There shouldn't be there, let alone him
Franklin Graham says he's not anti-Muslim, just anti-Islam. To be precise, he says
I love Muslim people. I want people to understand this. I am not on a crusade against Muslims. Christ died for Muslims... but I don't agree with the teachings of Muhammad.That's true, I expect; I have no reason to believe otherwise (for some values of "love" at any rate). Of course, Graham doesn't add two things: one, that although he loves them he sincerely believes Muslims are all going to Hell, and two, that he feels exactly the same way about Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, pagans, Wiccans, Taoists, Shintos, animists, atheists, agnostics, and many self-identified Christians...
And that's why he doesn't belong at a White House event*. Or, to be precise about it, that's why the White House shouldn't be having this event in the first place. He shouldn't be there, but "there" shouldn't exist in the first place. Because we have all those people - and more! - in the USA. And an event which takes sides against them (or anyone) shouldn't be sponsored by the White House.
Moreover, if it doesn't take sides, I fail to see how any preacher or religious person of any bent, not just the painfully honest Franklin Graham, can participate. If they sing the hymn from Lanark Primary School in Thurloe (courtesy of Fry & Laurie), their "religion" is so watered down as to be meaningless:
We worship you, o god or gods,And if they don't - even if "all" they do is say "Almighty God" - they've taken sides against someone.
Whoever you may be.
We realise that you operate
Supernaturally.
We thank you for the birds and bees,
For creatures live or dead.
But if you actually don't exist,
Then ignore what we've just said.
And that shouldn't happen. Not in the White House.
* Let me clarify: I mean the "National Day of Prayer". (If you want something sobering, try National Day of Prayer.org - the national seal and PRAYER and ""The LORD is good, a refuge in times of trouble. He cares for those who trust in Him" Nahum 1:7"....
And this year, as last, there will NOT be a National Day of Prayer breakfast at the White House, as in the past 50+ years there has been. Which is the right thing; it's not just Franklin Graham who doesn't belong there. It's all of them.
Labels: freethought, politics
6 Comments:
Uhhm, what White House event?
Fact check: I don't recall reading anywhere that Franklin Graham was invited to speak at a White House event, or to an event sponsored by the White House, or that he has ever spoken at the White House.
If it is true about Franklin Graham that (quoting you) "although he loves them he sincerely believes Muslims are all going to Hell, and two, that he feels exactly the same way about Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, pagans, Wiccans, Taoists, Shintos, animists, atheists, agnostics ... " why are you so cheerfully skeptical of that definition of love? If that is what he sincerely believes, wouldn't it be an act of love to do everything in his power to warn them and tell them how to avoid Hell?
You can question the validity of his belief, certainly. But if you accept the sincerety of his belief, then he is obviously acting out of love -- if it were otherwise, he would stay quiet and let all those people (according to his belief) just go to hell and not worry about it.
I believe I read that Graham's invitation was rescinded.
My thought about religion is that it could be a good thing for individuals; its problem is how it divides us. People can care passionately about their own beliefs. They should worry no more about the religion of others than they worry about what baseball team their neighbors support, or what sort of music their children like.
As I'm sure you know, I'm talking about the National Day of Prayer. "White House" is shorthand for "President and Federal Government".
Yes, his invitation was rescinded, because he said unkind things about Islam. My actual point is that NOBODY should be there, not just him. He's at least upfront about how he feels about other religions; the rest of 'em are pretending to get along with people they really don't like, or else pretending to have some deeply-held beliefs that don't exist.
I don't question the sincerity of his belief. But sincerity is far from being a recommendation. People have believed many horrible things sincerely. And we don't need for the kind of love that Graham and others have to be involved in any way with the secular government of this country. Let them pursue it without the federal government standing behind them.
Hey, Barbara, my thought is that if a religion is truly abusive, or causes its adherents to be abusive, those who recognize this have an obligation to speak out, even to oppose.
Read this post
http://biggovernment.com/davel/2010/05/02/feminists-and-franklin-graham/
Now, tell me, to follow your analogy, if players on a baseball team I am not of fan of are abusing women and children over whom they have a power-role, routinely abusing, should I not worry about it?
To address Anon's concerns, let me first assume you're a Christian - this argument is generally put to me by Christians. In fact, I can't remember anyone other than a Christian making it.
So... Imagine yourself hearing on the radio and tv constant refs to praising Buddha, thanking him, praying to him - Buddha had his hand under that airplane, Buddha spared my life, Buddha helped me win the game, Buddha will look after me
Imagine radio shows devoted to the glory of Buddha. Imagine a Franklin Graham counterpart with a daily newspaper column advising people how to deal with their nonbelieving friends and family.
And imagine your neighbor EVERY TIME he saw you telling you he qas praying that you'd see rhe light, please read this pamphlet, just listen to him, because otherwise you'll never achieve enlightenment and you'll be headed for another miserable existence. EVERY TIME.
Is "love" the emotion you feel?
Sincerity is not enough.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]