Can we still claim to be a Righteous and Moral people?

Question

If the answer is Yes, then why have we not individually called into question a President who is responsible for Cruel and Extra-ordinary treatment of *suspected* criminals?

Have we not lost the moral high ground?

Answer 1

We as the American People can still claim to be a Righteous and Moral people. But even Righteous and Moral people make mistakes, and we did so in choosing war-mongering leaders who put lust for power above integrity, careers above morality, wealth above humanity and profits above patriotism.

Some would lie and manipulate truth to foment and escalate a very profitable war, and embezzle billions of dollars (or close their eyes to the loss), despite the cost in lives of thousands of courageous young Americans and countless innocent Iraqi's.

Some would create the illusion of a good economy by piling trillions of dollars in debt upon future generations. Some would ruthlessly cut programs designed to help children, veterans, the elderly, the poor and needy, to funnel billions of dollars of federal money to their wealthy supporters via tax cuts.

Some would destroy the planet to reap huge profits for themselves, regardless of what they're destroying for future generations.

We, the American People, are a Righteous and Moral People. Many of those we elected to the highest offices in our nation, and many of those who run our largest corporations, only pretend to be.

If we don't make the same mistakes the next time we elect our highest leaders, we may be able to maintain the moral high ground in the world. If we do make the same mistakes, much of the world will only remember when America was the great moral leader of the world.

Answer 2

Anyone who claims to be righteous and moral probably isn't. It's all relative anyway. One side claims the other are baby killers when they support abortions and the other side wonders why the first side still thinks capital punishment is okay. Is it just all in the timing? No. There are serious moral issues on both sides and niether side can say that there isn't blood on its hands.

And one war is okay, but another isn't. We celebrate the civil war, but how many people were killed. It freed a people, but it was so bloody. And what about the revolutionary war. We were upset because we didn't want to pay any taxes (taxes which pale in comparison to what we pay today). What about bombing Hiroshima. So many people say that it was immoral to do that, but it probably saved a lot of lives on both sides, because, otherwise, we were going to invade Japan and there would have been over a million casualties on both sides, perhaps several million.

And what about the little known fact that most criminals are mentally ill. Sending them to prison helps very few people and labeling someone a felon ensures the person will be a failure. We have no sympathy for those people. We don't care what problems they have. We just send them off to be warehoused and who cares what happens to them after that. Is that moral? Where are our Democrats when this issue comes up? Mostly to the right of Republicans?

And, frankly, we are such a powerful nation and we could share our wealth with the world and make it such a wonderful place. But wouldn't you really rather have cable so you can watch the latest episode of American Idol??? What does that make us?

The President is no different from the rest of us. I'm not sure why we got into Iraq. I suspect the President really thought there were weapons of mass destruction there. Nevertheless, if we are going to throw stones at the President because he's not Righteous and Moral (whatever that means), I'd ask that the person without sin cast the first stone.

Answer 3

We can claim that ground, however it isn't true. We are no more moral and righteous than any other country, and haven't been since we started killing off the native Americans living here after our arrival. The whole history of our country is nothing but a succession of some group or groups oppressing another. If you really look at it, aren't the terms moral and righteous religions way of oppressing thought? Look at our government and tell me we are a moral and righteous people.

Answer 4

No we can't..how can we, if you look at this country's history, Can I ask this... how can a country be discovered when it was already inhabited therefore was not anyones to be discovered for. The treatment of the American Indian, the slavery inflicted on the blacks, I can go on and on..So you tell me, can we claim as a country to be so righteous and moral, when we have committed in the name of freedom such acts against humanity..Plus what is going on with "suspected" detainees, without due process of law and their mistreatment. The list goes on and on...

Answer 5

Absolutely true. We lost the moral high ground the minute Bush began to hold 'suspected' criminals in prisons, in secret prisons without allowing the Red Cross access to them, without charging them with a crime against the USA, etc...

I use the term criminals, like you, because many of the detainees are not terrorists but are guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time during roundups and some are just assumed guilty by association.

The Supreme Court last July told Bush that he was violating our own war laws by not doing the list I gave.

Answer 6

The suspected criminals you speak of are not classified as suspected criminals. Suspected terrorist would be the correct term and if it takes a few innocent lives that get strong interrogation to eventually get Intel that saves thousands of innocent people around the globe (not only Americans) from a guilty one then I support it and believe it is unequivocally the High Ground you speak of.

The ends truly justify the means!

Answer 7

No we cant, we havent been able to since the founding of the nation when Killing my people was not only condoned but often rewarded! Many a man made his repitation by being an Indian Killer, now they kill babyes in clinics! And some here say I will be gone and deny reporting others and they answered your question, aint that right B...

Answer 8

Gitmo versus beheadings of ordinary civilians? Come on, humanist.

Why not call into question a belief system that calls for forced conversion or execution of the infidel? That's moral?

Is it sad there have been incidents of toture? Yes. War is imperfect.

Answer 9

The "moral high ground was lost when abortion was made legal. Problem is, that the liberals want to protect the terrorists and in the same breath kill an innocent baby. Then have the gall to call our president immoral because they are blinded by hate to even see the truth. "The liberal motto should be changed We are here to kill babies and protect the terrorists because we hate Bush and we hate truth"

Answer 10

I think your confusion comes from thinking that terrorists are suspected criminals, not enemies hell-bent on murdering as many Americans as they can -- even at the price of blowing up there own children for the cause.

Felons are one thing -- we only try them in court after they are suspected of committing crimes. Terrorists have to be handled differently -- we have to stop them BEFORE they can carry out their plans to slaughter us. They are NOT a law enforcement problem.

And if they're captured in a war zone out of uniform shooting at our troops, i feel safe in classifying them as murderous thugs undeserving of our pity.

As to our being a righteous and moral people, hard to make that case when we seem to mimic the Hollywood lifestyle.