Moammar Ghaddafi is no more

Moammar Gaddafi (Mu?ammar al-Qa???f? ) is dead. It took seven months of fighting for this to happen. But, another Arab dictator is down and gone. Couple that with the various al-Qaeda leaders that have been removed by drone attacks and the change that has taken place across the Middle East over the last couple of years has been absolutely amazing. In fact, five major leaders have been killed or deposed during the last 12 months alone, two terrorist leaders and three “presidents”. What will come is yet to be seen, as certainly the attacks on the Copts in Egypt is a terrible thing. On the other hand, places like Tunisia are not showing those types of outbreaks. So, as many have been saying for years, it becomes obvious that there is not a single Arabic identity, but multiple Arabic identities.

More than that, with months having passed, it continues to look as though the radical right’s fears of an Islamic Caliphate were somewhat overblown. Nevertheless, the Arabic countries are not likely to become secular democracies. One only has to look at the “Christian” part of the American right to see how strongly people can oppose secular democracies. You see, we tend to forget that Muslims might be every bit as resistant to having their religion sidelined as many Christian Americans are. And this means that Muslim-friendly laws will probably stay on the books every bit as much as Christian-friendly laws are being advocated here. I always find it funny that it is decried as being so wrong for a church to be denied a building permit in an Arabic country while being touted as so right for a mosque to be denied a building permit in America. We often do not see how alike some of our factions are with some of “their” factions. I also find it odd when we insist that it is correct to have Christian-friendly policies here but then we insist that it is so wrong for “them” to have Muslim-friendly policies.

Yes, I agree that various of the Islamic policies in places such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia clearly cross the line into the violation of human rights and human dignity. But, why is it wrong for a state school in Saudi Arabia to insist that everyone participate in the daily prayers during school time, but so right for Christians to insist that the school day open with daily prayer? You see, if it is right for us, then it is right for Saudi Arabia, even if it offends Christians there, right?

I think that it is appropriate for our country to have laws and practices that conform to a Judeo-Christian ethic and morality. While various of our Founders were not “orthodox” Christians, yet they all accepted–in general–the Judeo-Christian worldview and ethic. More than that, I believe that this is a morally correct approach, though there certainly can be a lot of haggling over the details (just think of Prohibition and Sunday Blue laws). But, I find it quite ironic that many politically conservative Christians in the USA would condemn Muslims for doing in their countries some of what is being advocated for this country.

We need to be consistent, as Christians, in the way in which advocate for certain policies. If it is right for us because we are in a Christian country, then we should not proclaim that it is wrong for them even if they are in an Islamic or Hindu or Shinto country. If we advocate certain policies here, then we should not be offended if our missionaries are limited by identical policies over there. So, let us think carefully through what we advocate and why we advocate it.