Yesterday, I asked a simple question - where do you stand? Should the United States government have authorized the killing of Osama bin Laden back in the 90's when they had the chance? It is tempting in today's world to say "yes"! If only we had killed him when we had the chance the 9-11 attacks would have never happened.
Although that sounds like a compelling argument, I would have to say that President Clinton's administration did the right thing. Good moral reasoning would say that you cannot perpetuate an evil even if your intent is good. Evil, in some way, always begets evil just as violence begets violence and etc. Now don't get me wrong. There is a part of me that craves revenge by any means. There are things that happen in this world (including 9-11), in our country, in our own community that are heinous enough to make my blood boil with a desire to kill and maim and dismember the perpetrator. But is that the spirit that should lead us? As people of God, as Christians, and as human beings shouldn't we respond to a higher calling in our desire for retribution and justice?
Osama bin Laden (like it or not) was created in the image and likeness of God. He was (is) a child of God and, despite his own actions, deserved to be treated with dignity. He deserved to be brought in front of the proper court and tried in a fair way. (Who knows, killing him back in the 90's may have made him an instant martyr for his cause and inspired terroristic plots in intensity and number that would have killed and injured even more Americans.)
The principle is simple: you cannot do an evil even if your intent is good. Just look what it has done for the people of Afghanistan and Iraq and Osama himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment