Pat Robertson's outrageous call for the United States to reactivate the Doctrine of Assassination and murder a foreign head of state offended me on many levels. It offended my Roman Catholic upbringing, my sense of decency, my understanding of the American way of life and my understanding of civilized behavior. I should say, I do not pretend to have a firm grip on the state of Venezuelan politics but I understand Chavez is an avowed anti-globalist as are many people in Europe and the United States, that his country's government was awash in corruption before he came to power, that he has little time for organized religion and sees them as hypocrites, and that he enjoys the support of the majority of impoverished Venezuelans who happen to have brown skin but has little or no support among the ruling class who're descended from European ancestry. Moreover, I do find it quite odd that President Chavez has a penchant for wearing military uniforms in public, likes to associate with Fidel Castro and has a spotty record of success but, as the head of a foreign power, he is entitled to absolute respect regardless as to whether his rule and government is deemed repugnant by other westernised countries.
What is not okay is for a self-appointed man of God, the leader of a large Christian evangelical group to call for that country's leader's assassination. Under no circumstances can a Christian sanction killing and Mr. Robertson has overstepped his boundaries, widely. Nor is this the first time he has done so. And, as before, he has predictably issued a meaningless apology wrapped up in the skin of a further admonishment, an apology that is intended solely to restore his status-quo as a practicing Christian and prominent American. It seems to me the members of his religious community would be better served if they replaced this aging patriarch with someone less incendiary, with someone who would practice fully the edicts of Christianity. In calling for President Chavez's assassination, Mr. Robertson has in my view placed himself squarely in the barren terrain of fanatical Islamists, jihadists and others who will brook no vision of the world but theirs. By his redundant apology, he is not redeemed, but rather exacerbates a tendency toward wanton dangerousness.
[technorati: Pat Robertson, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela, The 700 Club]
3 comments:
I'm glad you stopped by my blog and left a comment, Damian. I confess that I had lost track of yours over the busy-ness of the last few weeks and so I am very glad to have access to it again. It is a pleasant and peaceful spot in the general hurly-burly of the blogosphere.
I was going to post this comment in your most recent post but then I read this:
"What is not okay is for a self-appointed man of God, the leader of a large Christian evangelical group to call for that country's leader's assassination."
How true. It can only be to our shame that Pat Robertson was not the first and will not be the last, no doubt, to utter such unChristian sentiments. One can only hope that the members of his church have rather more wisdom than does he.
I think this country's first amendment to the constitution says that it is perfectly O.K. for anyone to speak his mind, whether sane or wise or not. That's one of the aspects that makes the U.S. a great place to live.
I also disagree with your statement about requiring respect for Chavez simply because he is the head of a government. That's the same thinking we used to indulge in about attorneys, doctors, and ministers. Holy crap! Saddam Hussein was the head of a foreign government, and look what we're doing to him.
Thanks for the comment, though the US does not have a monopoly in allowing its citizens to speak their minds freely. This is a comment I hear often by Americans in relation to the US constituution and, while it is true, it should also be borne in mind that there are other democracies throughout the globe where the citizenry can also speak their minds freely. To wit, Europe. Also, in Britain,where there is NO constitution, the people speak their minds freely. These countries are also great to live in as well. So it is erroneous to imply that the US is the only democracy where this happy condition exists ;)
Post a Comment