TEXAS FAITH: Does just war theory legitimize Anwar al-Aulaqi's slaying?

It is our duty to keep law and order and faithfully guard the safety our citizens. Hate is one of the many sources of disrupting peace in a society and it is our responsibility to track down the source of such hate and work on mitigating it. If we cannot achieve that, we have the right to eliminate it. Dallas Morning News publishes opinions of the Panelists and I am pleased to one of the Texas Faith Panelists addressing the issues on a weekly basis. Here is my take. http://theghousediary.blogspot.com/2011/10/texas-faith-does-just-war-theory.html

MIKE GHOUSE, President, Foundation for Pluralism, Dallas

Anwar Al-Awlaki is gone, his death has brought a relief that the terrorist outfit Al-Qaeda has lost its backbone and a hope for a world free from terrorism is on the horizon. Al-Awlaki is an American charismatic preacher alleged to have influenced Major Nidal Hasan who killed 13 members of the Army in a rampage at Ft. Hood, the attempted Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and the underwear bomber Abdulmutallab. He was considered a threat to the security of the people of the United States.

This is indeed good news with a grain of salt.

It is our duty to keep law and order and faithfully guard the safety our citizens. Hate is one of the many sources of disrupting the peace in a society and it is our responsibility to track down the source of such hate and work on mitigating it. If we cannot achieve that, we have the right to eliminate it.

Indeed, there is partial justification in killing this man. However, the larger question remains about the character of our nation. Is this the kind of country that we want and is it constitutional? Rule of law is always sustainable and the guarantor of the safety and security of individuals in a society. Infringements of the law violates the rule.

The just war theory lists four strict conditions. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraph 2309, states these conditions:

1.The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
2.All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
3.There must be serious prospects of success;
4.The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power as well as the precision of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

Although we have met the first condition, we have failed on the other three. We have relied upon our gun powder and not our ability to find solutions through a serious dialogue. We need to realize that the nations rise and fall and each one of the nations is vulnerable.

The end of Al-Awlaki seriously kills the prospects of success of Al-Qaeda, but the basics of injustice in that part of the world remain inflamed. President Obama's political decision to deny the statehood to Palestine and the subsequent settlement permits in Jerusalem keep people frustrated. If that cannot be channeled through a dialogue, it will be expressed through disruptions, which is the only option Obama has offered them. We have fueled unrest and that is a grave mistake against safety of Israel and justice to Palestinians, the mother of all violence.

As a nation we want to seriously ask ourselves, do we need to give our president the right to fly from his pants or demand that he follows and upholds the Constitution? We let our former president wage a reckless war against Iraq with not a single legitimate reason and have witnessed the destruction of our own economy, death of our soldiers and death of Innocent Iraqis, widowed women on the streets of Iraq and foreclosures and job losses at home.

Here is the Fifth Amendment. Has the President followed it? Shall we make an exception for him?

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

This time seven Texas Faith panelists address the question including mine, please visit Dallas Morning News and write your take on the issue at: http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/10/texas-faith-does-just-war-theo.html

# #
Mike Ghouse is committed to building a cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day to the media and the public. He is a speaker thinker and a writer on the topics of pluralism, cohesive societies, Politics, Islam, interfaith, India and Peace. Over a thousand articles have been published on the topics and two of his books are poised to be released on Pluralism and Islam. Mike's work is reflected in 4 website's and 27 Blogs indexed at http://www.mikeghouse.net/ and you can find all of his current articles at www.TheGhousediary.com