I try not to talk about it, and I expect no one to agree with me (at best!), but I pretty much disagree with our current administration’s foreign policies (as well as related domestic ones). I have nothing but sympathy, for example, for many “anti-American” statements coming from the Bishop of Durham. Of course, at one level I think life would be easier in some areas if he would keep his mouth shut. But it is not Wright’s job to make my life easier. And, at another level, if we live in a culture where rationality has been replaced by guilt-by-association reactions, then I figure it is God’s judgment on us that we can’t understand him, just as the natives of Jerusalem only heard drunken speech on day of Pentecost.
But sympathy is not the same as agreement.
Say what you will about our current occupation of Iraq. I don’t think it would be preferable to give the country over the the US-taxpayer sponsored International Association of Rapists, Pimps, and Slavers who have never proven themselves good for anything except disarming populations so they could be controlled or killed by aggressors.
Why yes, as a matter of fact I have been proofreading a book about the UN and gun control. What made you ask?
By the way, the UN has never presided over genocide. The administration has always been able to somehow avoid “genocide” even in the midst of mass exterminations based on race. If they did ever have to deal with genocide then their priority in getting rid of “light weapons” would be a direct violation of their own international law and itself genocide. Good thing they’ve never had to deal with genocide! Otherwise, they might have to pull back on their disarm-all-civilians agenda.