10.27.2006

USA Baptizing Terror Suspects

Friends and Fellow Citizens,

Now more than ever, given the still-growing political power of those who equate American values with their particular and quite recent visions of Christianity, we must remain vigilant in our defense of the anti-establishment clause and other measures established by the founders of our country to prevent church-state fusion. Maintaining this separation has long been only a theoretical drive among progressive Americans of their several faith affiliations (in which I of course include the venerable faith in progress and reason which orients progressive Atheists and Agnostics), but now, given the recent shocking statements of our vice president which clearly allude to the involuntary baptism of suspected terrorists, the time has come to take action.

For those of you who have not been following the news, this last Tuesday at a White House photo-op, conservative radio host Scott Hennen (WDAY, Fargo) reported that his callers endorsed a practice obliquely referred to as "dunking in water." "Please, let the vice president know that if it takes dunking a terrorist in water, we're all for it, if it saves lives."

Asked by Hennen whether he supported that this life-saving practice of dunking in water, vice president Cheney replied, "Well, it's a no-brainer for me, but for a while there I was criticized as being the vice president for torture," Cheney said. "We don't torture. That's not what we're involved in." If not torture, then what is this administration "involved in?"

In defending Cheney, presidential spokesman Tony Snow said the question put to Cheney was vague and could refer to many practices. Snow's only clarification as to the dunking was to say, "It's a dunk in the water."

This ambiguous endorsement has drawn the attention of several human rights groups. Larry Cox, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, for instance, has understood this as an endorsement of torture: "What's really a no-brainer is that no US official, much less a vice president, should champion torture." While Mr. Cox's sentiment is absolutely correct, his, like other human rights groups seem to be missing the fact that this "dunking" was explicitly endorsed as a life saving measure, and thus, given the ambiguity, is more likely to refer to baptism than any torture practice.

Cheney, a Methodist, would certainly endorse baptism as a life saving measure on three important counts. First, Methodism unambiguously discusses baptism, often administered by "a dunk in the water," in these terms. Article XVII of the Methodist Confession of Faith, for instance, calls the sacrament ..a representation of the new birth in Christ Jesus and a mark of Christian discipleship... Second, the recent blurring of Muslims, terrorists, and fascists in official statements from the president and his administration (see, for instance, http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/10/washington.terror.plot/index.html) may indicate that making Christians of terror suspects is increasingly seen as a life saving measure for Americans at large. To this should also be added the fact that Hennen is deeply enmeshed in the networks of popular media which have recently coined the barbarous neologism "islamofascism," making it quite likely that dunking terror suspects into Christianity was the intended meaning of his question. Third, a life-or-death issue of a different sort may be at hand, given that it is unlikely that clergy members are available to baptize the suspects. In most Christian denominations including Methodism lay baptism is only allowed in cases of in cases of a genuine emergency. However, in life-or-death circumstances, that is, in circumstances like those created in our international network of torture facilities, any Christian may perform the rite. Which, we must ask, is the real motivation? Is it not possible that this administration has begun to risk lives in order to "save" them by this, their preferred method?

It is no longer enough only to oppose torture, though we must continue that fight as well. We, as Americans who oppose the union of church and state, must stand together and oppose this practice!

No comments: