2007 archive

There has been a lot of fuss today regarding the demonstration at Jena, Louisiana.

I heard one of the citizens of Jena (obviously white–don’t ask me how I know, I know) saying that he didn’t understand what the fuss was about.

And that, my friends, is precisely what the fuss was about.

I was brought up in the Southern Baptist Church.

I am still very much a Baptist, though I happen to attend a Methodist church now.

Baptist beliefs are, I fear, much misunderstood, primarily due to the antics of those who call themselves “Baptists.” Heck, any group of nutcakes who wants to start up some kind of wierd little sect seems to want to call themselves “The So-and-So Baptist Church of the Such-and-Such.”

There are six basic tenets of being a Baptist. Four of them are pretty much standard Christian stuff: the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, and so on.

Two of them are unique:

• Baptism of the Believer: One cannot be baptised unless he or she is able to profess faith. In other words, infant baptism is out (sorry, Methodists).
• Priesthood of the Believer: Though this is fundamental to Protestantism, Baptists take if much farther than anyone else. In the Baptist persuasion, the believer is in charge; the congregation is next, and so on. (I’m a very strong proponent of “priesthood of the believer,” but that’s another story.)

Furthermore, Baptists do not believe in creeds. No true Baptist Church ever repeats a creed.

For, you see, if you are repeating a creed, you are repeating beliefs imposed on you by someone else, thereby violating the principal of “priesthood of the believer.”

The little Baptist Church that I was raised in is a member of the Accomack Baptist Association, which, in turn, is a member of the Baptist General Association of Virginia (BGAV), which, in turn, is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention. (The land on which it stands was donated by one of my ancestors shortly after the unpleasantness of 1781.)

The missionary who founded the church (I believe his name was Elijah Lewis, but I am far from my sources), spent large amounts of time in jail for the crime of . . .

. . . being a Baptist.

A further fundamental principal of Baptists in America is separation of church and state. This dates back to Roger Williams’s founding of Rhode Island, which he founded because he was hounded out of the Massachusetts Bay Colony because of his religion.

Now, of course, the Southern Baptist Convention has fallen into the hands of the pharisees.

The little church in which I grew up has trouble finding pastors because it has (gasp!) women deacons (in the Baptist Church, the Board of Deacons is sort of like the Parish Council, the Board of Trustees, and the Administrative Council all rolled into one–they are the governing body of the church)

So, where am I headed with this?

To here. Give it a a read.

And think seriously about why the Founders decreed that Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.

I’ve mentioned Swampwater before. (By the way, the link is to Wikepedia–it might be interesting to investigate the edits to the article.)

Apparently they played Sergeant Rock one time too many:

The Iraqi government said today it has revoked the license of Blackwater USA, a private security company that guards U.S. Embassy personnel in Iraq, following a shootout in downtown Baghdad on Sunday that left at least nine people dead.

Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman Abdul-Karim Khalaf called the episode the “last and the biggest mistake” committed by Blackwater, whose black sports utility vehicles and agile “Little Bird” helicopters escort diplomatic convoys throughout Baghdad.

He said the decision of the Iraqi government meant that Blackwater “cannot work in Iraq any longer, it will be illegal for them to work here.”

“Security contracts do not allow them to shoot people randomly,” Brig. Gen. Khalaf said. “They are here to protect personnel, not shoot people without reason.”

We shall see whether or not the Iraqi (it is to laugh) government’s declaration has any weight. (Given that the Iraqi government doesn’t even run the blinking Green Zone, let alone Iraqi, well, you figure out the odds.)

It is not good to turn over our security, or the security of our personnel, to persons who are accountable, not to the United States of America, but to some private entity who considers itself accountable to no one.

Addendum, Moments Later:

Brendan has more.

So does Upyernoz.

Addendum, Later That Same Week:

Brendan has even more and Will Bunch weighs in.

Yes, when I was young, that’s what they were called.

DPs.

Displaced Persons.

Now it’s more fashionable to call them refugees.

The Current Federal Administration has created a bumper crop of them in Iraq, but has failed to accept responsibility for its actions.

(And this surprise us how?)

Trudy Rubin discusses the harvest and the craven, despicable failure of the Current Federal Administration to see to the safety of those Iraqis who have aided it (emphasis added):

When President Bush spoke to the nation about Iraq last week he predicted that if American troops left soon, “Iraq could face a humanitarian nightmare.”

He’s right. Things could get worse. But Iraqis already face a humanitarian nightmare as millions of refugees flee their homes to escape ethnic cleansing. More than 2 million are displaced within Iraq, and 2.2 million have poured into neighboring countries, according to U.N. agencies. That’s around a sixth of Iraq’s entire population, many living in desperate conditions, with tens of thousands still escaping monthly.

This is a refugee crisis of a magnitude that can destabilize the entire region. So why didn’t it rate a mention in the president’s speech?

“I’m very puzzled by why it’s gotten such short shrift,” says Kenneth Bacon, president of Refugees International, one of the few international aid agencies addressing the problem.

But we know the reason. As Bacon points out, administration policy is to stabilize Iraq so refugees can go home. Meantime – with stability still a mirage – refugee flows are on the rise as the desperate run for their lives.

This refugee crisis creates a security threat to the region – and a moral challenge to the United States. Among the current and potential refugees are thousands of Iraqis who have been threatened with death because they worked with U.S. officials. Many have risked their lives to help Americans, yet the United States has been pitifully slow in helping those under direct threat. In July, the U.S. ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, urged the administration to grant immigrant visas to all embassy staff members in need, after nine U.S. embassy employees had been killed, including a married couple who were kidnapped and executed.

And, of course, as long as the Current Federal Administration continues to play its tune that “Everything is coming out roses!” over there, innocents will continue to die.

For a lie.