Israeli / Palestinian connundrum

The editorial cartoon above was created by David Horsey. But, when Father Orthoduck saw it, it reminded him of an ongoing morality study online. In typical psychology fashion, the designers of the questionnaire put it together in such a way that the people who responded did not know what the researchers were testing until the questionnaire was over. And, the results were basically as above.

Both the questionnaire and the above cartoon are very careful to picture a fully innocent family. Therefore, whether they were a Palestinian or an Israeli family, any injury to them would have been “damage” to innocents. Half of the questionnaires described the family as Arab and half as Israeli. And, the results were troubling, to say the least. Uniformly, if the family was described as Palestinian, then over 50% of the respondents in the USA saw them as in some way being somehow deserving of what they get. If the family was described as Israeli, then over 50% of the respondents saw them as innocent victims. In other words, despite the “facts” given in the questionnaire that this mythical family was innocent, “guilt” was assigned depending on the cultural group to which the family was perceived as belonging

I am sure that there are those who will tend to argue against the Palestinians that simply by being in Gaza or the West Bank, they are guilty by association. Please be aware that this type of argumentation is the same type as that which Hamas and Hezbollah use. They also argue that any Israeli civilian is guilty simply because they live in Israel. In either case, by assigning guilt in this way, it makes it easier for us to countenance innocent civilian deaths. We do not have to defend ourselves if the deaths are somehow a deserving retribution upon those who died.

Father Orthoduck is not naïve. It is impossible to conduct a war without innocent deaths. That is what makes war so horrible. Nevertheless, while it may be necessary for a country to go to war, it should never do so without due care for the non-belligerent civilian population. In fact, that is one of the requirements for a just war according to St. Augustine. A “prince” is required to use the minimum force necessary in order to win the war. A deliberate and reckless disregard for the civilian population can change a war from just to unjust, according to St. Augustine.

That is why it is so important that we always check ourselves and our assumptions. Whenever we find ourselves lumping everyone in a country together under the sobriquet of “guilty” we have most certainly sinned. In fact, Prophet Ezekiel carefully warns us: “The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.” Whenever we begin to see entire populations as being guilty, we stop being just and we become unjust.

As you have watched the election in Iran and the marches of protest afterwards, has your image of the Iranians changed? Did you tend to lump them together into one vast mass of Muslim extremism and terrorism? Are you now aware that there are hundreds of thousands of Iranians who are very innocent Muslims and who want their human rights every bit as badly as we want our human rights? If your viewpoint on Iranians changed strongly during this past week, that is probably a sign that you need to repent of unjust views. You probably also need to examine yourself on other views that you hold about other populations, races, ethnics, language groups, etc., lest you be found wanting on the day when all shall be brought to light.