The Justice Department concluded in a report released Friday, Feb. 19, that the lawyers who gave legal justification to the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation tactics for terrorism suspects used flawed legal reasoning but were not guilty of professional misconduct. In other words, the end justifies the means. If it is legal, you have no moral or ethical reason not to proceed. If it is illegal, you still have no moral or ethical reason not to proceed, if you are willing to risk getting caught or consider the law based on your group’s opinion. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, be damned the moral and ethical consequences to society. That leaves nobody, from the local county jails, to the Federal maximum security prisons, and even to the battle field prison compounds, accountable for abuse and misconduct.
If all of this does not constitute professional misconduct, then perhaps we need to redefine professional conduct. Perhaps we need to question our religious leaders, who seem to pick and choose when to ignore Jesus’ words in the New Testament and when not to. It seems to me I’ve read several times where Jesus said, “You have heard — —”, but I say, “———”. We need to read Jesus sermon on the mount, recorded in Matt. chapter 5, especially verses 38 through 48. Through out His ministry, Jesus made some very serious criticism of the religious leaders and their ability to weasel out of strict adherence to the Mosaic Laws. He didn’t refute the veracity of the laws. He refuted how the laws were interpreted and enforced. He demonstrated that man should lean toward compassion and forgiveness and for man to leave the final judgment and punishment to God.
Most of the above is criticizing our claims of being a Christian Nation. However, nearly all world religions have the Golden Rule in their ethical code. The problem seems to be; all the world religions, including the Christian religion, have to deal with man’s greed and lust for power. Man has the ability to pick and choose who the others are, and it seems, the others who deserve ethical treatment seem to be those who honor “my” position of authority.
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and tit for tat has perpetuated bloody revenge. Should we as a Christian Nation continue down that dead end street? We don't need religion in government. We deed ethical behavior in society and government.














Comments (4)
We're not a Christian nation, though, are we, Ken? So many of my friends are Jewish, Buddhist, or Agnostic (and many other things too!). I don't think you meant to imply that we are a Christian nation.
I'm so glad that you wrote about this torture issue. Many believe that the attorneys should be held accountable and that there should be a full fledged investigation and accounting.
Posted by Pamela Jean
|
February 20, 2010 8:22 PM
Posted on February 20, 2010 20:22
That's such a jewel what you said,
"We don't need religion in government. We need ethical behavior in society and government."
That's so true! Great post!
Posted by Pamela Jean
|
February 20, 2010 8:35 PM
Posted on February 20, 2010 20:35
In answer to your question, we are a religious nation. Those claiming Christianity may be the largest single religion, but that does not make us a Christian nation!
Posted by Ken Poland
|
February 20, 2010 9:11 PM
Posted on February 20, 2010 21:11
Thanks for the clarification, Ken. I love it that you are writing so much these days.
Posted by Bob Hooper
|
February 21, 2010 1:19 AM
Posted on February 21, 2010 01:19