WWJD: the Crisis

Refugee:
Noun
A person who flees for refuge or safety, especially to a foreign country, as in time of political upheaval, war, etc.

One would truly have to live under a rock, in the current state of affairs, to have not heard about what is being called a "refugee crisis," wherein, as of July 2015 an estimated 4,000,000 (four million) Syrians have been displaced and fled the country, according to the UNHCR, or the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The reason for this crisis is mainly due in part to a bloody civil war that has torn the country into three different factions: territories controlled by the current political regime, rebel fighters, and Islamic extremists. This civil war had it's roots going as far back as 2006, however it is widely accepted that the official start of the war was in 2011. Between 2011 and 2013 an estimated 100,000 civilian casualties have been recorded, and many of the countries cities and towns have been ravaged and are no longer inhabitable. Understandably, these Syrian people had to leave their country.

Up until October of this year, less than 2,000 Syrian refugees have been allowed into the United States. However, in September, President Obama announced his plan to increase that number to at least 10,000, a number that pales in comparison to the aforementioned 4,000,000 refugees. Overall, our response to this historical crises has been lackluster to say the least, and despicable to say the most. The United States has the highest number of people who identify as Christians in the world (my source for this appears to be outdated although it's meaning is not lost). Of the Christian citizens in the United States, a majority of them have historically voted Republican, or leaned towards conservativism; this is no great surprise or revelation to anyone living in the United States. It is with that in mind, however, that I have turned my attention towards Republican representatives, most notably Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush, who have been vocally opposed to President Obama's announcement to accept more refugees into the United States. In a survey done by CNN in September, a majority of conservatives opposed allowing refugees to enter the United States (55%).

While I have no statistics to prove what I've observed, I can only imagine that the number opposed has increased in light of the terrorist attacks that took place in Paris, France, on the evening of November 13th, this year, 2015. Additionally, 24 different Governors have taken explicit steps towards the prevention of refugees being accepted into their states; only one of these Governors is a Democrat. As I have previously stated, a majority of Conservative Republicans identify as Protestant Christians, So, correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm seeing here is that Christians don't want Syrian refugees in the United States. But why?

In no uncertain terms I will tell you that the number one reason Christians don't want refugees in our country is fear. The Lord did indeed give us a spirit of fear, and we're using it to the fullest extent. We're afraid for our homes, our families, our way of life, and our security. That, mixed with a heaping helping of ignorance about the M word (yes that's right, Muslims) and how they are, in general, bad people, has created the notorious love child that only fear and ignorance can: hatred. The United States, after all, the golden calf we have come to know and love, cannot survive in it's current state if we submit and grant these "refugees" (read: terrorists) passage into our land of milk and honey, right?

Sarcasm aside, American Christians need to take a long, hard, introspective journey and open their Bibles in search of guidance. Should we love our enemies? Should we give them water to drink if they are thirsty and food if they are hungry? Can we continue to say "I love God" but turn and hate our brothers and sisters? Should we give to everyone who begs of us? Should we turn away people in need or will we make room in the stable? Will be oppress the poor and insult our Maker, or will we be generous to the needy and honor Him? Are we ready to reap what we're sowing? I ask these questions on the pretense that these refugees are indeed our enemies, because apparently that's how many people view them, but they aren't. Not in my eyes, at least. Maybe I'm a fool, maybe I'm ignorant, or maybe I'm not.

I know not everyone shares my sentiment, but I find it heartbreaking when I think of the hundreds upon thousands of men, women, and children, who are not only in desperate need of shelter, food, and clothing, but the grace of God that we have so selfishly harbored in our borders. Is our pride too great to recognize our duty as Christians to be the light of the world? Is our fear a lack of trust in the sovereignty of Christ or is it simply a symptom of never having really trusted in Him to begin with? Are we willing to sacrifice our humanity for our security? Is it the Christian inside us that refuses to acknowledge what is right, or is it the American?

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:7-8

Srsly 'Merica?

Imperialism: noun.
1. The policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. 


There are currently over 200,000 U.S. soldiers stationed in approximately 1000 military bases, which are in around 150 different countries world wide. Nearly 300 of these bases are in the Middle East.


Terror, as defined by Wikipedia, is a political strategy of the asymmetrical use of threats or violence against enemies using means that fall outside the routine forms of political struggle operating within some current regime.
Terrorism is performing acts of terror, as defined above.


About two months ago I got to see Newt Gingrich speak at Oral Roberts University. After he was done giving his little speech, my older sister, brother, and I got into a discussion with a few students from the university about some random political issues. Eventually the topic of the Middle East came up, and at one point in the conversation I blurted out "I think that the United States is over in these countries, terrorizing them for our governments own agenda. I think that we are terrorists."

You can probably imagine the following stares and faces. If you can't, they looked like this:

I'm not about to tell you that there aren't people out there in the world that have some serious problems with America. As a matter of fact, most of the world has a problem with America. I have a problem with us, and so should you.


I don't typically watch Fox or CNN. I sincerely dislike them. In my honest opinion, they're fear-mongering, war-mongering propaganda pundits. They all want you to believe that the whole of the Middle East is a bunch of rag-headed Muslims who hate America and our "freedom" and our "Christianity."


Well, first of all, if you're really convinced that the Qur'an is a book that preaches violence and that all the Muslims in the Middle East want to "kill all the infidels," I'd suggest you go do some research. However, since I know you're too lazy to do it, I'll provide you with some.


Way back when, when Rick Santorum was still in the Presidential bid, I would have a discussion here and there about some of his supporters, and they were all adamant about one thing in particular: we have to invade Iran because they want to have nukes, and if they have nukes they'll blow up Israel, and we support Israel because we're Christians like Santorum, which is why we support Santorum.


Well I hate to be blunt here, but they don't. Most people site the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) when they try to argue that Iran wants nukes, but in the words of Iran, IAEA has "pro-Western bias" and just wants us to invade them more. I know you're thinking "really? You trust Iran over your own government? They're the ones who want the nukes!" Well actually, yeah, I do. When exactly has the American government been known to tell the truth? "Oh don't worry slaves, you'll get 40 acres." "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman." "I am not a crook!" "Ah, America, the land of the free! Except for you natives, get back in your reservation!"


Iran isn't building nuclear warheads. The CIA knows it, Israel knows it, Mossad knows it (for those of you who don't know, Mossad is to Israel as the CIA is to the U.S.). Everyone knows it, but nobody admits it. Even Iran is like "srsly guise we need this nuclear power plant to keep our country running, stop trying to shut it down."
"What was that Iran? I can't hear you over the sound of our bombs exploding all over you!" - America
":(" - Iran


"In exchange for suspending its enrichment program, Iran has been offered "a long-term comprehensive arrangement which would allow for the development of relations and cooperation with Iran based on mutual respect and the establishment of international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program." However, Iran has consistently refused to give up its enrichment program, arguing that the program is necessary for its energy security, that such "long term arrangements" are inherently unreliable, and would deprive it of its inalienable right to peaceful nuclear technology."


How is this related to us being terrorists, you ask? I believe that we are terrorists because our government has flared up this conflict between the American people and the people of these Middle Eastern countries with their hateful propaganda and racism. Because of this hate and racism, many Americans advocate these wars that we're fighting, when we're killing more defenseless civilians than Al Qaeda members. We're terrorizing the civilians of Iran right now, just like we did to Iraq, as you read this. We're breaking into random houses and doing sweeps. We're interrogating and torturing innocents for information that we have no evidence that they even have. If you don't believe me, then I implore you to watch this video. No, I dare you to watch this video, then look me in the eye and tell me we're not doing something extremely wrong overseas.

Late Night Drafts; Morning Confusions: part II

Presidents: why bother?

Alright, so, let's get the basics out of the way. The American government is set up as such: there are three branches of government. The Legislative branch makes new laws. The Judicial branch, which basically makes sure people follow the laws (the court system is held within this branch). Finally, you have the executive branch. This branch is basically the President, Vice President, and his little peanut gallery (aka his cabinet).

The Presidents job is essentially to say "yay" or "nay" to everything. If a bill makes it through congress, it goes to the President, who basically has the power to sign it into law or to say "herp derp I do what I want," veto the bill, and sent it back to congress, who can revise the bill and try again. Or, if they receive 2/3rd's majority, can overthrow the presidents veto and make it a law anyways.

Sooooo... why? What's the point of the President again? He approves bills that have already gone through a vigorous screening period that can last years just to get tossed back and forth between the House of Representatives and the Senate (which together make up Congress)? And even if he doesn't like the bill Congress can pass it regardless of what he says?

Here's a quote from WhiteHouse.gov. "In order to pass legislation and send it to the President for his signature, both the house and the Senate must pass the same bill by majority vote. If the president vetoes a bill, they may override his veto by passing the bill again in each chamber with at least two-thirds of each body voting in favor."

Oh yeah and also the Pres can even have his personal appointments denied by Congress. What's that? The President is kind of a useless figurehead? "Many of the duties as head of state are ceremonial and convey no real power." - Wikipedia.

One of the main jobs of the President is to plan the country's budget. However, even when he does that, Congress can just be like "naw man you're dumb," and throw out his budget.


The President does have executive power, however. If he wants to, he can just be like "bam, I made this law up out of thin air and there's nothing you can do about it." That's fine and dandy, I guess, as long as you want a dictator.

What I'm getting at here is why should we even have a president? People will try to tell you that we need all three branches of government to have "checks and balances" and to make sure that no one branch gets out of control. We could accomplish the same thing with two branches. The President can stonewall a perfectly good bill so it doesn't become a law just because he doesn't like it. That's not balanced at all, in my opinion.

So I'd like some honest feedback here. And I mean real feedback. Not the typical "no... just no," that I get when I put out some crazy idea. Yeah Matt, I'm talking about you. And I still think that this country could get itself some help if it started up some factories. It'd be creating jobs, we'd be creating goods that we could export, we could use renewable energy to run them. But no. You never listen.