Welcome

Welcome to LibertarianChristians.com! If you are new here, you may want to see the About Page for a welcome message and more information about the site. Check out the posts on the right and the Top Posts page to get started! Don't forget to subscribe for free with RSS or Email.

Archive for iraq

This talk was given on August 20 at the Florida Liberty Summit 2011 in Orlando, Florida.

Thank you Campaign for Liberty for the opportunity to speak about a subject I feel so passionate about. I would like to speak to you today about Christianity and War. Although I am a Bible-believing Christian and a theological and cultural conservative, I write extensively about the biblical, economic, and political fallacies of religious people, and especially on the topic of Christianity and war. This is a subject where ignorance abounds in both pulpit and pew, and most of it willful ignorance. This is a subject that exposes Bible scholars as Bible illiterates. This is a subject that turns Christians into disgraceful apologists of the state, its leaders, its military, and its wars. This is a subject that reveals pro-life Christians to be two-faced supporters of wholesale murder.

If there is any group of people that should be opposed to war, torture, militarism, the warfare state, state worship, suppression of civil liberties, an imperial presidency, blind nationalism, government propaganda, and an aggressive foreign policy it is Christians, and especially conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist Christians who claim to strictly follow the dictates of Scripture and worship the Prince of Peace. It is indeed strange that Christian people should be so accepting of war. War is the greatest suppressor of civil liberties. War is the greatest destroyer of religion, morality, and decency. War is the greatest creator of fertile ground for genocides and atrocities. War is the greatest destroyer of families and young lives. War is the greatest creator of famine, disease, and homelessness. War is the health of the state.

Read More→

Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Articles
Comments (0)

The vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on Monday night to raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion was significant in more ways than one. S. 365, which passed by a vote of 269-161, including the support of 174 Republicans, featured the vote of a House member who has been absent all year – Arizona Democrat Gabrielle Giffords.

Giffords was shot on January 8 in Tucson, Arizona, along with eighteen other people, six of whom died. After her brief trip to Washington, Giffords returned to Houston to continue her therapy.

Giffords was elected to Congress the first time in 2006. She took office on January 3, 2007. She was reelected in 2008 and 2010. She is the only member of Congress whose spouse is an active duty member of the military.

Although I wish her well and hope she makes a full recovery from her horrific head injury, I equally wish that she would stay home and not cast any more votes in Congress.

The following is a list of all the congressional appropriations that include war-related funding from the time that Giffords took office until the time she was shot:

  • FY2007 Continuing Resolution, H.J.RES.20, P.L. 110-5, 2/15/07, $1.8 billion
  • FY2007 Supplemental, H.R.2206, P.L. 110-28, 5/25/07, $98.7 billion
  • FY2008 Continuing Resolution, H.J.Res.52, P.L. 110-92 9/29/07, $5.2 billion
  • FY2008 DOD Appropriations Act, H.R.3222, P.L. 110-116, 11/13/07, $11.6 billion
  • FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R.2764, P.L. 110-161, 12/26/07, $73.2 billion
  • FY2008 Supplemental Appropriations Act, H.R.2642, P.L. 110-252, 6/30/08, $163.2 billion
  • FY2009 Continuing Appropriations Act, H.R.2638, P.L. 110-329, 9/30/08, $4.0 billion
  • FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act, H.R.1105, P.L. 111-8, 3/11/09, $1.1 billion
  • FY2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act, H.R.2346, P.L. 111-32, 6/24/09, $82.5 billion
  • FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R.3288, P.L. 111-117, 12/16/09, $8.2 billion
  • FY2010 DOD Appropriations Act, Title IX, H.R.3326, P.L. 111-118, 12/19/09, $127.3 billion
  • FY2010 Supplemental, H.R.4899, P.L. 111-212, 7/27/10, $34.2 billion

With the exception of the smallest appropriation, $1.1 billion in the FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act, Rep. Giffords voted for all of these war-related appropriations. Judging from her voting record in Congress, I see no reason why she voted against this omnibus bill. It certainly wasn’t because she opposed the $1.1 billion in funding for war-related foreign operations of the State Department.

On the other hand, that champion of peace and nonintervention in the House, Rep. Ron Paul, voted against all of these war appropriations, with the exception of the first one, on which he didn’t vote.

I am often criticized for condemning U.S. soldiers for fighting unjust and immoral wars like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is the politicians that send our troops to war, I am told, that I should be criticizing. Although I refuse to exclude the troops since, after all, they are the ones doing the actual fighting, I have nothing but contempt for the architects of these wars, the president who instigated these wars, the president who continued these wars, the neocons who welcomed these wars, the conservatives who defend these wars, the Christians who support these wars, and the Congressmen who continue to fund these wars.

Every member of Congress – Gabby Giffords and every Democrat and Republican – who voted for the above and any of the other war funding has blood on his (or her) hands – the blood of thousands of U.S. soldiers who lost their lives fighting senseless foreign wars. (Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of foreigners killed by U.S. bombs and bullets, but what war supporter cares a whit about them?)

Although not as important as lives lost and ruined, appropriating taxpayer money on senseless and unnecessary wars is the height of fiscal irresponsibility. Any talk of cutting spending to reduce the deficit that doesn’t include cutting off funding for foreign wars is ludicrous. But of course, we are dealing with the U.S. Congress – one of the largest collections of crooks and creeps on the planet.

Originally published on LewRockwell.com on August 4, 2011.

Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Articles
Comments (1)

Defenders of U.S. wars and military interventions look like the majority of Americans. They also dress like them, eat like them, work like them, play like them, and talk like them. However, it is sometimes impossible to communicate with or make sense of them because some things they say have their own peculiar definition.

This differs from military doublespeak.

To really understand these defenders of U.S. wars and military interventions, one needs a warmonger’s lexicon. To get started, I propose the following entries:

Just war: any war the United States engages in.
Good war: any war in which the United States is on the winning side.
Defensive war: any war the United States starts.

George Bush: the Messiah, but especially when he was fighting against Muslims.
Barack Obama: Satan, but not when he is fighting against Muslims.

Insurgent: anyone who dares to fight against U.S. troops occupying his country.
Militant: see insurgent.
Enemy combatant: see militant.
Freedom fighter: an insurgent, militant, or enemy combatant supported by the United States when he fights against some other country.

Weapons of mass destruction: weapons that foreigners can use to attack Americans.
Advanced weapons systems: weapons that Americans can use to attack foreigners.

Allies: countries that support U.S. foreign policy.
Enemies: countries that don’t support U.S. foreign policy.

Patriot: any American who supports U.S. foreign wars.
Traitor: any American who opposes U.S. foreign wars.

Hero: any American solider who fought in any war against any country for any reason.
Coward: any American who doesn’t support U.S. soldiers fighting in senseless foreign wars.

American: supporting large defense budgets.
UnAmerican: opposing large defense budgets.

Threat to American security: see unAmerican, coward, and traitor.

Veteran: God’s chosen people.
Non-veterans: second-class citizens.

Muslim: terrorist.
Terrorist: Muslim.

Soldier: public servant.
Civilian: freeloader.

Isolationist: any American who opposes U.S. wars, empire, and/or foreign policy.

Zionist: someone who favors U.S. military intervention in the Middle East.
Anti-Semite: someone who opposes U.S. military intervention in the Middle East.

Pacifist: enemy of the United States.
Draft dodger: see pacifist.

Dead U.S. soldier: fallen hero.
Dead foreign civilian: collateral damage.

Torture: torture of Americans by foreigners.
Enhanced interrogation techniques: torture of foreigners by Americans.
Extraordinary rendition: U.S. supported torture of foreigners by foreigners.

U.S. interests: anything the United States wants to be interested in.

When it comes to defenders of U.S. wars and military interventions, learn their language so you won’t be intimidated or deceived by them, but don’t waste too much of your time with them. There is nothing more frustrating than discussing the finer points of something like just war theory and then finding out thirty minutes later that the warmonger you thought you were having a meaningful conversation with and in basic agreement with believes that all the wars the United States has engaged in are just wars.

Originally published on LewRockwell.com on July 4, 2011.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Articles
Comments (0)

It seems sensible and logical that followers of someone called the Prince of Peace would not act like they are following Mars, the Roman god of war.

As I have maintained whenever I speak about Christianity and war, if there is any group of people that should be opposed to war, empire, militarism, the warfare state, an imperial presidency, blind nationalism, government war propaganda, and an aggressive foreign policy it is Christians, and especially conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist Christians who claim to strictly follow the dictates of Scripture and worship the Prince of Peace.

I have also maintained throughout these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that, even though it is Christianity above all religions that should be opposed to the evils of war and militarism, in the Church will be found some of the greatest supporters of the military and the current wars.

The "criminality of war," as Howard Malcom, president of Georgetown College, wrote in 1845, is not "that tyrants should lead men into wars of pride and conquest," but that "the people, in governments comparatively free, should so readily lend themselves to a business in which they bear all the sufferings, can gain nothing, and may lose all." That people would act this way, Malcom says, is an "astonishment indeed." "But," he continues, "the chief wonder is that Christians, followers of the Prince of Peace, should have concurred in this mad idolatry of strife, and thus been inconsistent not only with themselves, but with the very genius of their system."

I have heard and read many Christians criticize Obama – and rightly so – for his horrendous policies, but I have heard and read little or nothing from Christians of how Obama has continued the war in Iraq, escalated the war in Afghanistan, and expanded the bogus war on terror to other countries.

The above sign from a church in Maryland can unfortunately be seen almost anywhere in the United States. Although some Christians have begun to criticize Obama and the Democrats for the things that only a short time ago they were silent about when perpetrated by Bush and the Republicans, support for the military among Christians – no matter where it goes, why it goes, what it does, how much it costs, how long it stays, and how many foreigners it kills – is so entrenched, so sacrosanct, that I am at the same time bewildered and embarrassed, angered and ashamed.

The result of this mindset is a perversion of the very Scriptures that Christians claim to believe and follow. So, just as Christian warmongers would, if they were honest, recite The Warmonger’s Psalm (Psalm 23), assent to The Warmonger’s Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-12), and pray The President’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13), so they would acknowledge that they manifest The Warmonger’s Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).

In contrast to the works of the flesh (adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, and revellings), the Apostle Paul in the Book of Galatians mentions the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance.

But in place of these virtues, warmongers have substituted pride, indifference, vengeance, ignorance, malice, arrogance, lust, foolishness, and blasphemy.

Christian warmongers have pride in the U.S. military – the greatest cause of terrorism and instability in the world. They are indifferent to the tremendous suffering of foreigners who get in the way of the U.S. military. They want vengeance for 9/11 now matter how many innocent Muslims have to die. They have a tremendous and willful ignorance of the true nature of U.S. foreign policy. They have malice toward foreigners who never harmed Americans until the U.S. military starting bombing them. They have an arrogant "USA, USA" patriotism that supports an interventionist and militaristic foreign policy. They lust for the blood of foreigners by supporting bombing, drone attacks, torture, and indiscriminate killing. They make foolish statements like the military is defending our freedoms by fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. They blaspheme God by asking him to bless and protect U.S. soldiers.

I realize that I am making some serious accusations, but the truth is simply that most Christian warmongers don’t care whether there are Predator drone attacks against Afghan and Pakistani peasants as long as a Republican-controlled government gets to conduct the attacks.

Originally published on LewRockwell.com on June 23, 2011.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Articles
Comments (0)

In April, I reported that John Stossel filmed an episode of his show at the Students for Liberty International Conference in 2011. The segment was interesting, but I was genuinely concerned that Stossel, despite being quite decent on many economics issues, had un-thoughtful view of war and history.

However, I was pleased to see the following clip of Stossel on the O’Reilly Factor, where Stossel defends Ron Paul and begins to sound pretty good on issues of foreign policy. It was rather funny, honestly, to hear Stossel say that Ron Paul is “right on everything” – including foreign policy. While Stossel doesn’t talk about jus in bello (ethics during war), where I had the biggest problem with him before, he has the right idea on jus ad bellum (justification for war). Take a look, it’s entertaining to watch that snake O’Reilly squirm and look like an idiot trying to pronounce Keynes’s name to say the least.

I should note, though, that there was a Federal Reserve in 1920. They just didn’t do much in that recession, and thus it lasted for less than a year.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Articles
Comments (4)

Who is behind LCC?

Norman Horn is the creator and primary writer for LCC. Learn a little bit about him in the About Page. You can write him a note or ask a question at the Contact Page. Follow him on Twitter.

Photobucket

Top Ron Paul Sites - Ranking the best Ron Paul related Freedom and Liberty Websites