What Would King Have Said About Saddam?

By Richard Land - Mar 19, 2003 - comment

Is the enemy of the anti-war movement Saddam Hussein, or President Bush?

Martin Luther King Jr. once said of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the martyred World War II pastor, “if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.”

As was the case so many times on so many controversial issues, King spoke eloquently to the issue of when, if ever, violence was justified. Bonhoeffer — Lutheran theologian, ethicist, and pastor — had once been a pacifist. However, confronted by the relentless evil that was Hitler and the Nazis, he joined the resistance, including their plot to assassinate Hitler in 1944. Arrested by the Gestapo, Bonhoeffer was executed by hanging at Flossenberg concentration camp one month before Germany’s surrender in 1945.

After the war, Bonhoeffer’s fame and influence grew, undergirded by the fact that he lived out his belief in “costly grace” and direct confrontation with political evil. His martyrdom underscored the authenticity of his message. Bonhoeffer’s legacy impacted millions of people in the last half of the 20th century, including King.

As Bonhoeffer, and evidently King, came to understand, when your enemy has a basic moral structure which can be appealed to, and a conscience that can be troubled — as with Gandhi and the British in India, and King and racially segregated America — then disciplined non-violent disobedience and demonstration against injustice must be the morally superior path. However, when your enemy, in his implacable evil, has no conscience, then violence may be permissible and necessary.

With Saddam Hussein, we are dealing with a sadomasochistic sociopath who has murdered his way to absolute power. His hero is Joseph Stalin, a man who rivals Hitler in the annals of perpetrators of monstrous evil. Hussein has used weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors and his own people. He has ignored and defied United Nations resolutions and continues to subject his people to the privations from UN sanctions in his attempt to conceal present versions, and to acquire ever more deadly models, of weapons of mass destruction.

I ask those who demonstrate and protest this potential war to contemplate this question. Is their opponent President Bush or Saddam Hussein? If their opponent is Bush, then protest peacefully, because he has a conscience to which they may appeal as Gandhi did against the British Raj and King did against segregationists. But if the enemy is a conscience-less Hussein—as I believe he is—then, like Bonhoeffer, do we not have a moral imperative to use force to oppose such evil?

Further Learning

Learn more about: Citizenship, War

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com