Christians and Nuclear Deterrent

Mark Tooley has an opinion piece on politically advocating for nations with the bomb to disarm.  Our mortal lives are precious, but the passage from Daniel testifies to surrendering our goods and even our bodies to remain in harmony with a divine creation that is ever more precious.  In the end, I cannot advocate for a government to abdicate defense and impose that policy on people who are not freely choosing to go all in on Jesus' way.

My comment:

Mark30339| 3.21.13 @ 2:20PM

I take no pride in assenting here. The article and comments certainly do hold logic, but should show more compassion for the unfortunate Japanese civilians who suffered horribly from deployment of our nuclear powers. Our material lives are of such a value that we wish to harbor destructive powers that presumably frighten and coerce potential invaders. Yet our Judeo-Christian tradition harkens back to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed'nego, who refused to be coerced by the the fearsome Nebuchadnez'zar. They "yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God." If we are both Christian and supportive of the nuclear deterent, let us at least acknowledge the embarrassment of being too feeble in faith to face our enemies with the same forgiving and weaponless grace that Jesus modeled for us.

chemman| 3.21.13 @ 6:22PM

You are mixing up what we as individuals are called to do in the face of our individual enemies with that which a nation is called to do. They are not necessarily the same.

Mark30339| 3.22.13 @ 6:20PM

Or rather, they are not necessarily different things. I cannot advocate for our government to unilaterally disarm because that kind of faith leap can't be imposed on a population by decree. But it embarrasses me that we enjoy our peace and security because we are willing to rain down nuclear annihilation on other populations. Note that the citizenry of Poland was counseled to resist and confront non-violently. It was not just a coincidence that the US was applying pressures on the Soviets without provoking armed conflict. Reagan and John Paul II (and especially their staffs) were in constant coordination in this non-violent confrontation. See The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism by Paul Kengor (Sep 18, 2007) and its related youtube speech at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqjQadIE954.