iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jonathan Merritt

Jonathan Merritt

Posted: April 8, 2010 12:10 PM

Today, American President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the most expansive nuclear arms treaty in more than 10 years. The new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) comes after a year of negotiations between the U.S. and Russia on the subject. It will eliminate some of our outdated weaponry and reduce the size of both countries' nuclear arsenals. Deployed strategic weapons (i.e., missiles and bombs) will go down from 2,200 to 1,550, and delivery vehicles (i.e., bombers, silos, and submarines) will drop to 800.

"There are approximately 20,000 nuclear weapons in the world today -- 95 percent of which are in the United States and Russia -- but even one detonation would cause unimaginable suffering and loss of innocent life, as well as environmental and financial fallout," stated the Rev. Tyler Wigg-Stevenson, an expert on the ethics of nuclear weapons policy and Director of the Two Futures Project, a growing movement of American Christians dedicated to the moral imperative of nuclear abolition. "We firmly believe that the ratification of the START treaty is a critically important step that the Senate can take to improve American citizens' security from nuclear conflict, especially the threat of nuclear terrorism."

Moving toward a world free of nuclear weapons was the dream of President Ronald Reagan and is supported by Reagan's former Secretary of State, George Shultz.

I think this treaty makes us safer and is consistent with the divine call upon Christians to be peacemakers, which is why I added my voice to a Christian movement supporting the signing of the START treaty. I commented, "Implementing the new START agreement is significant because it reduces the massive stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world and increases existing weapons monitoring. Christians are compelled by our holy Scriptures and the example of our Lord Jesus Christ to work toward peace in a fallen world literally hell-bent on waging war."

To learn a Christian perspective on nuclear weapons, check out The Two Futures Project.

Jonathan Merritt is author of Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Our Planet. He blogs regularly at JonathanMerritt.com.

 
 
 

Follow Jonathan Merritt on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jonathanmerritt

Today, American President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the most expansive nuclear arms treaty in more than 10 years. The new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) comes ...
Today, American President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the most expansive nuclear arms treaty in more than 10 years. The new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) comes ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 131
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
07:42 AM on 04/15/2010
Sometimes war is necessary. I'm glad Obama sees that.
01:56 PM on 04/11/2010
Oh Jeez. What will it be next, "Evangelicals for Puppies and Soft Icecream?" As a former Evangelical and ex-minister I remember there is only One Future: An eternal megachurch service in heaven with the White, English-speaking JC and endless renditions of Amazing Grace. Seriously, aren't we all a bit weary of this group and that religion ostensibly waking up to issues that affect everyone? Why not show some enlightened and rational progress and create coalitions that are truly Pro-Life, that is, pro-disarmament, pro-peace, pro-diversity, etc. Oh, I forgot. Those who call themselves "Good News" people have one agenda: make more disciples. Ultimately they would have to sing, Praise God for mushroom clouds.
03:20 PM on 04/11/2010
I'm really curious why you got into ministry - and out of it.
07:41 AM on 04/15/2010
I'm curious HOW you got in ministry.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EricEFNY
08:08 PM on 04/09/2010
"The second point of criticism would be that the new counting rules discount a lot of weapons systems that could really add to the American strategic offensive nuclear power. First of all, in contrast to START I which counted each bomber as one delivery system carrying ten or more warheads, (depending on whether that was a bomber with cruise missiles, and the different number of cruise missiles). The new treaty apparently counts each bomber as one delivery system, and one warhead. So it would easily fit under the ceiling of 1550 and 700. However, in fact, each bomber does not carry one nuclear weapon, but may carry ten, or fourteen, or even twenty cruise missiles and gravity bombs. That would be another point of criticism."- http://carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=40506

“"I really have no response. Because last I checked, Sarah Palin's not much of an expert on nuclear issues," President Obama. Based on his misguided reasoning, it is logical to assume neither is he. By the way the new agreement counts one bomber equals one nuclear bomb.

Last time I checked.........not!:

Russia's TU-160 bomber specs:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/tu160/

B2 Spirit US Bomber specs:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/b2/

The "new" START treaty claims to reduce the numbers...Not so much. It is a great PR stunt and that is all it is.”
05:36 PM on 04/09/2010
Lots of Evangelicals are for nuclear disarmament, likely most of them. It's the Evangelical fundamentalists who are the problem. There is a very big and very real difference.
02:04 PM on 04/09/2010
why consult evangelicals about ANYTHING??? Once they are infected with that disease, their rational brain is hijacked, they very predictably become the same thing for all intents and purposes and because of this, they forfeit their right to have their opinions considered to be valid. For a valuable, valid opinion of something you need someone with the ability to actually think, not just robotic-ally tow some 'party line'. who cares what they think? Of all groups on earth, you have chosen the one that cannot and does not think for itself and whos input is useless to any real discussion of anything.
06:14 PM on 04/09/2010
Evangelicals are not all the same. They represent many different opinions and viewpoints. Some are even - gasp - liberals.
12:32 AM on 04/11/2010
NO, they are not. No liberal would be that fkd up
10:05 AM on 04/11/2010
Yeah but they vote as a block.
03:42 PM on 04/11/2010
Who votes as a block? Evangelicals? Conservatives?
11:41 AM on 04/09/2010
Well of course they would because if anyone is going to bring the end of time it would be them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hollybork
08:25 AM on 04/09/2010
Evangelicals support and applaud Peace?! They think it is good to get rid of nuclear weapons. Then why did we have them all this time, for heaven's sake. What does this mean? I am confused. Have they changed their religion about rapture, blood atonement, separating the sheep from the charred goats, and bringing on armageddon from the end of a warhea? I cannot believe my ears. Finally something from the people of the tribe of perpetual war about following the Prince of Peace.
10:06 AM on 04/11/2010
It is a New Age.
photo
ionthegravity
Life is 100% fatal
09:38 PM on 04/08/2010
Isn't this contradictory to the whole end of the world, Rapture thing? All I see is these so-called Christians "checking out" to wait for the end of the world to go flying off into the sky, or some garbage.
10:09 AM on 04/11/2010
Peter Tosh - Legalize it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOEgjkfuMOg&feature=related
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bcasey11
go veg
09:31 PM on 04/08/2010
i wish obama stood up against war
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:11 AM on 04/09/2010
he has to win in 2012 too, 2001 is too near a memory, u guys need an enemy, im sure he hates it but we know he will swallow a lot of crap to get any progress, he has no choice.

u do realise that if obama plays this very cleverly the liberal to conservatiive ratio could flip by the time he leaves, give him time.

i mean look at how pathetic the tea partiers look, just give them enough rope.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zbowling
software engineer, geek
07:53 PM on 04/10/2010
Bcasey11 says "I wish obama stood up against war"
and your retort is " u guys need an enemy". You projected something on to him that comes from within yourself. You have created an enemy out of whole cloth, without consider what he said.

Obama chose to start a full fledged committed war, but you make excuses for him:
"im sure he hates it"
"but we know"
"he will swallow a lot of crap to get any progress"
"he has no choice." -- excuse making and projection.

He always has a choice, but its not his life or death, just his candidacy.

You: "u do realise that if obama plays this very cleverly the liberal to conservatiive ratio could flip by the time he leaves, give him time."

The largest D majority in decades. Polls say it will "flip". 1 term is enough to judge what he has done with his mandate.

11 dimensional chess theory: pretending others are too stupid to see the wisdom or super intelligence behind the moves, Obama must be thinking many moves ahead of us mere mortals.

Yours is the language of a "true believer" of a cult of personality.

Partisan arguments work for politicians and the party system. We, the proletarians vote, but aren't part of the party but made to feel like you are, until you make demands. Then they turn their faithful brownshirt true believers upon the dissenters.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bcasey11
go veg
09:25 PM on 04/08/2010
I believe that god is an import issue... and so is peace
08:34 PM on 04/08/2010
Oh men. I'm conflicted. I think all religions should be abolished, but I guess it's ok for a religious group to believe in doing the right thing about nuclear weapons.I 'll just ignore their flying sugardaddy beliefs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fedupinfla
In a kennel full of dogs, I bark the loudest
03:46 AM on 04/09/2010
I'd believe in the flying spaghetti monster if it means ridding the world of the biggest threat known to man!
06:30 AM on 04/09/2010
the biggest threat known to man is religion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zbowling
software engineer, geek
05:58 PM on 04/10/2010
better that they associate taking care of the earth with God, because it's a type of universalism, one step beyond secular humanism. IMO.. seeing all creatures as equally deserving of life as humans and the earth as a gift from god (or creation, or a part of the whole).

Rather that ban religions it would be better to require philosophy, theology, history, mythology, and the arts, and learning the scientific principles of theory.
We should require serious study of the original religious texts, comparisons with ancient religions to show how Buddhism, hinduism, paganism, and especially judaism, christianity are syncretist religions that were used and changed for political purposes, elitist control, and population integration to encourage peace over conquered lands.
Serious study will create more atheists, not laws that outlaw religion.
08:33 PM on 04/08/2010
Amen!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
1088
08:25 PM on 04/08/2010
Not according to Palin and the tea baggers, they want Nuclear war!
12:05 PM on 04/09/2010
Palin just wants money. The tea baggers just want attention.

I doubt any of them want nuclear war.
10:11 AM on 04/11/2010
Lets ask them.
08:24 PM on 04/08/2010
I was in second grade during the Cuban missile incident and remember all those nuke drills we went through in grade school that gave me nuclear nightmares for years after they made watch all old films of nuclear tests. Anymore I'm more worried about bio-chem than nukes and all the strange chem-trails over this country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zbowling
software engineer, geek
06:03 PM on 04/10/2010
Do you know that chemtrails are only water condesation? There is smog produced from the fuel burnoff, but it's being burned. The way to get chemicals into the air like the chemtrail conspiracy theorists speculate would be through the use of a crop duster type dispersal system.
10:27 AM on 04/11/2010
You are misguided, nukes are still more dangerous.
07:52 PM on 04/08/2010
The opinion of evangelicals on anything is worthless. No longer able to think rationally, they are now robots and everything they believe is totally predictable, so completely predictable that their opinion is invalid. Evangelicals will never contribute anything of value to any discussion.
01:33 PM on 04/09/2010
Really? This column is worthless? So if evangelicals speak as "hawks" it's worthless and if they speak as "doves" it's worthless? That's an inherently irrational position.
02:10 PM on 04/09/2010
I think christianity is irrational and terribly damaging (as are most other religions), but many christians, aside from their religious beliefs, are smart and decent people with much to contribute. It just seems as though the "religion" part of the brain gets compartmentalized since in every other area of life we require evidence before we believe it. but I would never want to say that the contribution from any person is useless. For example, if christians want to prevent nuclear war and help the poor, I'm all for it. I just don't see why we need biblical backup for these beliefs when it's abundantly obvious why we should fight for these things.