Bush Mix of God and War Grates on Many Europeans

[milefile]

I've been hearing about this for a while now, and not only in Europe. I guess I wasn't the only one who thought it was getting a little creepy.


Bush Mix of God and War Grates on Many Europeans

By Tom Heneghan

PARIS (Reuters) - The religious overtones in President Bush (news - web sites)'s speeches increasingly grate on many ears in Europe, where leaders invoking God in times of war are widely suspect of misusing faith for political purposes.

No less than the German president, French prime minister and Belgian foreign minister have joined religious leaders in expressing concern about Bush's beliefs and the place of religion in U.S. politics.

Media commentators, especially in northern European countries with Protestant heritages, have branded Bush's evangelical views as Christian fundamentalism, with some even comparing them to the Islamic fundamentalism of Osama bin Laden (news - web sites).

The discussion reflects both the widespread popular anti-war sentiment in Europe and the deeper gulf between a continent where faith is on the wane and an America where religious values probably play a more prominent political role than ever before.

German President Johannes Rau, a Protestant preacher's son who makes no secret of his own faith, reacted sharply this week on n-tv television to press reports that Bush believed defeating Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was part of a divine plan.

"George Bush has got a completely one-sided message. I don't think a people gets a sign from God to liberate another people," he said. "Nowhere does the Bible call for crusades."

Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel, a vocal critic of the war, said before hostilities broke out last month that he saw Christian fundamentalism gaining influence in Washington and added: "That is, of course, a dangerous point of departure."

French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, asked about a U.S. weekly's cover story on Bush and God, told Le Point magazine: "In no way can God be called on for a vote of confidence."


UNEASE AT GOD TALK

Bush's firm faith, rooted in an evangelical Protestantism that reflects an important voter bloc in his Republican party, has also prompted questions in mainstream U.S. media about how much it colors his stand on Iraq (news - web sites) and his war on terror.

In his speeches, he has asked for guidance from "the loving God behind all of life and all of history," hinted he believed there was a "divine plan" for the world and warned Americans that "we are in a conflict between good and evil."

These references may not seem so out of place in the United States, where all presidents say "God bless America" and "In God We Trust" is emblazoned on dollar bills.

But they stand out and sometimes even shock many Europeans who remember how German soldiers trooped off to World War One with "Gott mit uns" (God with us) stamped on their belt buckles.

"I believe George Bush's religious views are genuine," Cardinal Karl Lehmann, head of the German Bishop's Conference, told the Catholic weekly Rheinischer Merkur in an interview on Thursday. "But this careless way of using religious language is not acceptable anymore in today's world."

In Sweden, invoking God in politics is so unusual that parliamentarian Hans Lindqvist told Reuters: "I've never seen anything like this before."

Commentators in Britain, where Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites)'s firm but discreet Christian beliefs have also aroused critical attention, have described Bush as "chaplain in chief" and analyzed his use of religious phrases and images in detail.

"For world-weary Europe, the presidential language evokes mirth and queasiness in equal measure," The Independent wrote.

In France, where even practicing Catholic or Jewish politicians shrink from mentioning religion, the daily Le Monde reacted sharply last week to the news that the U.S. House of Representatives had called for a day of national prayer and fasting to secure divine blessings for U.S. troops in Iraq.

"This bizarre approach shocks Europeans," it said in an editorial. Its religion correspondent accused Bush and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein of "gross misuse" of religion.

"One is tempted to say the destiny of America is in the hands of a small group of Protestant bigots," Henri Tincq wrote.

The religious side of Bush's thinking has attracted much less public attention in traditionally Catholic countries such as Ireland, Italy and Spain, where the Roman church has lost most of the vast influence it used to wield in secular affairs.

Media there have focused mostly on whether the Iraq conflict is a just war, sometimes quoting the pronounced anti-war stand of Pope John Paul (news - web sites) II.

Russia, which in its old communist days might have churned out caustic criticism about the White House and "the opium of the people," has also shown little interest in Bush's beliefs.

"Politicians now routinely invoke God and Orthodoxy for all sorts of things," one longtime foreign resident remarked. "You can't open a billiard hall without an Orthodox priest present." (Additional reporting by Bart Crols in Brussels, Andrew Hay in London, Erik Kirschbaum in Berlin, Patrick McLoughlin in Stockholm, Ron Popeski in Moscow, Carlos Santamaria in Madrid, Estelle Shirbon in Rome and Kevin Smith in Dublin)

 

[Red Eye Racer]

"I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas, had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative eroding the important bridge between church and state."—Question and answer session with the press, Jan. 29, 2001 - George W. Bush

Nuff said

 

[Pako]

I also find it a misuse and an uneducated view of his own religion. I highly doubt God is listening when a prayer is directed to Him, asking for help to kill fellow humans, for "our" nation.

A Christ follower (Christianity Based) would "Turn the other cheak". This is clearly not the case with Bush's Administration's actions. The actions of the administration is hipacritical to what Bush's religious views are (or should be, based on his claims).

Then again, the sexular group would demand that his religious views not put the our nations into harms way by taking a Christian approach to running our nation.

If you can't please everyone, don't please anyone.

 

[Wastegate]

Am I correct in thinking that it's nothing new for American Presidents to talk about God and War at the same time?

Religious fundamentalism has always been a popular cause of wars and almost always has been used to boost morale in the soldiers doing the fighting on both sides.

Perhaps Europeans have come to use it less over the last 50 years or so because of the increasing percentage of non-Christians in most European countries and the subsequent political correctness this has caused in European society.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by Wastegate Am I correct in thinking that it's nothing new for American Presidents to talk about God and War at the same time?

No. I don't think you are. Can you name one? And we're not talking about "god bless america." Were talking "crusades," "the loving God behind all of life and all of history," and "divine plan"... of which Bush seems to think he is the harbinger of.

Religious fundamentalism has always been a popular cause of wars and almost always has been used to boost morale in the soldiers doing the fighting on both sides.

Yeah. Just ask Palestine, the Taliban, and Al Qaida. In America we fight for freedom. Until now anyway.

Perhaps Europeans have come to use it less over the last 50 years or so because of the increasing percentage of non-Christians in most European countries and the subsequent political correctness this has caused in European society.

America has an increasing percentage of non-christians as well. And since immigration is far more prevalent it could be assumed even more so.

 

[Pako]

milefile:

In his speeches, he has asked for guidance from "the loving God behind all of life and all of history," hinted he believed there was a "divine plan" for the world and warned Americans that "we are in a conflict between good and evil."

What Bush said is undeniable, but the interpretations of what he said is pretty bold.

[added] Asking for guidance does not emply a "divine plan" as this author is leading you to believe. Asking for guidance from a higher power (God, in Bush's case) is an act of request for wisdom beyond his own means of himself or his administration, ultimately for his nations wellfare. A little divine help couldn't help.
[/added]

 

[vat_man]

I imagine it probably grates even more on the Muslims he's trying to convince that the war's not on Islam.

 

[ledhed]

The article you used was obviosly shaped to fit the writers purpose. Most of Bush's speeches are ment for American consumption, and as such the language and context used is not easily digested by Europeans. I have posted transcripts of Bush leading up to the war, show me one thing in those speeches that would refer to a crusade or that has overly religouse overtones. The speeches in question were geared IMO to a much broader audience. Sometimes you just have to read between the lines most writers have an agenda and tend to shape their writings to suite. Bush is a religouse man and so is Tony Blair . Mr Blair dosn't wear his religion on his sleeve as much as our president most likely because of European sensibilitys. I think personaly that religion has no place in politics but as a practical matter in the U S , I donot see it disapearing anytime soon, Religion is ingrained in our culture. Ironic when you consider that most of our founding fathers were for the most part not very religouse if not atheist . Our constitution reflects this, there is seperation between church and state for that very reason. Also keep in mind that many came to this country to escape religiouse persecution in Europe or elsewere and they make up the bulk of our population. Its tough being the only superpower on the block..one almost is inclined to miss the good ol USSR.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by ledhed
The article you used was obviosly shaped to fit the writers purpose.

Yes. Was the writer's purpose dubious?

Most of Bush's speeches are ment for American consumption, and as such the language and context used is not easily digested by Europeans.

Leader of the FREE WORLD.

I have posted transcripts of Bush leading up to the war, show me one thing in those speeches that would refer to a crusade or that has overly religouse overtones.

I can't. Wrong speeches.

The speeches in question were geared IMO to a much broader audience. Sometimes you just have to read between the lines most writers have an agenda and tend to shape their writings to suite. Bush is a religouse man and so is Tony Blair . Mr Blair dosn't wear his religion on his sleeve as much as our president most likely because of European sensibilitys.

I'd call them international sensibilities. Every time Bush talks international politics he is talkng to the world. We in America wouldn't understand because there are no other world leaders who are omniscient like Bush, or any other American president.

I think personaly that religion has no place in politics but as a practical matter in the U S , I donot see it disapearing anytime soon, Religion is ingrained in our culture. Ironic when you consider that most of our founding fathers were for the most part not very religouse if not atheist . Our constitution reflects this, there is seperation between church and state for that very reason. Also keep in mind that many came to this country to escape religiouse persecution in Europe or elsewere and they make up the bulk of our population.

So then I don't see your problem with the article.

Its tough being the only superpower on the block..one almost is inclined to miss the good ol USSR.

Although I don't see how this has anything to do with this thread, I agree. At least then there was some sense of predictability and balance. Thanks a lot Russia!

 

[ledhed]

Anytime a quote is taken out of the context of the whole it is suspect. Who annointed Bush as the leader of the free world ..I was not aware of his new electorate.
The story or article you presented was an attempt by the writer to justify his position , on its face it is not factual or to be beleived. It is still only one mans opinion and an attempt to justfy his position. It is nothing more or less.

 

[epic]

its destiny.. leave it alone.. remember you cant change destiny, unless you have a flex capacitator or whatever it was

plus Bush is a thug, he'll mess you up if you talk trash bout him

 

[focus117]

I am a Christian, but I don't think religion is involved in this war against Iraq. I'm still very young, and don't understand much political things, but even I don't think religion is involved! It's only an excuse for the war.

 

[vat_man]

Originally posted by focus117
I am a Christian, but I don't think religion is involved in this war against Iraq. I'm still very young, and don't understand much political things, but even I don't think religion is involved! It's only an excuse for the war.

I don't think it is either - but it doesn't matter what you or I think - it's what Arab Muslims think - and they think it is.

 

[focus117]

 

[ledhed]

Arabs are worried about any attack on their culture or their religion. From reading their newspapers I get a strong sense that they do beleive that the west , the US in particular have their best interest in mind. The western powers have a long sad history of colonisation. exploitation and brutality in the Arab world.
We do not give them much reason to like us , let alone trust us.. They have a thousand reasons to hate and mistrust. They are a proud and diverse culture with a long and rich history.
Its going to take deeds not words to prove to them that times have changed..for the better.

 

[DGB454]

Couple things.

I believe Bush is a Christian. I believe he asks for wisdom from God as he should if he is a Christian. As a Christian he should not hide his beliefs reguardless who he is speaking to. The Bible basicaly says that you should let your faith shine as a beacon for others to follow. If he hides his belief in Christ then it's as if he is ashamed of it and that would be against what Christ taught.

Another thing.

"George Bush has got a completely one-sided message. I don't think a people gets a sign from God to liberate another people," he said. "Nowhere does the Bible call for crusades."

Didn't Moses get a sign to liberate his people?
When this guy talks about crusades is he also referring to wars?
If so then I can thing of many places in the Bible where God has called his faithful to take up arms against his enemies.(The enemy of God.)
Remember the Bible says there is a time for every purpose under heaven.(that's not just a song) There is a time for war and a time for peace. A time to live and a time to die.

Is Bush getting guidance from God? I hope so but only God and Bush really know for sure.

 

[NightKid]

Religion has no place in politics, ESPECIALLY not American politics. That Bush is a born-again Christian and has been rapidly destroying the barriers between Church and State....that just annoys me.

Bush stole the office. I hope the Indian Curse does play out...this guy needs to take a (permanent) vacation.

 

[DGB454]

Indian curse?

You can't make someone who is a Christian to stop being a Christian no matter what position he holds.

You don't have to accept his views but you can't make him stop expressing them either.

 

[NightKid]

I don't care that a person is a born-again Christian (as much as the thought makes me shudder).

I care that the PRESIDENT is a born-again Christian.

And yes, the Indian Curse. Every 20 years, the current President of the USA dies. If Bush lives, he'll be the only president to avoid it so far.

 

[DGB454]

Originally posted by NightKid
I don't care that a person is a born-again Christian (as much as the thought makes me shudder).

I care that the PRESIDENT is a born-again Christian.

And yes, the Indian Curse. Every 20 years, the current President of the USA dies. If Bush lives, he'll be the only president to avoid it so far.

I'm trying to think back to 20 years ago and I can't think of a president dying. Let's see...I believe it would have been Regan.
I guess the curse must have been broken(or B.S.). Maybe you are thinking of the vodoo curse where every 20 years someone believes in an Indian curse.

I do agree with you on one point. I care that the PRESIDENT is a born-again Christian too. Although it doesn't make me shudder.

 

[NightKid]

It started with President Harrison in 1840. Less than a month in office he died after he caught a cold that developed into pneumonia. Twenty years later in 1860, Lincoln became president. We all know what happened to him. Twenty years later, in 1880 Garfield was elected president. He met a similar fate as Lincoln, taking a bullet only six months after he took office. Twenty years later, in 1900 President McKinley was reelected to office. He too was assassinated. Twenty years later, in 1920 Harding was elected president only to die of a stroke after three years in office. Twenty years later, in 1940 President Roosevelt is reelected only to die in office of a cerebral hemorrhage. Twenty years later, in 1960 Kennedy is elected president. He too was assassinated. Twenty years later, in 1980 Ronald Reagan is elected president. He takes a bullet and survives. That is the exception not the rule.

A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist, whether he's Islamic or Christian. They are all enemies of humanity. It was Christians, may I remind you, that were responsible for the Inquisition, the Crusades, the atrocities in North Ireland, the Salem Witch Trials, and countless other acts of violent hatred and ignorance.

 

[ledhed]

Two quotes come to mind when I read this thread.
" Religions that teach brotherly
love have been used as an excuse
for persecution, and our profoundest
scientific insight is made into
a means of mass destruction. "


"So far as I can remember, there is not one
word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence"
Both are from Bertrand Russell.

 

[DGB454]

Originally posted by NightKid
It started with President Harrison in 1840. Less than a month in office he died after he caught a cold that developed into pneumonia. Twenty years later in 1860, Lincoln became president. We all know what happened to him. Twenty years later, in 1880 Garfield was elected president. He met a similar fate as Lincoln, taking a bullet only six months after he took office. Twenty years later, in 1900 President McKinley was reelected to office. He too was assassinated. Twenty years later, in 1920 Harding was elected president only to die of a stroke after three years in office. Twenty years later, in 1940 President Roosevelt is reelected only to die in office of a cerebral hemorrhage. Twenty years later, in 1960 Kennedy is elected president. He too was assassinated. Twenty years later, in 1980 Ronald Reagan is elected president. He takes a bullet and survives. That is the exception not the rule.

A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist, whether he's Islamic or Christian. They are all enemies of humanity. It was Christians, may I remind you, that were responsible for the Inquisition, the Crusades, the atrocities in North Ireland, the Salem Witch Trials, and countless other acts of violent hatred and ignorance.

Well then I guess the curse is broken.

May I remind you that there are always radicals in every group.
I don't know a Christian (and I know alot of them)that would go in for that type of behavior. If you believe in some indian curse then I would say you are more messed up than any Christian I know or non Christian for that matter.
When you focus on the bad that's all you will ever see.
There are millions of Christians out there helping people every day
when others are sitting on the sidelines because they don't see it as their problem.
You are entitled to your opinion however.

 

[DGB454]

Originally posted by ledhed
Two quotes come to mind when I read this thread.
" Religions that teach brotherly
love have been used as an excuse
for persecution, and our profoundest
scientific insight is made into
a means of mass destruction. "


"So far as I can remember, there is not one
word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence"
Both are from Bertrand Russell.

I don't totally disagree on the first quote. As I said before, There are radicals in every group. I don't agree with them but they are there.

There are many passages in the Bible that tell us to seek out wisdom and to cherish it.

 

[DGB454]

One last thing. All the last major wars the U.S. has been involved in have nothing to do with religion. WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam. So from this should I say all non-Christians are the cause for most of the atrocities in recent history? Therefore all non religious people are evil? No.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by ledhed
Anytime a quote is taken out of the context of the whole it is suspect. Who annointed Bush as the leader of the free world ..I was not aware of his new electorate.
The story or article you presented was an attempt by the writer to justify his position , on its face it is not factual or to be beleived. It is still only one mans opinion and an attempt to justfy his position. It is nothing more or less.

No. It's not just one man's position. The quotes contained in the article prove that. And I've been hearing about this for some time now. It didn't just come out of nowhere. Bush bothers people. He talks like some bible thumpin' fundementalist. I can't see how you'd disagree unless you like it, in which case just you could just say so, rather than closing your eyes and covering your ears and going LA LA LA LA! because that's the impression your post gets accross.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by DGB454
Couple things.

I believe Bush is a Christian. I believe he asks for wisdom from God as he should if he is a Christian. As a Christian he should not hide his beliefs reguardless who he is speaking to. The Bible basicaly says that you should let your faith shine as a beacon for others to follow. If he hides his belief in Christ then it's as if he is ashamed of it and that would be against what Christ taught.

Another thing.

"George Bush has got a completely one-sided message. I don't think a people gets a sign from God to liberate another people," he said. "Nowhere does the Bible call for crusades."

Didn't Moses get a sign to liberate his people?
When this guy talks about crusades is he also referring to wars?
If so then I can thing of many places in the Bible where God has called his faithful to take up arms against his enemies.(The enemy of God.)
Remember the Bible says there is a time for every purpose under heaven.(that's not just a song) There is a time for war and a time for peace. A time to live and a time to die.

Is Bush getting guidance from God? I hope so but only God and Bush really know for sure.

This is just scary. If this is what Bush is about then I am totally against it. Then the war is a crusade. Then America is a Christian country, like Europe was known, very recently, as Chrisendom. That was grown out of for good reasons. Now America will become the new Chrisendom. Super. That's just what the world needs... another country fueled by religious zeal, another radical kook as it's leader. I guess that little thing about separation of church and state is optional. I guess the fact that many non Christian tax dollars are paying for much of this war is irrelevant.

You and ledhed only deepen what the article says. But at least you are being honest about it.

If you can't step outside the issue and see it from every direction then you won't understand my perspective. And I won't argue it endlessly. I've never seen a religious conversion occur on GTP and that's what "winning" this argument amounts to.

I'll finish reading what posts are left and leave you all to have the last word.

 

[DGB454]

Originally posted by milefile
This is just scary. If this is what Bush is about then I am totally against it. Then the war is a crusade. Then America is a Christian country, like Europe was known, very recently, as Chrisendom. That was grown out of for good reasons. Now America will become the new Chrisendom. Super. That's just what the world needs... another country fueled by religious zeal, another radical kook as it's leader. I guess that little thing about separation of church and state is optional. I guess the fact that many non Christian tax dollars are paying for much of this war is irrelevant.

You and ledhed only deepen what the article says. But at least you are being honest about it.

If you can't step outside the issue and see it from every direction then you won't understand my perspective. And I won't argue it endlessly. I've never seen a religious conversion occur on GTP and that's what "winning" this argument amounts to.



I'll finish reading what posts are left and leave you all to have the last word.

Because Bush is a Christian doesn't make this a holly war or a crusade anymore than circumsission(sp) makes you Jewish.

America has been a Christian country for years. (or at least a God believing one.) I think the last poll I saw stated that 70 % of Americans believe in God.

Yes ,a lot of non-Christian dollars are paying for a war that isn't Christian motivated. A lot of Christian tax dollars are going to it too. A lot of Christian dollars also pay for things most Christians don't support that have been pushed through congress by non Christian people. It happens.

There is a seperation of Church and State still. It's impossible to elect a President who holds no beliefs in anything.(that's not entirely true because Clinton got elected) To keep all Christians from running for public office wouldn't work anymore than stopping all Athiest from doing so. We have checks and balances that keep one from having too much power. So chances are we will never have a pure Christian agenda or a pure Ahtiest agenda.

 

[Pako]

milefile:

Like I stated before, my first post in this thread actually....., a true Christ Follower would not wage an attack agianst an agressor. As far as I can see, his actions are clearly agianst his religious views (assuming that Christianity is in fact his religion).

 

[ledhed]

Bush is religiouse so are alot of people, I don't condemn them for it. Everyone that does not aggree with my point of view is not wrong. I am not a religouse person but I try to be open minded about it. Europeans seem to have a different level of tolerance for mixing religion and politics. I must be used to it because I live in the US . I grew up saying the plege of allegiance " one nation under god " and all that. I am able to seperate religion from politics and I am aware of it when its being mixed up . I guess maybe I expect most people to want to ,or be able to do the same.
I am very aware that throughout history religion has been used as a means to controll people and has been used an an excuse to rape murder and conquer counless people. I am also aware that that does not make religion a bad thing. It makes the people who decided to use it in that manner bad people. That to me is the difference., in our point of veiws.