Chapter four deals with the issues referred to as pro-life. There are seven issues addressed in the chapter: abortion, cloning, stem cell research, child/elder abuse, euthanasia, sex trafficking, and capital punishment. Jackson and Perkins do not give a biblical definition for each individual issue addressed in the chapter due to the nature of the issues. All of the issues are dealing with caring for those who cannot defend themselves.
Abortion is the premeditated murder of an unborn child. This is the original “value of life” issue in the United States; as a result of the Supreme Court decision Row vs. Wade. The authors give credit to the efforts of the church after the decision. Examples of these efforts are “The nationwide network of crisis pregnancy clinics and homes for unwed mothers” .
Cloning was first proved to be possible when “Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1996.” Although cloning is possible and considered a scientific miracle, it is not proper for humans to duplicate God’s creations. Although “The United Nations has gone on record against human cloning” ; the United States does not have a ban on human cloning. Another scientific advancement due to cloning is stem cell research.
The debate surrounding stem cell research concerns the remaining embryos from couples who are attempting in vitro fertilization treatment. This process creates multiple embryos which are not needed. “The question lies with what to do with the four hundred thousand “excesses” embryos that lie in wait within laboratories”. Some of these are used in couples who are infertile. The argument for using these embryos for research is that one day they may be used for treating medical conditions. But, “In the ten years…there have yet to be any successful treatments of any medical condition.” Adult stem cells have been taken from bone marrow, “at present, over seventy different types of medical conditions have been treated with adult stem cells.” Christians should encourage the adult stem cell research because it does not result in killing human embryos.
Jackson and Perkins divided the pediatric abuse and neglect and geriatric abuse. In reality, medical professionals are trained the same way for both cases. The church’s reaction should be the same yet we are outraged when it is pediatrics but not the geriatrics. This is a major problem because “four children die every day as a result of child abuse or neglect.” The authors make a great point when it comes to the modern culture and raising children; when they say “Parents draw back and do not have as strong a bond with their children as in past generations.” This then impacts those parents when they want to be cared for later in life but their children take advantage of them. Those parents become another burden for the adult child to bear. With the added stress the adult children sometimes take their stress out on the parent. Due to the physical conditions of a majority of geriatrics their medical bills are too much to bear. This results in the withholding of medical treatment, creating abuse. These people who have retired are a strain on their children, so they become “unproductive and unwanted” creating the concept of euthanasia.
Euthanasia is “the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering… by lethal injection or suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.” This practice is not addressed in any federal law in the United States, it has been an issue left up to the states to decide. Although there has been a precedent set in the Terri Schiavo case in Florida. The human race now has the chance to not only make all of the decisions in life but to also choose when they die. “There is concern that euthanasia may increasingly become used involuntarily for the elderly and disabled.” I would believe that the author’s parallel of euthanasia and the Nazi party’s genocide are not very similar.
Sex trafficking is a major problem in the world today “The FBI estimates that well over 100,000 children and young women are trafficked in America today.” This also shows it is a very real problem in the United States; more so than people realize. Within the United States many children are enslaved in the sex trade without a response from the church or government. “Many good pieces of legislation are passed into law, only to be left unenforced.”
Capital punishment is used as a punishment when two eye witnesses testify to a murder crime. The authors point out “The Old Testament gives specific guidelines for the use of capital punishment.” These guidelines are the same as we have today, two eye witnesses. Many people say that capital punishment is killing a person and therefore immoral. The authors do not seem to pick a side on the issue they just briefly present the issue.
The entire chapter can be summed up in one sentence “all innocent human life is deserving of our collective protection.” Chapters three and four can be summed up by saying, “With each concession we make in the value of innocent human life, we erode the foundation upon which all life stands.” This chapter was just bringing together the many issues regarding to the value of life. Many of these issues do not have a flipside for which the authors could list; the few that do exist were not mentioned. For example Jackson and Perkins did not address the issue of the abortions due to medical emergencies.
30 November, 2009
Within chapter five Jackson and Perkins address the issue of immigration. This chapter contains the legal issues of immigration in addition to the biblical views of immigration. Once the limits of the issue are set Jackson and Perkins discuss seven principles within this issue they believe need to be addressed. Seven topics within immigration are: Enforcing security at the borders, help in assimilation to American life, reward counties attempting economic reform, attempting to keep families intact, minimize chain migration, guest workers programs, places illegal’s in a country while they are applying for legal papers. Some of these principles are in the center of the discussion in the government while others are not discussed. This chapter attempts to address the issue of immigration in a very limited amount of space.
This chapter begins with several stories of which are explaining the Harry Jackson’s life experiences with immigration. Examples are very effective when attempting to obtain the authors state of mind. The examples given are people who had been deported due to paperwork problems, a man who was qualified to be a church elder but was not given the position due to his immigration status, a young women who had seen her family killed and cam seeking asylum but was put in prison. All of the examples were because of problems in the immigration laws. “Part of the problem with immigration policy today is that we have not had a consistent, coherent philosophy of immigration in the past.”
Chapter five then continues into listing fifteen different laws dealing with immigration between 1882 and 2003. Several of these laws would be nice if the book gave a bit more of an explanation. Several of these laws provide advantages to citizens of some countries while placing restrictions on others; see the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924. The result of the poor legislation is “This unclear, back-and-forth government policy has created national disunity, a shadow economy, and broken families.” While “Many Americans feel that our country is being overrun by illegal immigrants and that our government is standing idly by.”
The biblical view on immigration is defined after the legal issues are addressed in the chapter. Jackson and Perkins list seven bible verses regarding to the immigration issue. All verses used are in the Old Testament, the majority of the verses are referring to the Israelites in Egypt. “The scriptures that speak of the plight of immigrants often address how the domestic poor should be treated as well implying that both groups often lack the means to defend themselves from exploitation.” Most often the immigrants “are desperate or see no other options to better their lives.” So the church needs to reach out to the legal immigrants and elect people who wish to reform the immigration process.
When it comes to border security Jackson and Perkins address the issue of security at the nation’s borders. They acknowledge the issue needs to be addressed but they are torn by the legality of the issue and the plight of the immigrants. “Our nation has provisions for those who are fleeing persecution and for immigration by people who follow legitimate processes. But there is no legal way to justify the brazen, dangerous act of violating our country’s borders.” They also propose attacking this issue from a different approach, “We need to take away one of the major reasons for illegal immigration—the ability to send large sums of money back home to family and loved ones.” Border security has not yet been attacked in this manner it is worth the effort of the government.
America has been referred to as a giant melting pot because in the past immigrants have accepted American culture and contributed to the culture. In modern America, there are little different racial areas of towns. Immigrants, “They must become part of the American family, and to do that they must actively assimilate.” This means they must follow the laws of America and become a “part in the fabric of the American family.”
Jackson and Perkins also propose the Government should be given to a “favored nation”; this nation would be based on economic reform occurring in the country. “These reforms would include fiscal policy and entrepreneurial incentives that seek to remedy poverty, the root cause of illegal immigration to the United States.”
Many families are broken up when a parent comes to the United States to gain a larger income. There are many pregnant mothers who attempt to cross the border when nearing their due date because the child will be an American citizen and she is eligible for residency when the child becomes 21 years old. The authors have a different opinion “Babies born to people here illegally should not automatically be citizens.” Chain migration is also a way in which families are broken up.
Chain migration “means by which aliens are permitted to immigrate because previous adult immigrants who now have gained citizenship send for their adult relatives.” These people are generally elderly adults who will need medical attention sometime in the near future, who lack medical insurance. Resulting in a heavier load on the emergency medical services; and the tax payers who pay for the emergency health care.
Guest worker visas are something in which both the current President and both authors support. There should be limitations placed on such a program according to Jackson and Perkins. “However, such guest-worker programs should be nonrenewable and nonadjustable, confined to a period of two years.”
Third-country resettlement is the last topic, this topic the writers do not seem to be pro or con. This issue does not seem plausible because of the same questions the authors ask, “What country is willing to take illegal aliens from the United States?”
This chapter overall did a good job addressing the issue of immigration and the biblical view on immigration. Out of the seven topics Jackson and Perkins picked from within the immigration issues very few solutions were proposed to the problems. In conclusion, when voting the religious right needs to take into consideration the candidate’s opinions on immigration policy. The point was also made of how much of an opportunity it is for Christians to witness to the diversity of cultures within the United States.
This chapter begins with several stories of which are explaining the Harry Jackson’s life experiences with immigration. Examples are very effective when attempting to obtain the authors state of mind. The examples given are people who had been deported due to paperwork problems, a man who was qualified to be a church elder but was not given the position due to his immigration status, a young women who had seen her family killed and cam seeking asylum but was put in prison. All of the examples were because of problems in the immigration laws. “Part of the problem with immigration policy today is that we have not had a consistent, coherent philosophy of immigration in the past.”
Chapter five then continues into listing fifteen different laws dealing with immigration between 1882 and 2003. Several of these laws would be nice if the book gave a bit more of an explanation. Several of these laws provide advantages to citizens of some countries while placing restrictions on others; see the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924. The result of the poor legislation is “This unclear, back-and-forth government policy has created national disunity, a shadow economy, and broken families.” While “Many Americans feel that our country is being overrun by illegal immigrants and that our government is standing idly by.”
The biblical view on immigration is defined after the legal issues are addressed in the chapter. Jackson and Perkins list seven bible verses regarding to the immigration issue. All verses used are in the Old Testament, the majority of the verses are referring to the Israelites in Egypt. “The scriptures that speak of the plight of immigrants often address how the domestic poor should be treated as well implying that both groups often lack the means to defend themselves from exploitation.” Most often the immigrants “are desperate or see no other options to better their lives.” So the church needs to reach out to the legal immigrants and elect people who wish to reform the immigration process.
When it comes to border security Jackson and Perkins address the issue of security at the nation’s borders. They acknowledge the issue needs to be addressed but they are torn by the legality of the issue and the plight of the immigrants. “Our nation has provisions for those who are fleeing persecution and for immigration by people who follow legitimate processes. But there is no legal way to justify the brazen, dangerous act of violating our country’s borders.” They also propose attacking this issue from a different approach, “We need to take away one of the major reasons for illegal immigration—the ability to send large sums of money back home to family and loved ones.” Border security has not yet been attacked in this manner it is worth the effort of the government.
America has been referred to as a giant melting pot because in the past immigrants have accepted American culture and contributed to the culture. In modern America, there are little different racial areas of towns. Immigrants, “They must become part of the American family, and to do that they must actively assimilate.” This means they must follow the laws of America and become a “part in the fabric of the American family.”
Jackson and Perkins also propose the Government should be given to a “favored nation”; this nation would be based on economic reform occurring in the country. “These reforms would include fiscal policy and entrepreneurial incentives that seek to remedy poverty, the root cause of illegal immigration to the United States.”
Many families are broken up when a parent comes to the United States to gain a larger income. There are many pregnant mothers who attempt to cross the border when nearing their due date because the child will be an American citizen and she is eligible for residency when the child becomes 21 years old. The authors have a different opinion “Babies born to people here illegally should not automatically be citizens.” Chain migration is also a way in which families are broken up.
Chain migration “means by which aliens are permitted to immigrate because previous adult immigrants who now have gained citizenship send for their adult relatives.” These people are generally elderly adults who will need medical attention sometime in the near future, who lack medical insurance. Resulting in a heavier load on the emergency medical services; and the tax payers who pay for the emergency health care.
Guest worker visas are something in which both the current President and both authors support. There should be limitations placed on such a program according to Jackson and Perkins. “However, such guest-worker programs should be nonrenewable and nonadjustable, confined to a period of two years.”
Third-country resettlement is the last topic, this topic the writers do not seem to be pro or con. This issue does not seem plausible because of the same questions the authors ask, “What country is willing to take illegal aliens from the United States?”
This chapter overall did a good job addressing the issue of immigration and the biblical view on immigration. Out of the seven topics Jackson and Perkins picked from within the immigration issues very few solutions were proposed to the problems. In conclusion, when voting the religious right needs to take into consideration the candidate’s opinions on immigration policy. The point was also made of how much of an opportunity it is for Christians to witness to the diversity of cultures within the United States.
The value of human life or lack thereof is commonly associated with abortion and euthanasia, yet within the 20th century at minimum one hundred million people died due to the actions of governments. The value of life needs to be applied to war and government actions. Chapter 3 deals with the value of life as it pertains to war, terrorism, and governments. Major ideas addressed in the chapter are the Bible’s view on war, just war theory, torture, and the church’s reaction to Islam. These issues are addressed by Jackson and Perkins in order to answer the question of “Can a Christian be in favor of war, and in what circumstance?” With the current world conditions many Christians are questioning the legitimacy of the War on Terrorism; this is a very important question.
Many Christians claim to be against war for the reason that the sixth commandment states in Exodus 20:13 “Thou shalt not kill”. This is a common mistake because the correct interpretation of the verse is not kill, but murder. Murder is committed by an individual, and war is committed by governments or what Paul refers to as “the sword” in Romans 13. “Further, government –not Individuals- are charged by God to wage war.” In Deuteronomy 20, God says nothing about not going to war. God does give instructions about going to war and how to conduct war. The biblical text gives the authority to declare war to the governments because they have been appointed by God. God giving the Israelites reasons to go to war and how to conduct war gives the modern world the idea of just war theory.
The book makes several comments pertaining to Islam and the authors beliefs on the subject. According to the book, Muslims believe that governments are in charge of going to war. Jihad is defined by the context in the book to mean holy war.
Christians take a different view of war, they use what is called the just war theory. This is a theory that was started by St. Augustine and completed by St. Thomas Aquinas. Before we apply the theory, the nations need to attempt every diplomatic resource available. There are two parts to this theory “Jus ad bellum” and “Jus in Bello”. “Jus ad bellum” determines if the reasons for going to war are justified. This does not include the actions during the war only the reasons for justifying the war. Seven to eight requirements exist. Just cause, legitimate authority, right intention, probability of success, proportionality, and last resort are the main six requirements needed to fulfill a just reason to go war. There are two less used reasons, then the former six these are; comparative justice, and emergent peace. “Jus in Bello” is pertaining to the actions of a military force once they are in the war. It governs the actions of those combatants while they are fighting the war. These actions, if violated, will make the war unjust. Even if the reasons for going to war are just the war will still be viewed as unjust while it is being conducted. This also deals with a proportional response to achieve your objective, and ensuring that you take into account civilian considerations. Perkins and Jackson take into account that preemptive strikes can be considered just, but they must adhere to the just war theory.
Terrorism is a major concern to many people around the world. Is this method of waging war considered to be just? The Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear, intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies n the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” This definition alone states that terrorism is unlawful, because it is targeting a society filled with civilians, it violets the “Jus in Bello” portion of just war theory. The terrorists do not have legitimate authority to carry out these acts so they do not adhere to any of the just war theory.
While conducting war many countries have resorted to torture to extract critical information in order to obtain the advantage. The United States has signed the Geneva Convention which gives instructions in the treatment of prisoners. The only problem with this treaty is that it only deals with uniformed enemy combatants, resulting in the treatment of a terrorist dressed in civilian clothing to not be restricted to the Geneva Convention. Jackson and Perkins both state that the United States should adhere to the Geneva Convention regardless of the states of the enemy combatant. The way Jackson and Perkins define torture as anything that will leave lasting physical effects. With these definitions of torture and just war theory there is one thing that the church can do to peacefully fight terrorism.
The church needs to send missionaries to foreign countries, particularly the Middle East in order to witness to the individuals. According to Jackson and Perkins the U.S. state department needs to utilize its positive influence to gain access for the Christian missionaries into countries like Saudi Arabia. This needs to happen because many countries are not allowing missionaries into the countries, and one way to combat the terrorist is to challenge their ideologically. Jackson and Perkins say that without Christian influence in these countries the Muslim people will become more radical.
This chapter was really interesting because the authors address an issue that is not normally taken from the “value of human life” point of view. They did an excellent job on the approach of what the Bible has to say about war. When they attempted to tackle the Muslim point of view, they generalized the idea of jihad too much. Jihad means so much more than just holy war, yet they did not even hint at the possibility of the other definitions. The reason for this could have been the need to address many other topics. When it came to just war theory they did an apathetic job of explaining the theory. Just war theory has so much more substance that they did not mention. They redeemed themselves when it came to applying their definition of just war theory to terrorism. When they addressed the topic of torture, it was a decent job for the space used, this topic is such a heated debate it probably would have been best to just leave out the topic. Jackson and Perkins had an interesting opinion on what the church needs to do in order to combat terrorism. It would be extremely difficult to get the United States to use muscle in order to gain missionaries into countries who do not want them. The book did not create a distinction between Islamic radicals and believers. Overall the chapter was slightly disappointing.
Many Christians claim to be against war for the reason that the sixth commandment states in Exodus 20:13 “Thou shalt not kill”. This is a common mistake because the correct interpretation of the verse is not kill, but murder. Murder is committed by an individual, and war is committed by governments or what Paul refers to as “the sword” in Romans 13. “Further, government –not Individuals- are charged by God to wage war.” In Deuteronomy 20, God says nothing about not going to war. God does give instructions about going to war and how to conduct war. The biblical text gives the authority to declare war to the governments because they have been appointed by God. God giving the Israelites reasons to go to war and how to conduct war gives the modern world the idea of just war theory.
The book makes several comments pertaining to Islam and the authors beliefs on the subject. According to the book, Muslims believe that governments are in charge of going to war. Jihad is defined by the context in the book to mean holy war.
Christians take a different view of war, they use what is called the just war theory. This is a theory that was started by St. Augustine and completed by St. Thomas Aquinas. Before we apply the theory, the nations need to attempt every diplomatic resource available. There are two parts to this theory “Jus ad bellum” and “Jus in Bello”. “Jus ad bellum” determines if the reasons for going to war are justified. This does not include the actions during the war only the reasons for justifying the war. Seven to eight requirements exist. Just cause, legitimate authority, right intention, probability of success, proportionality, and last resort are the main six requirements needed to fulfill a just reason to go war. There are two less used reasons, then the former six these are; comparative justice, and emergent peace. “Jus in Bello” is pertaining to the actions of a military force once they are in the war. It governs the actions of those combatants while they are fighting the war. These actions, if violated, will make the war unjust. Even if the reasons for going to war are just the war will still be viewed as unjust while it is being conducted. This also deals with a proportional response to achieve your objective, and ensuring that you take into account civilian considerations. Perkins and Jackson take into account that preemptive strikes can be considered just, but they must adhere to the just war theory.
Terrorism is a major concern to many people around the world. Is this method of waging war considered to be just? The Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear, intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies n the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” This definition alone states that terrorism is unlawful, because it is targeting a society filled with civilians, it violets the “Jus in Bello” portion of just war theory. The terrorists do not have legitimate authority to carry out these acts so they do not adhere to any of the just war theory.
While conducting war many countries have resorted to torture to extract critical information in order to obtain the advantage. The United States has signed the Geneva Convention which gives instructions in the treatment of prisoners. The only problem with this treaty is that it only deals with uniformed enemy combatants, resulting in the treatment of a terrorist dressed in civilian clothing to not be restricted to the Geneva Convention. Jackson and Perkins both state that the United States should adhere to the Geneva Convention regardless of the states of the enemy combatant. The way Jackson and Perkins define torture as anything that will leave lasting physical effects. With these definitions of torture and just war theory there is one thing that the church can do to peacefully fight terrorism.
The church needs to send missionaries to foreign countries, particularly the Middle East in order to witness to the individuals. According to Jackson and Perkins the U.S. state department needs to utilize its positive influence to gain access for the Christian missionaries into countries like Saudi Arabia. This needs to happen because many countries are not allowing missionaries into the countries, and one way to combat the terrorist is to challenge their ideologically. Jackson and Perkins say that without Christian influence in these countries the Muslim people will become more radical.
This chapter was really interesting because the authors address an issue that is not normally taken from the “value of human life” point of view. They did an excellent job on the approach of what the Bible has to say about war. When they attempted to tackle the Muslim point of view, they generalized the idea of jihad too much. Jihad means so much more than just holy war, yet they did not even hint at the possibility of the other definitions. The reason for this could have been the need to address many other topics. When it came to just war theory they did an apathetic job of explaining the theory. Just war theory has so much more substance that they did not mention. They redeemed themselves when it came to applying their definition of just war theory to terrorism. When they addressed the topic of torture, it was a decent job for the space used, this topic is such a heated debate it probably would have been best to just leave out the topic. Jackson and Perkins had an interesting opinion on what the church needs to do in order to combat terrorism. It would be extremely difficult to get the United States to use muscle in order to gain missionaries into countries who do not want them. The book did not create a distinction between Islamic radicals and believers. Overall the chapter was slightly disappointing.
In the first chapter of their book, Personal Faith Public Policy, Jackson and Perkins attempt to answer the question “Who is the Religious Right?” Jackson and Perkins answer the question with five main ideas. These ideas are as follows “values voters”, Origins of the religious Right, recent diversification of the religious Right, youth movement within the religious Right, and Breaking the party lines. Those five ideas are used in such a way as to answer their original question of “Who is the Religious Right?”, by answering the question they dispel the myths created by the religious Right’s critics that the religious Right is dying.
Jackson and Perkins first establish that “values voters” exist and are a force to be considered in a national election; countering the idea that the religious Right is dying. Citing the exit polls from the 2004 election which listed the largest deciding factor for voters were moral values at 27%. These values are issues like same sex marriage, abortion, and many others. “Far more Americans share a common or similar set of values that just those dismissively labeled “the religious Right.” By establishing that the religious Right is far more than just the religious community, Jackson and Perkins also react to the accusations made by critics that the religious Right is an aggressive force.
The book also gives a brief history of the religious Right, objecting to the idea the religious Right was created as an aggressive political force. Judicial decisions based on the separation of church and state spurred on the religious Right movement in the late 1970s to the early 1980s. There are thirteen court decisions in which religious freedoms have been lost in the public arena such as prayer and bible reading in school, which are cited in the book. According to Jackson and Perkins the straw that broke the camel’s back was the prayer in the public schools being banned. At that point these religious Right organizations began forming. “The truth is we are simply responding to the attacks that have been waged by a small but significant minority aided by the courts.” By doing this the courts have awakened the sleeping giant of the religious Right in order to defend many religious freedoms, but it has diversified since then and grown into moral issues.
Just as the religious Right has diversified in the issues it wants to defend, the religious Right has also diversified in its base of supporters. Originally the religious Right was comprised of white, old, evangelical men, is now diversified into many different religions, age groups, and races. This has helped its power of voting bloc but also has caused the issues it confronts to broaden. A new face of the religious Right is the youth of this country. One great example of this new face is seeing you at the poll which was started by students meeting around the flag poll of their school and praying. This event happens every September 12th and it was estimated that nearly two million students participated in order to pray for their countries leaders and their school. Age is not the only diversification happening within the religious Right; the religious Right is including many different races as well. In 2004, Ohio had a marriage amendment against same sex marriage on the ballet and “based upon exit polling, six in ten African Americans voted in support of the marriage amendment.” These few examples from the book show the amount of diversification happening within the religious right, both racial and age.
The last idea covered in the chapter is the idea of breaking party lines in order to vote for the candidate with values the voter supports; causing party diversification within the religious Right. The origins of the religious Right are within the Republican Party but recently “values voters” have been crossing their party’s line and voting for the candidate who holds their values. By expanding the issues the religious Right has gained supporters from both sides of the isle. “As a result of broadening of the evangelical movement, both political parties will increasingly have to compete for the support of the evangelicals to succeed.” “Values voters” are forcing all candidates to confront the religious and moral issues in order to have a chance at winning an election.
“A Pew poll on religion and politics, conducted in September 2007, revealed that 72 percent of Americans want a president with “strong religious beliefs.” Regardless of political party, a candidate for president of the United States cannot win without passing a minimal hurdle of declaring faith in God.”
This chapter answered the question of who is the religious Right. Answering this question is becoming more complex as the religious Right diversifies. Causing politicians to be educated in the religious and moral issues.
Jackson and Perkins did an excellent job of answering their original question. Those five main ideas they used to answer the question defined the religious Right to one that is no longer confined to one party, race, and age group. This movement is lead by voters who uses their conscience and religion when they vote. The definition of the religious Right is now becoming less right and less religious, yet we continue to use this term for a lack of a better word. Evidence within this chapter validates the idea of civil religion, which is addressed in the book Twilight of the Saints.
The second chapter of the book begins by addressing the fact that the Bush administration has let down the “values voters”; because the only moral issue they have been successful at attacking has been stem cell research. When President Bush was running his platform was same sex marriage, stem cell research, abortion and several other moral issues. Though disappointing the nature of not having control of the congress, and a low approval rating has hindered the President’s efforts.
Even though the countries leadership has failed in the previous four years, the church needs to still vote and provide witness to this shattered culture. Jackson and Perkins use the model that the biblical prophets gave the church, using the five rights. If the church lives by these rights they will give a biblical example to the culture. The five rights are to live right, do right, move right, pray right, and speak right. Living right means the church needs to set an example of what a Godly person is, we need to talk the talk and most importantly walk the walk, the church needs to practice what they preach. Part of living right is to do right; this is achieved by serving the community around you by participating in outreach ministries. Moving right is ensuring the church is not becoming what the media projects us as. The church needs to become more active in prayer, the elders of the church need to take a lesson from the youth and be praying like the youth do when they meet for see you at the poll; Christians need to pray for the country more often. When witnessing to the nation the church needs to be loving not forcing their religion on people. These five rights will enable the church to effectively penetrate the culture actively instead of passively. Though these five rights the “values voters” can display what they want to happen effectively to the culture, by setting a “prophetic” example.
Jackson and Perkins first establish that “values voters” exist and are a force to be considered in a national election; countering the idea that the religious Right is dying. Citing the exit polls from the 2004 election which listed the largest deciding factor for voters were moral values at 27%. These values are issues like same sex marriage, abortion, and many others. “Far more Americans share a common or similar set of values that just those dismissively labeled “the religious Right.” By establishing that the religious Right is far more than just the religious community, Jackson and Perkins also react to the accusations made by critics that the religious Right is an aggressive force.
The book also gives a brief history of the religious Right, objecting to the idea the religious Right was created as an aggressive political force. Judicial decisions based on the separation of church and state spurred on the religious Right movement in the late 1970s to the early 1980s. There are thirteen court decisions in which religious freedoms have been lost in the public arena such as prayer and bible reading in school, which are cited in the book. According to Jackson and Perkins the straw that broke the camel’s back was the prayer in the public schools being banned. At that point these religious Right organizations began forming. “The truth is we are simply responding to the attacks that have been waged by a small but significant minority aided by the courts.” By doing this the courts have awakened the sleeping giant of the religious Right in order to defend many religious freedoms, but it has diversified since then and grown into moral issues.
Just as the religious Right has diversified in the issues it wants to defend, the religious Right has also diversified in its base of supporters. Originally the religious Right was comprised of white, old, evangelical men, is now diversified into many different religions, age groups, and races. This has helped its power of voting bloc but also has caused the issues it confronts to broaden. A new face of the religious Right is the youth of this country. One great example of this new face is seeing you at the poll which was started by students meeting around the flag poll of their school and praying. This event happens every September 12th and it was estimated that nearly two million students participated in order to pray for their countries leaders and their school. Age is not the only diversification happening within the religious Right; the religious Right is including many different races as well. In 2004, Ohio had a marriage amendment against same sex marriage on the ballet and “based upon exit polling, six in ten African Americans voted in support of the marriage amendment.” These few examples from the book show the amount of diversification happening within the religious right, both racial and age.
The last idea covered in the chapter is the idea of breaking party lines in order to vote for the candidate with values the voter supports; causing party diversification within the religious Right. The origins of the religious Right are within the Republican Party but recently “values voters” have been crossing their party’s line and voting for the candidate who holds their values. By expanding the issues the religious Right has gained supporters from both sides of the isle. “As a result of broadening of the evangelical movement, both political parties will increasingly have to compete for the support of the evangelicals to succeed.” “Values voters” are forcing all candidates to confront the religious and moral issues in order to have a chance at winning an election.
“A Pew poll on religion and politics, conducted in September 2007, revealed that 72 percent of Americans want a president with “strong religious beliefs.” Regardless of political party, a candidate for president of the United States cannot win without passing a minimal hurdle of declaring faith in God.”
This chapter answered the question of who is the religious Right. Answering this question is becoming more complex as the religious Right diversifies. Causing politicians to be educated in the religious and moral issues.
Jackson and Perkins did an excellent job of answering their original question. Those five main ideas they used to answer the question defined the religious Right to one that is no longer confined to one party, race, and age group. This movement is lead by voters who uses their conscience and religion when they vote. The definition of the religious Right is now becoming less right and less religious, yet we continue to use this term for a lack of a better word. Evidence within this chapter validates the idea of civil religion, which is addressed in the book Twilight of the Saints.
The second chapter of the book begins by addressing the fact that the Bush administration has let down the “values voters”; because the only moral issue they have been successful at attacking has been stem cell research. When President Bush was running his platform was same sex marriage, stem cell research, abortion and several other moral issues. Though disappointing the nature of not having control of the congress, and a low approval rating has hindered the President’s efforts.
Even though the countries leadership has failed in the previous four years, the church needs to still vote and provide witness to this shattered culture. Jackson and Perkins use the model that the biblical prophets gave the church, using the five rights. If the church lives by these rights they will give a biblical example to the culture. The five rights are to live right, do right, move right, pray right, and speak right. Living right means the church needs to set an example of what a Godly person is, we need to talk the talk and most importantly walk the walk, the church needs to practice what they preach. Part of living right is to do right; this is achieved by serving the community around you by participating in outreach ministries. Moving right is ensuring the church is not becoming what the media projects us as. The church needs to become more active in prayer, the elders of the church need to take a lesson from the youth and be praying like the youth do when they meet for see you at the poll; Christians need to pray for the country more often. When witnessing to the nation the church needs to be loving not forcing their religion on people. These five rights will enable the church to effectively penetrate the culture actively instead of passively. Though these five rights the “values voters” can display what they want to happen effectively to the culture, by setting a “prophetic” example.
17 May, 2009
Iran’s Nuclear Program and Weapons
In the 2002 State of the Union Address President George W. Bush, used the term “Axis of Evil” to describe three states. These three were Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. This speech laid out the goals of “the war on terror”. According to the President “Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction.”[1] These three were picked because of their intentions of securing “weapons of mass destruction”. Iran was targeted specifically because, “Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.”[2] The government in Iran has made statements which convey the intention to use any weapons of mass destruction on Israel and its allies. Iran has developed their nuclear program with assistance of several foreign powers and has also achieved a method of delivery which can threaten most of the region. Due to current state of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs the pressing issue is; how can they be prevented from expanding their programs further?
The United States has had four goals when dealing with Iran, since the current government took power. They are “limit Iran’s aggressive assertiveness in the region, halt Tehran’s support for terrorism, promote Iranian democracy and human rights, and stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.”[3] Iran’s current population and terrain drastically limit any military courses of action. Iran is located in the Middle East, it is bordered by “Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan-proper, Azerbaijan-Naxcivan exclave, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan”.[4] Currently Iran is sandwiched between U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran has an estimated population of 65,875,224. The terrain of Iran is “rugged, mountainous rim; high, central basin with deserts, mountains; small, discontinuous plains along both coasts”[5] This is why Iran has spread out the nuclear facilities.
Iran learned from the mistakes Iraq made in 1981 when Israel destroyed their only nuclear reactor. Iran has done several things to ensure their nuclear facilities remain unharmed. The facilities have been dispersed across the large nation, creating the possibility of a small flight being able to do massive damage impossible. The map below demonstrates how the Iranians dispersed their Nuclear Facilities. Iran has also placed the facilities in densely populated cities when possible. Some facilities due to their purpose are dependent on natural resources.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Iran has facilities critical to its program in five different cities. These cities are Tehran, Bushehr, Esfahan, Natanz, and Arak.[6] Tehran has the Kalaye electric company which is suspected to be producing centrifuge parts, Tehran research reactor, radioisotope production facility, Jabr Ibn Hayan multipurpose laboratories. In Bushehr there is a Russian built light water reactor. Esfahan has a miniature neutron source reactor, light water sub-critical reactor, heavy water zero power reactor, fuel fabrication laboratory, uranium chemistry laboratory, uranium conversion facility, graphite sub- critical reactor which has been decommissioned, and a fuel manufacturing plant. Natanz has a pilot fuel enrichment plant and fuel enrichment plant. Arak has the Iran nuclear research reactor. The facilities that make other countries nervous are in Natanz because they produce the equipment needed to enrich uranium for a power plant or bomb.[7] As the image below illustrates Iran did learn from Iraq’s mistake by distributing the facilities around the country.
Iran has developed several missiles capable of launching large payloads. The development of these missiles has been aided by countries such as China, Libya, and North Korea. North Korea has been the one which has provided the assistance for the longer range missiles. “Iran is now on the threshold of developing a missile with intercontinental ranges. One option available to Iran is to develop missiles similar to North Korea’s Taepo Dong-1 or Taepo Dong-2 using technology North Korea has already transferred to Iran or may transfer in future sales.”[9] The Iranian equivalent of these the Shahab-3 and the variant of the Shahab-3.[10] The range of the Shahab-3 is eight hundred kilometers and the Shahab-3 variant has a range of one thousand two hundred kilometers. At this range it is capable of threatening most of the region.[11] Iran is also searching for weapons with an even longer range up to six thousand kilometers. The image below illustrates the countries which will be within range of these weapons. “In the last five years we have witnessed the development of a nuclear weapons and ballistic missile program in Iran that now provides it with the potential to threaten American interests. Iran’s program has been, and remains, dependent on foreign assistance.”[12]
[13] While we can attempt to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, we should also be focusing on stopping the sale of these technologies from nations like North Korea.
Many analysts have been attempting to figure out how to stop the development of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, there are others that feel that that is a lost cause. “The U.S. is unlikely to succeed in altering the range of Iranian motivations for acquiring WMD.”[14] There are many different ideas of how to prevent the future development of missiles and WMDs within Iran one of which is; “In Iran, the goal of U.S. direction of policy should be to encourage the evolution of the regime in the greater openness and moderation; in practical terms, this probably means the emergence of a political system in which clerics play a less prominent role.”[15] This is very difficult to do therefore there is little the United States can do to prevent Iran from attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
Over the years Iran has developed an elaborate anti-aircraft defense system. In addition to dispersing the nuclear facilities within the country, while placing them near populated areas. There have been many nations which have assisted Iran over the years with building them nuclear power plants such as Russia or selling them engines for ballistic missiles such as North Korea. In order for the United States and the world community to slow or stop Iran’s programs they need to stop giving Iran foreign assistance.
[1] State of the Union Address 2002,President George W. Bush, From the 2002 Presidential Documents Online via GPO Access, January 29, 2002
[2] Ibid.
[3] Michael McFaul, Abbas Milani, and Larry Diamond. 2007. "A Win-Win U.S. Strategy for Dealing with Iran." Washington Quarterly 30, no. 1: 121-122.
[4]Central Intelligence Agency, “The World Factbook- Iran” CIA World Fact book. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iran.html [accessed February 22, 2009]
[5] Ibid.
[6] Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. Iranian Nuclear Sites, Hussein D. Hassan, 2007.
[7] International Atomic Energy Association, Report prepared for Meeting of the Board of Governors prepared by the Director General, Implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran: 2003.
[8] “Iran Nuclear Sites”, Nuclear Threat Initiative Web site, http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles_pdfs/Iran/iran_nuclear_sites.pdf [accessed February 22, 2009].
[9] CRS Report RS22758, Iran’s Ballistic Missile Programs: An Overview, by Steven A. Hildreth, pg. 5.
[10] Bill Gertz, "N. Korea sells Iran missile engines," Washington Times, February 9, 2000, p. A1.
[11] Bill Gertz, "Tehran increases range on missiles," Washington Times, September 22, 1999.
[12] U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs. 2000. Iran’s Ballistic Missile and Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs. 106th Cong., 2d sess., pg. 36.
[13] U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Proliferation: Threat and Response, January 2001, p. 37.
[14] U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs. 2000. Iran’s Ballistic Missile and Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs. 106th Cong., 2d sess., pg. 43-44.
[15] Ibid, 43.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)