Genocide, War, and the Human Way

We have recently been exposed to another human frailty by governmental entities. Our President of the United States of America is imploring Congress to withdraw the pending resolution that accuses Turkey of genocide against the Armenians about a century ago. Most historians clearly describe the Ottoman Turk empire of slaughtering over one million Armenians during the first world war. This was denied then by Turkey and is still denied by them. If our Congress were to condemn the genocide now it would at least be a long overdue recognition of another case of inhumane acts by government and people controlled by evil governments.

President Bush does not want to incite the Muslim radicals in Turkey and thereby hinder the use of Turkey bases and air space as the war in Iraq continues. Therefore he and his administration are opposed to admonishing Turkey for their basic violation of human rights. This stance is taken despite the oft repeated proclamations by the Bush Administration that we are in Iraq to provide a democratic pathway instead of a genocidal dictatorship that previously existed. Isn't it enlightening to discover that Sadam's genocidal acts were horrible but Turkey's were OK.

History, however also tells us that governments who preach the loudest about other people's inhumane acts usually are artfully denying or obscuring their own atrocities. Our war against Iraq is an example. We entered this war under the false pretense espoused by the Bush Administration and accepted our all-to-willing Congress that Iraq was about to send nuclear bombs our way. We know that this belief was unsubstantiated by intelligence that was ignored or hidden before the invasion. The result has been the slaughter of over 600,000 innocent Iraqi children, women, babies, and men and the displacement of about 2 million refugees in camps and other countries as a result of this "genocidal" war against Iraq and those of the Islamic religion.Thousands of US military personnel have paid the ultimate price and many thousands are forever physically or mentally disabled. And this senseless war continues as our Congress wringing its collective hands and promoting the continuing slaughter of military personnel and innocent Iraqis.

I truly believe that our war against Iraq amounts to genocide that is at least as horrible as what the Ottoman Turks committed against the Armenians. Both must be condemned. Inhumane behavior must not be condoned. We are as guilty as Turkey and the Iraq war is the latest example of genocidal actions by government under the pretense of some noble purpose.

The Human Way must include a pathway that eliminates destructive pretense and steers away from avoidable conflict and war. We must always opt for the peaceful path. Adopting selective definitions or semantics to justify hidden agendas must stop. Governments are responsible for leading or forcing their people into wars and atrocities, and governments must stop their genocidal actions on behalf of all the people who yearn for nothing more than peace and well being for themselves and their loved ones. We must always take the Human Way to peace.

Life is Sacred

We in the USA are frequently deluged with so called "pro life" and "right to choose" slogans and political position ads that proclaim one position or the other as the only correct and morally acceptable position.

What do these proclamations really mean? "Pro life" is defined to mean that any human abortion is morally wrong because such a practice destroys life. "Pro choice" means that one can chose to destroy a potential life or not, and morality is totally ignored.

Both positions are morally bankrupt because nether side is consistent and both slip into selective amnesia when applying their positions regarding abortion to the sacredness of life in general.

Why is it acceptable to espouse pro life beliefs and yet approve of war? How can one accept the killing of innocent children as "collateral damage" and hold firm to "pro life" beliefs? How can one be morally morally right regarding the sacredness of new born life while accepting the killing of innocent young children by bombs and bullets?

How can those who support the "pro choice" stance deplore war and the killing of innocent men, women, and children who are victims of war?

Are not both positions morally bankrupt?

If life is sacred, and I believe that it is, how can humans arbitrarily decide when life is or isn't sacred?

How can one say that a fetus must be allowed life, but when born can be neglected and allowed to suffer from disease and poverty and the ravages of war?

How can one destroy a potential life and decry the loss of life in war?

Either life is sacred or it is not. Either one's life is as sacred at eighteen years of age as it is at birth, or it is not sacred at all.

Politicizing the sacredness of life represents the epitome of hypocrisy. Both "Pro Choice" and "Pro Life" stances are equally destructive positions. The sacredness of life does not terminate at birth, nor does it when a stray bomb penetrates the walls of a bunker or innocent child's home.

We are the custodians of each other's lives and must adhere to the Human Way. All life must be considered sacred and we must govern our behavior accordingly. All arbitrary destruction of life, either by abortion , war, poverty, disease, or wanton disregard of others is morally wrong. We must adopt a unified stance that becomes the basis of all human endeavor, and codes of law and governance. These must be based upon the sacredness of each and every life from birth to natural death.