Cindy Sheehan's Bizarre Encampment

[church mouse guy]

Well, I don't know why you continue to mention the flag-draped coffins. The body count is available in the press.

Why would you have a dinner party at the White House for the fallen when the war is going on? It would be a media circus as many of the relatives are bitter over the war. When I was a kid, many people were still bitter over WW II. You just avoided them.

Bush has met with her once from what was posted here. She evidently chose to camp out by the side of the road, and her actions were evidently pre-planned because the tent seems to have come from nowhere. Also, two Bush administration officials have met with her at her campsite.

Moreover, she now has the attention of the Democrat Party, and it looks as if the Democrat Party should do something for her since she would be more consoled by Teddy Kennedy than Bush anyway.

LE, you voted to pull out of Iraq immediately because it is an illegal war so of course you are going to downplay the importance of the war and especially the Iraqi theater.

This is a Democrat problem that will not be solved until the end of August when the lady promises to go home--but what will she have accomplished except some days of discomfort in primitive living conditions?

I think that this raises another question of how long one is supposed to grieve over loss. The English Victorians said a year, but Israel only mourned over Moses for a month I guess. I think that a month is long enough.

 

[LadyEagle]

CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

And I don't know this woman's spiritual condition, but all I can say is that without Jesus Christ and the undertaking of the Holy Spirit with groanings that cannot be uttered, there are a lot of things in life that are unbearable without God's help, comfort, and peace.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

Oh, please. That's like saying if one hasn't served in the armed forces then one can't talk about defense policy, or if one isn't receiving a welfare check then one can't talk about welfare policy.

I emailed Mrs. Sheehan months ago to give her my condolences. But I will not support her staged political event in Crawford just because she lost her son in the war in Iraq.

 

[ASLANSPAL]

I don't think the majority of abortion clinic
protests I was a part of in the 80's and early
90's were staged...but they were well organized for maximum communication and it was for
the most part honest communications with very
few shennanigans because our Pastor ran a tight
ship and educated us real well.

I think Cindy Sheehan is not staged as well she
has joined a cause just as I joined the protest
or abortion clinics...the cause was just..Mrs.
Sheehan has some legitimate points...the reasons
for the war has changed and new revelations speak
of impatience an un last resort attitude from
this administration and the American people has
seen that as well and it is reflected in poll
numbers.

If you had lost a loved one in war and in the begining the reason was Weapons of Mass destruction then that played out and you change it to Democracy for Iraq and then that changes to
an Islamic state...I would be wanting to ask questions as well.

 

[church mouse guy]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

And I don't know this woman's spiritual condition, but all I can say is that without Jesus Christ and the undertaking of the Holy Spirit with groanings that cannot be uttered, there are a lot of things in life that are unbearable without God's help, comfort, and peace.

No, my question is how long should a Christian grieve? Chuck Swindoll said that the Israelis mourned for Moses for 1 month and that he thought that that was a long enough period for mourning. What do you think? It is unlikely that I will ever be a mother, LE, unless medical science comes up with something other than having the federal government pay for some worthless stem cell research. Oh, maybe I should e-mail Frist and thank him for giving me hope that an old man might become a mother with enough federal dollars spent--possiblity thinking deluxe.

This event in Crawford is totally staged. This woman is a full-time protester. This is all explained on her website about Gold Star Families for Peace.

http://www.gsfp.org/

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

Where did the idea come from that only mothers mourn the loss of a child?

Is this the time for me to say, until you are a father, don't talk to me about mourning the loss of a child?

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

This isn't about a mother mourning the loss of her child.

This is about a mother exploiting the death of her child for her own selfish ends.

 

[JohnAMac]

I guess some of you don't think that people outside the church are noticing that anytime someone has a disagreement with the President, the typical response from what has been labelled and segregated as the "right wing religious crowd" is to pick apart the person that has the disagreement, and do whatever it takes to discredit them as a human being.

I'm having trouble finding the passages of scripture where Jesus instructs me to rip apart anyone who dares challenge my political position, or where my responsibility toward the rest of the human community is suspended if they happen to hold a differing political view, or publicly challenge someone I've placed on a pedestal.

A man I've been witnessing to for over a year made a point of coming up to me at Wal Mart and pointed to this specific example. He quoted some blogger and said, "How is it that you people can claim to follow the teachings of Jesus on the one hand, and slander another human being just because she's made her disagreement with the President so public?" Apparently the blogger made it quite clear that he was a "born-again, Bible believing Christian."

This isn't the only time I've encountered this. You may disagree with Cindy Sheehan, but I don't think the Bible would justify the kind of character assassination and slander that she is getting, and there are too many people who are claiming the name of Christ who are openly involved in the slander, and apparently proud of it. Some of you have expressed your views right here in this thread.

I Corinthians 10:32-33 says, "Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God--even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good, but the good of many, so that they may be saved."

I don't like being included in a broad statement, identified as "you people" when I personally was not involved. I could take the attitude that if he wants to paint with a broad brush, and include me in collective guilt, that's his problem, but that would not be what Christ would have done, nor wants me to do. I think it is long past time when Christians should realize that they need to put their own political preferences aside, and extract themselves from that mess in favor of getting back to their Kingdom work. Acquiring the worldly power of government, or even its favor, isn't going to bring revival.

 

[church mouse guy]

JohnAMac, of course, you are right that we should not impeach the lady's character.

I myself wondered if she were mentally ill before I realized that she is a full-time professional demonstrator.

Actually it was Eleanor Clift, Contributing Editor, Newsweek Magazine, who outed Mrs. Sheehan on The Mclaughlin Group television show yesterday. Eleanor Clift repeated twice that Mrs. Sheehan was a Gold Star Mother.

That did not make any sense until I saw a list of Mrs. Sheehan's articles posted by Ken. (Thanks, Ken, and a tip of the hat!

) Among them was an article entitled Gold Star Families For Peace. That led to a website and I understood what Eleanor Clift was saying about Mrs. Sheehan's being a Gold Star mother. This is some sort of Democrat Party front as John Conyers and 3 dozen other Democrats have signed a letter demanding that President Bush meet with this lady again.

Mrs. Sheehan has authored 13 articles on Lew Rockwell. She is a Democrat Party operative. Look for her at major Democrat Party meetings until after the elections of November 2008.

She has said that she will leave Crawford at the end of August.

Please click here for Gold Star Families For Peace.

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
JohnAMac, of course, you are right that we should not impeach the lady's character.

Her character only came under scrutiny when her motives became clear.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:
... You are just parroting the attack machine of the self-loathing gay boy Drudge and now another mr.pervert Bill O'reilly is attacking her..they miss the point..mothers who have lost loved ones and who protest should not be shown the ditch... period. ...

Wow! Just look at all the name calling going on here! I wonder if someone will find these words offensive?

This woman doesn't represent the mothers who've lost loved ones. She represents herself through her hatred and desire for vengenance. Not even the rest of her own family supports her, according to them.

 

[JohnAMac]

I don't think you have enough accurate information to judge her motives. And the information provided about her family has some dubious origins. One of her family members spoke on CNN today, and it was not anywhere close to the context portrayed in the posts here.

Considering the fact that there are a number of other mothers out there with her, I don't think there is any way to judge who she does or doesn't represent.

I'm beginning to think that some Christians revere Bush and his policies more than they do God or Jesus Christ, and will stoop to misinformation and character assasination to avoid facing the facts. I like Bush personally, and find a lot of agreement with his policies. However, I strongly disagree with his decision to attack Iraq. Aside from my personal feelings that war is anti-Christian and immoral, the fact of the matter is that the invasion of Iraq was a major political mistake. Time and the facts have brought the American people around to the realization that Iraq was not a terrorist threat to the US or its Middle Eastern interests. Bush will have to take the consequences of that error. He's a big boy, he can handle it.

I also think he is wrong to try to avoid seeing the people who protest his policies. This is a free country, and protest, regardless of the character or motivation of the people doing it, is a fundamental constitutional right. I disagree with Bush's attempts to confine protests to "free speech zones" far away from where he will be, or to use his staff and local law enforcement to make protesting miserable for those gathering in Crawford at his ranch. Surely he realizes that a President whose popularity and support has never surpassed the 51 % level at any point in his presidency will generate some public protest. It makes him look bad when he attempts to squelch it, and it probably generates support for the other side that they might not get otherwise.

Above all of that, unqualified support from the right wing Christian community compromises the credibility of the faith and is a divisive element which damages the reputation of the Christian church as a whole. It puts the church in the awkward position of being backed into a corner and having to support policies and actions that are clearly un-Christian and anti-Biblical. It compromises the free church in the free state by muting its voice. It is difficult to reconcile Christ's ideal, "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of God." Jesus didn't limit peacemaking to the context of individual relationships, and I find it absolutely appalling to see Christians defend war by shredding the scripture. These aren't liberals, they're self proclaimed conservatives and fundamentalists. They've attacked Cindy Sheehan's character and slandered her publicly. What scripture passage did they get that authority from?

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by Mike McK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LadyEagle:
CMG, until you are a mother, don't talk to any woman about mourning the loss of a child.

This isn't about a mother mourning the loss of her child.

This is about a mother exploiting the death of her child for her own selfish ends. </font>[/QUOTE]What are her "own selfish ends." Unless I'm mistaken, she wasn't active until after her son's death.

 

[church mouse guy]

Sorry, JohnAMac, but this lady is a pure Democrat party operative. She turns out to be just another politico. She is a full-time peace protestor and has a 501-c-3 peace site:

www.gsfp.org

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
Sorry, JohnAMac, but this lady is a pure Democrat party operative. She turns out to be just another politico. She is a full-time peace protestor and has a 501-c-3 peace site:

www.gsfp.org

Yes, she started Gold Star Families for Peace - after her son died.

 

[Bro. James]

Peaceful redress of grievances is one of many rights afforded the citizens of this democratic republic--it is part of the Constitution which many of us defend to the death even today.

Right or wrong all citizens have a right to a public display of what they have to say--within the bounds of slander and libel of course.

An informed body politic is what can make the difference--party partisans included.

A black lady on a bus made a "statement" which has had a profound effect on the social fabric of this nation--even though the opposition may have gone underground.

Thank God for the freedoms we have left. May He give us the fortitude to keep them.

Can we defend them to the end?

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by Bro. James:
Peaceful redress of grievances is one of many rights afforded the citizens of this democratic republic--it is part of the Constitution which many of us defend to the death even today.

Right or wrong all citizens have a right to a public display of what they have to say--within the bounds of slander and libel of course.

An informed body politic is what can make the difference--party partisans included.

A black lady on a bus made a "statement" which has had a profound effect on the social fabric of this nation--even though the opposition may have gone underground.

Thank God for the freedoms we have left. May He give us the fortitude to keep them.

Can we defend them to the end?

Selah,

Bro. James

By the same argument this is exactly why we - those that don't agree with her statements - can also express our opinions even if they don't sit well with everyone.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by JohnAMac:
I don't think you have enough accurate information to judge her motives. And the information provided about her family has some dubious origins. One of her family members spoke on CNN today, and it was not anywhere close to the context portrayed in the posts here. ...

I think we have her own statements - well documented by her own hand and voice - by which to judge her comments. We all judge people by what they say and do. She, in fact, is doing just that we she blames the President, personally, for her son's death. I find those statements to be outright lies that appear to be driven by a deeply seated hatred. She appears not to be seeking peace but vengeance and is using her son's death as a tool towards that end. Her actions are not those of a grieving parent but those of a political activist screaming at her opponents.

It's possible that the report concerning her family members views might not be completely accurate or wholly inclusive of her entire family. Regardless, that makes no difference regarding the content nor purpose of which she's saying.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by JohnAMac:
... I'm beginning to think that some Christians revere Bush and his policies more than they do God or Jesus Christ, and will stoop to misinformation and character assasination to avoid facing the facts. I like Bush personally, and find a lot of agreement with his policies. However, I strongly disagree with his decision to attack Iraq. Aside from my personal feelings that war is anti-Christian and immoral, the fact of the matter is that the invasion of Iraq was a major political mistake. Time and the facts have brought the American people around to the realization that Iraq was not a terrorist threat to the US or its Middle Eastern interests. Bush will have to take the consequences of that error. He's a big boy, he can handle it. ...

Christians have only one God and He is not an earthly King or President. Christians, as citizens of earthly nations, also have leaders to whom they should demonstrate appropriate respect most especially in a nation that gets to choose its own. That respect in no way conflicts with our being subject to our creator, savior, and guide.

The war in Iraq is a fact whether or not it was justified. (I believe it was but that's another issue!) Our nation is at war with Iraq - not the President - and it is our war.

This woman's son was killed in that war. Our President didn't kill him, as she proclaims. Our enemy killed him. He deserves to be remembered as one who scarified his life for his nation in the performance of the duty to which we sent him. For his own mother to cheapen that sacrifice by calling it a murder by our President is a very shameful position for her to take or for any of us to support.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by JohnAMac:
... They've attacked Cindy Sheehan's character and slandered her publicly. What scripture passage did they get that authority from?

That's a fair question for a Christian to ask and a Christian to answer.

1 Kings 10:7-10
And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in. And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude. Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad: for who is able to judge this thy so great a people? And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing.

Ezekiel 44:23
And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.

Hebrews 5:12-14
For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

I pray that we be given the wisdom from God, such as He gave Solomon, to properly discern between good and bad, clean and unclean, and judge the actions of mankind among us accordingly. Judgment, in this sense, is a duty of all Christians. We must be able to discern good from evil and call evil by its true name. We must do that to bring honor to God the ultimate judge of all things.

Colossians 6:1-8
Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

We are most certainly in a position to judge one another her on this earth with respect to matters between us and with respect to good and bad. In fact, among Christians, we should prefer to do that in the church verses the civil venues available to all. It also seems that we will, in fact, "judge the world" and "shall judge angels" one day when the Lord comes again to end all evil of this age and to redeem all His chosen children.

I pray that we not loose sight of the fact that it is God who will decide our eternal place of residency. That is a judgment we can not make and dare not make. We'd better not judge one another, in this sense, by claiming a person is going to Heaven or going to Hell for, in so doing, we attempt to put ourselves in the Lord's place. I think He'll put us in our place if we do that!