Leftist Commemoration Undermines Resolve Against Terror
Yes. Perhaps this is being posted a bit late. However, the points are still valid. If you are going to be that condescending, perhaps you should be reminded that you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time online obsessively reading columns and articles of those you snidely dismiss as less accomplished than yourself.
It is said that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn anything from history. Following the attack on 9/11, the nation's leaders as epitomized by the members of Congress joining on the steps of the Capitol in patriotic chorus vowed that they would be vigilant against the laxity of policy and perspective that left the door wide open allowing such a tragedy to transpire in the first place. However, in the decade since then, little has changed in the hearts of many that would prevent an occurrence of similar or greater magnitude from happening again in the future.
Under the auspices of the National Cathedral, an interfaith memorial was to be held in Washington, DC. Since the President and a number of representatives from a variety of religious perspectives were scheduled to speak at the service, the event was billed as and assumed to be one promoting an inclusive brand of diversity and spirituality.
It is estimated that nearly 20% hold to a theology or worldview classifiable as Evangelical in nature. Critics might respond that is only a small percentage of the population and as such the perspective should not be catered to with a proverbial seat on the dais.
If that is the case, then why should a number of other faiths have been included that did next to nothing in laying the foundation upon which this country was built or offer little in addressing the 9/11 attack. One could argue that, at least, Islam should have been allowed on stage to offer an apology for the entire awful mess.
The number of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains in this country no doubt come in at a percentage far below that of the Evangelical Right. A number of these Eastern faiths are emphasized over that of Evangelicalism because of the tendency of these creeds of the Orient to ignore the reality of the troubles plaguing mankind rather than addressing how to really resolve them as in traditional Christianity.
Leftwing religionists, such as those organizing the memorial service sponsored by the National Cathedral, despite clinging to the Christian name do not like to admit evil manifesting in human lives known as sin exists. Pantheism --- the philosophical backbone of Hinduism --- denies the objective reality of sin altogether.
Popular conceptions of Hinduism further down the chain of enlightenment consist of an infinite number of gods (though adherents of a multiplicity of deities still get as jacked out of shape as a monotheistic Jew if a family member comes to Christ as Lord and Savior). However, among elites, the multitude of divinities are not so much distinct personalities but rather representations of the singular unified reality known as “Brahman”.
In fact, according to the adherents of this outlook, we ourselves are not really independent consciences distinct from the comprehensive totality (“Atman is Brahman”). What we perceive as the self is merely an illusion. This is summarized by the teaching of “maya”.
Thus, instead of grappling with the overwhelming horror of sin on such a grand scale as an objective reality such as 9/11, the Eastern perspective just glosses it all over by insisting that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon never really happened in the ultimate sense. And if by some small chance that it really did, such an act at its core couldn’t possibly be evil at its most profound depth. One of the beauties the pantheist insists upon in the All Is One mentality of philosophical monism is that at such a level everything is beyond the limited concepts of good and evil.
One religion invited to the interfaith prayer service is so obscure that it is a safe wager that the majority of Americans have likely never heard of it and even fewer understand it. It was in all likelihood selected as it represents the kind of religion Episcopalian elites would like to impose upon the masses in the future.
As a system of belief, there is very little that Jainism can provide to defend a civilization against the onslaught of terrorism. It does posses a number of tenets that are the equivalent of where liberalism ends up if followed to its logical conclusions.
For example, Jainism does not believe in a personal God as found in the monotheistic traditions. Rather, what is thought of as the ultimate has more in common with a form energy. When considering Jainism, one is reminded of Yoda in “The Empire Strikes Back” when he describes the Force of that series as “surrounds us. binds us.”
As such, a ratiocinative consciousness cannot be seen as the characteristic separating the higher order lifeforms more worthy of additional ethical concern and reflection. Since this characteristic is not possessed by what Paul Tillich would categorize as the ultimate concern of this creed now under consideration, those life forms possessing it are no more superior or much higher along the chain of being than those that do not.
The way this principle manifests itself is reminiscent of how things would operate if PETA had its way. Jainists are fanatic vegetarians. Not only do they refuse to eat meat, but they also sweep the ground in front of them so as to not inadvertently step on any bugs.
Jains also wear a cloth over their mouths and also abstain from certain vegetables so as to avoid inflicting undue harm on microorganisms. In other words, during the outbreak of a killer epidemic, if they want to remain philosophically consistent, they would have to remain no more in favor of the triumph of man over germ than germ over man in such a biological survival of the fittest.
Certain schools of Eastern thought construed through a Western New Age mindset hold that we create our own reality, largely through how we conceptualize the world around us. This has to be the reason to justify how the Obama administration decided to commemorate the anniversary of September 11th.
To fully appreciate what happened that tragic day, one cannot avoid who it was and what motivated these scumbags to carry out an act of such evil that the average person cannot fully grasp the magnitude of the deed's animus. By emphasizing this act of Islamist terror, the nation would be reminded that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance and that there exists those in the world whose highest goal is the destruction of that with which we have been blessed.
Instead, the Obama administration issued directives that the specifics of the attack were to be downplayed (as if the Twin Towers simply collapsed and a large gaping whole split the Pentagon all on their own). Instead, government officials and spokesmen were to present a "positive forward looking narrative" emphasizing trivialities such as community service.
However, some things that happen aren't positive. To be historically accurate, one cannot deny or sweep under the rug that several thousand Americans died that day and who it was that killed them.
Religion and/or spirituality is one of the most important pillars embraced by an individual influencing how they will cope with what transpires in the world around them. And though the state should have virtually no say in determining what path one ultimately decides upon for oneself, it has to be admitted that some creeds optimize one's chances of survival over others in that they approach the world as it actually exists rather than how we would like it to be.
by Frederick Meekins