Cindy Sheehan is one of hundreds of grieving moms whose children have been killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. What is unique about Mrs. Sheehan is that she once met President Bush shortly after her son was killed, and now she has been camped out in Crawford TX outside President Bush's ranch. She is demanding that Mr. Bush speak with her as she stands outside with the press and other war protesters accusing the President of having "killed" her son.
Columnist Maureen Dowd recently wrote that Mrs. Sheehan had "absolute" moral authority to speak out against this war since she has suffered so in the loss of her son. However, another gentleman, Mr. Ronald Griffin, has also lost a son in this war. He states, "I grieve with Mrs. Sheehan, for all too well I know the full measure of the agony she is forever going to endure. I honor her son for his service and sacrifice. However, I abhor all that she represents and those who would cast her as the symbol for parents of our fallen soldiers."
Mr. Griffin also directed some of his comments toward Ms. Dowd and her statement of "absolute" moral authority being possessed only by those whose loved ones have died over there. Do these grieving parents somehow have more to say than those whose loved one have survived?
We learned many lessons from the war in Vietnam, not the least of which was one lesson in which it is extremely difficult to protest a war without protesting the participants. I remember one giant banner at a protest in Washington DC during the Vietnam era which stated, "SUPPORT OUR TROOPS. BRING THEM HOME." From this we have surely learned that as we express our concerns about the current war against terror, we must choose our words carefully - and control our emotions - so that while we ask questions, we do not ultimately do harm to those who have fought, those who will soon fight, and those who are currently fighting. These brave men and women must never doubt that an entire nation prays for them constantly.
Grief is a powerful emotion that can sometimes bring out the worst in us. I wrote yesterday about comments that Arkansans had made about the BTK killer in Kansas and what "justice" should actually come to him. Surely in this case, the good people who lost loved ones at the hands of this guy have more to say about what should have happened than we who are so far removed. This does not mean that we should not express concern for the criminal justice system. Kansas is not the only state to suffer from a serial killer or crime in general.
Making a claim for "absolute" moral authority, however, can be dangerous. Columnist Kathleen Parker wrote that "while no human being has absolute moral authority on this or any other issue, the 'theory' of moral authority means that those who bury their loved ones have a right to complain and to have their voices heard. In 'practice', however, it means that people lost in their emotions get a pass from the usual standards of debate and fair play."
I think that one does not need "absolute" moral authority to express concerns about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I expressed my reservations long before the US rolled into Iraq even as I knew that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous man with a lot of resources and questionable ties to forces outside his private little kingdom. Did my service as a US Marine grant me "absolute" moral authority to question the decision to invade? No. My citizenship in this nation grants me the absolute RIGHT, if not the outright obligation, to question those who run this country IN MY BEHALF. I am a citizen, not a serf.
I cannot question Mrs. Sheehan's motives for camping out at the President's ranch for I am well aware that we all grieve in our own way. She has at least temporarily abandoned her "post" for her sick mom, but the filing for divorce by her husband did not seem to phase her. She did not rush home for that.
The only point I hope to make by such an observation is that grief, regardless of the cause, cannot grant to any of us an "absolute" right to anything other than our grief. Too often our emotions can run away with us, and we become "absolutely" unreasonable and irrational. This is what makes protesting under the influence of emotion so dangerous. We are unreasonable and irrational and in the end, we do more harm than good. We direct our anger and our grief only where our emotion will send it. I think perhaps this is what happened to our troops in Vietnam when they returned. The protesters did not have ready access to our government, so they directed their anger, their emotions, toward the next best thing: the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines who returned home.
May we learn from our past. Amen.
Comments