15 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Wherefore renounce war and proclaim peace. D&C 98:16 Continuing the thought experiment: If the U.S. had not declared war on Mexico, Arizona would now be part of Mexico, and el Senador Pearce Garcia would be trying to deal with undocumented immigrants from the north. If the U.S. had not declared war on Spain, the Phillipines never would have been a territory, nor would Cuba or Puerto Rico. That means Puerto Ricans would not be U.S. citizens, and able to come to the mainland without going through immigration. Leonard Bernstein never would have written the beautiful music to West Side Story. If the U.S. had not declared war on Britain in 1812, we would not had an opportunity to rebuild the White House. If the colonies had not rebelled against and fought their sovereign King, the U.S. would now be like Canada and part of the Commonwealth. Slavery would have ended earlier. Because we would have been more like Canada, we would have a single payer system. |
I’m not a pacifist. I own several firearms, and carry on a regular basis. That being said, I admire a certain group in the BoM that laid down their lives, rather than fight. On an individual level, it’s beautiful (and completely a fundamentalist show of faith). On a societal level, it seemed to have better results than engaging in war in retaliation. Some of them were killed. Some of the killers stopped killing and were converted. And then they had to flee for perfection. Whereas, if they had fought, you could assume great numbers on both sides would be killed. I’m not suggesting this as a policy. Indeed, that would be an extreme level of satanic subversion of individual agency (to require someone to lay down their life for you). That would be something that an individual would have to decide for their self for the appropriate reasons. But nevertheless, I certainly thank the Veterans and pray the day will soon come when they aren’t necessary anymore. |
Pacificism isn’t at all the same as proclaiming peace. |
The Anti-Nephi-Lehis were wimps. Am I right or what bbell? |
I nominate you to be the first one to test out the “let em kill you until they get tired of it” strategy for peace jjohnsen. Unless youre gonna wimp out, that is. |
I’m a Utah Mormon aren’t I? I’m already considered a wimp by most of my ward for not being gung-ho about invading two countries in the past decade. |
jjohnsen, if professing your wimpiness is how you prefer to observe Veterans day then that’s great. Personally I don’t observe Veterans day with any sort of “gung-ho” stuff about reasons for wars and what-not. I did 10 year in the army, 2 of em in Iraq. Mixed feelings on that… I do think it’s a day on which i’m more than justified to tell sniveling sycophants like yourself to shut the hell up though. Youre not one of these Anti-Nephi-Lehi dudes, youre just a wimp. |
I think there are plenty of sites around the bloggernacle that had great ways to celebrate Veterans Day. Complaining about pacifists was the least of these. And I appreciate your service even though you’re obviously a major douchebag. |
“sniveling sycophant” was probably a bit much… I guess I have a huge chip on my shoulder, especially on Nov. 11 |
“One sword keeps another in its sheath.” George Herbert. An agressor doesn’t attack unless they think they can win. Well, unless they’re bat-guano crazy. |
#3, Ardis: that reminds me of the faux-Star Trek line: “We come in peace! ….. FIRE PHASERS!” |
I think it was Daniel Peterson who gave some background, or drew connections between the story of the surrender of the Ammonites (anti-Lehi-Nephis) and later eras of Native American traditions of where killing an enemy who surrendered didn’t “count” as their human sacrifce that was needed to install a new king. The story in Alma was written from a Nephite viewpoint on three layers, 1) Ammon’s account to Alma, 2) Alma’s insertion of the story into the large plates, 3) Mormon’s abridgement of the story from the large plates into his plates. At any point, perhaps even in Ammon’s account to Alma, further background or reasons why the anti-Lehi-Nephis were under attack, and why it was called off, could have been left out, or just unknown or not understood from a Nephite perspective. Ammon pretty much gives the anti-Lehi-Nephis perspective, and is not concerned with the perspective of the attacking Lamanites, as that is not applicable to his overall narrative of accepting the gospel of Christ or his praise of his beloved Lamanite friends. |
And Bookslinger, you remind me of the line about our Pilgrim forefathers: “They first fell on their knees, and then fell on the Indians.” “Pacificism” to me is a kind of neutral position, a withdrawal — “I don’t want to fight. Leave me [or my country, or whatever] out of it.” “Proclaiming peace,” or “being peaceful,” seems more active, seeking to create peace, which is more than an absence of war. “Proclaiming peace” seems to me to be entirely compatible with Veteran’s Day because it credits servicemen and women with doing their duty because it IS their duty, with the likelihood that they could prefer peace even while not backing down from duty, and not fighting because they glory in bloodshed. |
Ardis, I think you are right. I think that Truman, FDR and Churchill proclaimed peace by winning the war and then extending a hand to our former enemies in fellowship and help. See the Marshall plan and the rebuilding of Japan for examples. I don’t think these men wanted war but when it was thrust upon them their policies on war and then the policies in the post war period led to long term peace. Can anyone imagine Germany or Japan becoming warlike again? Proclaiming Peace is not simply no war ever. |
#13 was good… |