Well the Intelligence Bill has been passed which is probably a good thing. That Immigration Reform was not included, over the objections of some, is also probably a good thing. Congress’ tendency to lump too many things into one bill tends to warp many good intentions and make them dependent upon issues not directly having to do with, in this case, intelligence matters. In January when Congress reconvenes they and the public will be able to address the matter of immigration in a direct and transparent fashion instead of having it muddy the waters of an intelligence bill.
On a different topic, I wonder if most people of faith want their leaders to talk about killing people “in the name of the Lord” as Reverend Falwell recently did. And should our country men and women really have looked in the mirror after September 11 and wondered if, as Falwell suggested at the time, social goals or sexual orientation were issues that influenced events on that terrible day?
Should we be at this killing game even if takes “ten years” in a return to what might resemble a middle-ages mentality when militarists invaded Muslim lands to kill and convert, a course suggested by columnist Ann Coulter after 9/11? Are these people in fact serious about such things or just ego freaks more interested in promoting themselves by making outrageous statements and becoming political power brokers rather than moral spokesmen?
My dictionary defines reverend as one worthy of reverence, that “attitude of deep respect, love and awe as for something sacred.” Is that an accurate description of Reverend Falwell? Are the views he expresses worthy of respect and reverence? Many of us are horrified by such views expressed in the name of religion. The question is do his followers support his call for killing in the “name of the Lord” or might they begin to take issue with such sentiments?