By Sarah Pulliam Bailey | Religion News Service August 7
at 2:12 PM
Prominent conservative voices are criticizing the
decision to bring two medical missionaries who contracted Ebola back to the
United States for treatment.
Real estate mogul Donald Trump and retired neurosurgeon
Dr. Ben Carson were both critical of bringing the infected missionaries back to
the U.S. Columnist Ann Coulter went further, questioning why the missionaries
were working in the “disease-ridden cesspools” of Africa.
Dr. Kent Brantly, with Samaritan’s Purse, and Nancy
Writebol, with Service in Mission, are medical missionaries who were infected
with Ebola while working with patients in Liberia. They are being treated at
Emory University Hospital in Atlanta.
If Dr. Brantly had practiced at Cedars-Sinai hospital in
Los Angeles andturned one single Hollywood power-broker to Christ, he would
have done more good for the entire world than anything he could accomplish in a
century spent in Liberia,” Coulter wrote in a column.
But the professional provocateur is facing a backlash
from the mainstream Christian establishment, especially evangelicals, for whom
overseas missionary work is an article of faith.
“St. Thomas should have never gone to India and Jim
Elliott should have never gone into the jungle. Sigh,” conservative columnist
Erick Erickson shot back at Coulter on Twitter.
Samaritan’s Purse, which is run by Franklin Graham,
declined to comment on the criticisms directed at Brantly and others. Service
in Mission was unavailable for comment.
Denny Burk, a biblical studies professor at Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary, said Coulter was dishing out “pagan foolishness”
and shouldn’t be a go-to source for the theology of mission work. Andrew Walker
from the Southern Baptists’ Ethics &?038; Religious Liberty Commission
called her remarks “absolutely reprehensible, Christ-denying vitriol.”
Yes America's Christian conservatives have finally found Christ and have turned on the Dragon Lady Ann Coulter. It's about time with the comments that have been coming out of this piece of shit lately.
ReplyDeleteOh and Ben Carson had his two bit comment to make.
ReplyDeletehttp://global.christianpost.com/news/why-would-we-bring-that-into-our-country-dr-ben-carson-says-he-wouldnt-have-brought-ebola-infected-missionaries-to-us-124495/
And the Donald gets a quarter for his rant
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/03/donald-trump-ebola-doctors_n_5646424.html
62% of Americans agree with the decision to bring our people home for care.
To be a conservative, it seems, is to live in perpetual fear of what you are going to lose if you help someone out.
ReplyDelete"The bottom line, according to the MIT study, was that "liberals are no more or less generous than conservatives once we adjust for differences in church attendance and income."
Deletehttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-conservatives-or-liberals-20140331-story.html
What does church attendance have to do with generosity? Makes you feel obligated? What's wrong with compassion and helping out just because it's the right thing to do.
DeleteOh you mean the sort of compassion that's liberal with other peoples money and property. Now I get you.
DeleteDid I say I would take anything from you.
DeleteI guess by your response Max is right on isn't he.
DeleteYou didn't have to say you'd be generous with other people's property. I know you will vote for those who do.
DeleteI guess by your response Max is right.
Delete"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
ReplyDeleteTo bad it's not about you Rick.
Max,
Being conservative is much like being liberal. Means different things to different people. As all liberals do not embrace every progressive principal, not every conservative embraces every conservative principal. But here, it's all about labels and categorizing people which is what this government wants so badly. Us against them.
Hiya Lou :-)
DeleteGreat post, and I agree, but let me ask you a follow-up qualifying question: Do you think it's the "goverment" itself that wants to label and divide, or do you think it's the money behind the scenes that buys legislation, moves us to war, etc., that's implementing the "divide and conquer" on the American electorate?
I'm drawing a distinction here. The "government" is what we make it, good or bad. You know that I've always believed that it's the cash flow into our electoral politics that corrupts our government and creates the ridiculous shit show that our government (especially congress) has become.
I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.
Lou you are just an asshole period.
DeleteThanks Rick. Confirms your a true progressive, name calling and of course blame someone else for your own failings.
DeleteWhat you think everything is about you? How self centered.
At one time those that served in government did it because they wanted to serve their country and help their fellow Americans. Enter the professional politician.
ReplyDeletePoliticians serve because:
1. It's a job.
2. It's all about power.
3. The ego reigns supreme.
To attain that status of professional politician, it takes money, not chump change but real money. What did Obama spend in his re-election big a billion dollars for a job that pays 400K a year plus the bennies and of course AF1. Is it just a job, no it's all about power, ego. Guess the job part is out the window as well as serving the American people. To spend that kind of money, it takes deep pockets, their monied interests.
How to retain power? How to convince the masses that you are the best person for the job while serving the monied interests? Saying so just doesn't get it. Divide the country? Seems to have worked pretty well, wouldn't you say?
Politicians:
1. Serve them selves.
2. Serve their monied interests.
3. Serve the [arty.
4. The people if it doesn't conflict with 1-3.
As to labeling and dividing, it's a tactic to be used to be elected or re-elected.
And yes, money corrupts the political process be it corporate dollars, labor dollars, special interest dollars or the wealthy, not to mention the people, want free, vote for me.