ballots.

Undoubtedly, this should translate into a wake-up call for Republicans and blood in the water for Democrats. If the President-elect delivers on his promises "such as seeking real solutions on abortions, abolishing nuclear weapons, ending torture, caring for the poor, and stewardship of creation then the myth that Christians are a reliable partisan base will vanish in our generation," commented Tyler Wigg-Stevenson of the Two Futures Project in today's press release.

Perhaps Wigg-Stevenson is right. Perhaps Obama will deliver on his promises. Perhaps the young evangelical shift will continue. Either way, we can all agree on this: things are about to get interesting.

Developing...

I commented on this new data in Chris Quinn's article, "Obama Shifted Some Church Voters," in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Check out the article and let me know your thoughts. 

Do you feel there is some general relief even among solid Republicans that we can put the Bush era behind us?