Doug Van Pelt

"Patriotism Must Die!"

Wow.

I heard a punk band at Warped Tour cry this from the stage (Strike Anywhere).
While the passion was commendable and the voice revolutionary,
I don't think it would make our founding fathers of the revolutionary war as proud as it might appear on the surface. Yeah, it's cool that someone would be brave enough to think revolutionary thoughts like that -- not bowing to some prevailing thought or order of the day just because. And it is also commendable to think and love globally; but it is not realistic to think that mankind is basically good at heart and we can all just get along. A machette to the back of the neck or a rocket launcher to your dwelling place can end that idealistic notion real fast. History pretty much shows us that tyrants and outlaws will exist and kill. Fighting them with love isn't what Jesus taught. At least I don't think so. Yes, His teachings are universal and should be looked at applying to each and every situation we might face; but as a good liberal interpreter of the Bible will tell us, context can apply meaning. Did Jesus really teach us to love our enemies in the context of an invading army? If so, why did He never once really push the idea of civil disobedience and overthrowing the government of His day? Certainly He could have set up some sort of peaceful, utopian government. But He didn't. One reason for that might possibly be because He doesn't believe in it for mankind on this Earth under the present age (say, pre- Kingdom of Heaven eternal reign, and before the destruction of evil, judgment, etc). Perhaps He knew that a police force and a military were necessary. When He taught His Sermon on the Mount, He referenced a Roman soldier asking a citizen to carry his backpack one mile, which was apparently so common that it was a law in Roman occupation times. He told His followers not only to obey the soldier, but to carry that pack two miles. If He was against the military, don't you think He might've given us more clues or hints of His thoughts on the matter?

To get rid of patriotism is a radical thought. I'll give the spokesman that. But it is also so hypocritical to criticize a government that gives you the freedom to voice such an opinion. Criticism is not wrong. In fact, our government was set up so that it could be changed, as human nature will somehow get in the way and foul things up. Thus the need for a government of checks and balances and a freedom of the press and freedom of speech. To stand up and cry an end to patriotism is a slap in the face of those who gave their lives to defend this nation and this freedom. Someone who stands up and does this has that right. But they should realize that they are saying "(bleep) you" and slapping or spitting in the face of those soldiers and patriots before them. When this person is called a coward or some other name back in their face, they need to understand why. If they have thought through this and still want to protest, that's fine. But speaking without thinking is just dumb.

Having a respect for the blood of martyrs and soldiers is proper. Yes, on multiple sides of an issue. There is a time and a place to speak out on injustice, mistakes, wrong thinking. Let us listen to both (or multiple sides) of an issue. Perhaps this diatribe was just one side.

Politics. What a crazy thing.

Oh, and Rosenberg was a spy!