THE NEW CRUSADES

By: Xaivier Martin

When President Bush first began his seriously lobbying for "faith-based" initiatives in 2002, I thought to myself, "He's obviously catering to his base of evangelicals and conservative Christians." I figured a few small provisions would get through, but nothing major, because with all the religious ranting and raving, the U.S. is still steeped in a strong belief in individual rights and religious freedom.

Next, Bush moved his domestic policy of protecting the homeland to a foreign policy of liberating nations under tyrannical and volatile rule in the interest of "spreading democracy." The need to hunt down Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden became the need to oust Saddam Hussein and has now become the need to establish an Iraqi Democracy. Being the person I am, I'd like to believe in Bush's desire to do the right thing and help those in need. Still, there are two glaring omissions from this "goodwill tour" that make me skeptical: 1. There are people in the U.S. (the country Bush was elected to lead) that don't know what democracy is and yet we're using armed forces to make sure another nation understands and participates in it. 2. There are people in other nations like the Sudan (genocide) and the nations of southern Africa (AIDS) who have actually asked for and could probably use the U.S.'s help a little more than the Iraqi people.

And it was with the U.S. House passage of the act allowing "faith-based" organizations to hire and fire based on a person’s religious belief that really made me stop and think. I began thinking about everything that has been going on in the last few years and how it might be connected. My conclusion: We may be looking at a modern version of "The Crusades."

The original Crusades sought to cleanse the world of heretics and spread the word of God throughout those allegedly barbaric and underdeveloped areas. Whether be it through the spreading of Democracy or empowering of faith-based groups, the New Crusade promises to be just a tumultuous and divisive for this county as its predecessor's was on the world.

The Republican agenda in the last six months has consisted of creating a democratic Iraq, spreading democracy to every unstable nation in the world, giving faith-based groups immunity in following equal rights legislation and placing the Ten Commandments and other scriptures in front of courthouses.

Meanwhile, President Bush's first bold move of domestic policy, No Child Left Behind, has proven to be as effective as a pacifist in a bar brawl. Social Security is claimed to be broke in 2041, but quite a few members of his own party want no part of Bush’s proposed extreme makeover.

In 1620, some of this country's forefathers came to the shores of Massachusetts in search of the reality of religious freedom. In 1776, the social architects of our country created an outline of a society built on reason, checks and balances, and civic responsibility; all without the mention of religion. Yet, here in the 21st Century we find ourselves being divided into those who believe in God and want the right to subject all others to their beliefs and those who don't believe and wish the U.S. to remain a secular society.

How is it that the same party that wants the government to step in and essentially endorse a religion by putting its scripture in front of public courthouses also wants the same government to stay out its gun racks, bank accounts and Social Security? And these same people will explain away any accusations of authorized religious discrimination by saying the display of these scriptures is an affirmation of their faith, not a devaluing of other faiths.

Others might suggest that this is merely the affirmation of the faith that is interwoven throughout the rituals of this country such as the Pledge of Allegiance. After all, it is clearly stated when said,"One nation, under God……" right? Well, those of you who were around during the "Red Scare" that led to the Cold War might remember that the Pledge of Allegiance did not always have the previous line of religious conviction. The "One nation, under God……" was added at the insistence of The Knights of Columbus who suggested the language would help distinguish the U.S. as a righteous and just nation as opposed to the Godless and immoral Communist state of the Soviet Union.

Public officials are elected to write and protect legislation that is created to insure the citizens of this country have every opportunity at life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They are not elected to act as a moral compass or to recommend what kind of relationship I have with my God, should I choose to have a relationship with God.

The character Sen. Vinnick (played Alan Alda) in NBC's
"The West Wing" perfectly articulated the stance of an elected official when addressing the fact that he did not regularly attend church and had not for several years: "I’ll answer any questions you have about my policies or my politics, but if you have questions about faith I suggest you go to a church."

Despite the many efforts of Republicans to suggest that our country is becoming more Godless by the minute, Faith-Based groups got $160,000,000 more from the federal government (Housing and Urban Development, Education, Labor, Justice and Health and Human Services) in 2004 than they did in 2003. Additionally, Faith-Based groups were given an additional $669 million in 2004 by the Department of Agriculture and the Agency for International Development in grants.

Still, a speech given to group of 250 religious leaders gathered at a conference organized by the White House suggests that, maybe it's not an increase in money for Faith-Based groups that President Bush ultimately wants, "Unfortunately, there are some roadblocks -- such as the culture inside government at the federal, state and local level that is unfriendly to faith-based
organizations," Bush later said. "It is said that faith can move mountains. Here in Washington, D.C., those helping the poor and needy often run up against a big mountain called bureaucracy."

Although dealing with completely different things, these words spoken over nine centuries ago sound strangely similar:

"The West must march to the defense of the East. All
should go, rich and poor alike. The Franks must stop
their internal wars and squabbles. Let them go instead against the infidel and fight a righteous war……God himself would lead them, for they would be doing His work. There will be absolution and remission of sins for all who die in the service of Christ. Here they are poor and miserable sinners; there they will be rich and happy. Let none hesitate; they must march next summer. God wills it!"

These words were spoken by Pope Urban II as a rallying cry to the Council of Clermont for what would later be known as The First Crusade. Now, Bush is far from the Pope, but summer is right around the corner.