Walter Hinteler wrote:
Note that even in Germany, the Catholics and Protestants tend to inhabit different sections.
That tended to be, correct, due to cuius regio eius religio
. And that ended in 1806.
The U.S. being a Protestant nation is what allows Jews to be given a "fair shake," in my opinion, in the U.S.
The majority of Americans (76% to 80%) identify themselves as Christians. ...
... the five largest denominations are:
The Catholic Church, 68,503,456 members
The Southern Baptist Convention, 16,160,088 members
The United Methodist Church, 7,774,931 members
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6,058,907 members
The Church of God in Christ, 5,499,875 members
Roman Catholics: 24.472.817
Evangelical Church of Germany: 23.896.089 (data as of 28.08.2012Source
So, it seems like a nation (the U.S.) with a vast majority of Christians is using drones that upset you? How come your "Christian" teachings didn't seem to be effecting the use of drones by the U.S.?
Again, it appears to me that you are making the claim that Christianity is all the same. It is balkanized. The U.S. was a white Protestant nation prior to 1850(except for Black slaves - that would be a bigger sin than any drone attacks). When Catholics came from Europe (to man the assembly lines, or be some other sort of manual labor) the Protestants were able to industrialize the nation. Now today, Catholics and Protestants both contribute to the country's welfare. However, in my opinion, Protestants still have the largest stake, wealth wise in the nation. So, if you do not like drones, there are many Christians, Protestant or Catholic to complain to. I have no input to the course of this nation.
But, in my initial analogy that the life of one U.S. pilot, in my opinion, is more valued than those children that you say were casualties in drone attacks, also forgets that U.S. pilots have families. Yes, I value a U.S. pilot's children and wife more than those unfortunate children that were casualties.
In my opinion, your rhetoric makes me wonder if the U.S. was completely wise to effect the Berlin airlift, considering the U.S. was willing to not let the Soviets starve West Germany into submission, only six years after Germany had been a declared enemy. Does the U.S. meet your standards for ethical behavior by not vanquishing its prior enemy (Germany) and then helping them survive the Soviet threat?
Lastly, were any children casualties in the firebombing of Dresden, or Hiroshima, or Nagasaki? Do the math. Drone casualties do not compare to those military actions. But, if you would claim that a drone attack is as bad as the firebombing of Dresden, I might understand that logic.