Gone Camp'n with Jesus

"Let me say something about Harry Potter. Warlocks are enemies of God… Had it been in the Old Testament, Harry Potter would have been put to death! You don't make heroes out of warlocks!" -Pastor Becky Fischer, Camp Director

Last night I watched the documentary Jesus Camp. Intrigued by nothing more than the title, I thought it would be appropriate for the Easter holiday. The film examines the evangelical culture of the mid-west United States by following several children during their stay at the “Kids on Fire School of Ministry”, located at Devil’s Lake, North Dakota. While I believe the film presents the subjects with a negative bias, it is still quite an eye opener. To be honest, it scared the hell out of me. Forsure, I don`t see eye to eye with the political and social views of much of the religious right, but the thing that bothered me in this film was the manipulation of children. It seems to me that these children never get a chance to develop their own ideas, opinions, or beliefs. While I understand that children will naturally develop similar views and values as their parents, there is something very different taking place here. The children in this film are not being influenced by their parents, they are being brainwashed. They simply don’t have a chance. From an early age these children are manipulated to believe certain ideas and reject all others, creating a culture of no tolerance or acceptance. Believe and act as your parents, or go to hell. Quite literally, this is what is being taught to these children and the consequences are huge. I won’t go into details, but this film is definitely worth the watch. I would love to hear what others think.

Presidential Power and the War on Terror

When you are in the business of being the President of the United States, war isn’t always a bad thing; after all, you are the commander in chief of the armed forces. Indeed, President Bush has become an extremely powerful man over the last six years. The “war on terror” has allowed the President to use his role as commander in chief to wage war in Iraq, while infringing on fundamental civil liberties in the United States. Bush routinely cites the war on terror as legitimate cause for holding suspected terrorists without trial, torturing them, and even spying on the American public. Of course, this is nothing new in American politics. Presidents as far back as Lincoln right through to Roosevelt, Truman and Nixon have used war to increase the power of the American executive.

However, there is an important difference between these presidents and the current head of state. While the war in Iraq will eventually come to an end, the war on terror could conceivable last for decades. Traditionally, when presidents use war as a pretext for extending their powers, they are brought back in line by Congress when the conflict has finished. Think of it as a pendulum. During war, it swings toward the presidency, giving him the power to carry out his duties as commander in chief, exercising “executive prerogative”, if you will. After the conflict has ended, Congress traditionally re-asserts its power, effectively swinging the pendulum back. This is a relatively healthy system, each branch of government keeping the other in check, as was intended by the framers of the Constitution. President Bush, however, seems to have found a loop hole. The war on terror has no definite enemy, no definite battlefield, and can never be fully won. Theoretically, presidents for decades to come could use the war on terror to legitimize the extension of the president’s power, permanently keeping the pendulum with the presidency.

Recently, the Senate passed a bill to begin to cut funding for the Iraq mission, which stipulates that soldiers must begin to withdraw in the next four months. It seems that Congress is finally attempting to pull in the reins on President Bush. But even if Congress pulls America out of Iraq, it does not mean the war on terror is over. If Congress truly hopes to keep the presidency in check, it must pass legislation limiting the possible long term implications of such an open ended war. It is, after all the duty of Congress to keep a “check” on the President.