I think that supporting the United Nations is not necessarily infringement of christian neutrality.
Why should it be called then as a whole - generalized a "scarlet-coloured wild beast' it only one part is military policy like in any other government?
What do you think of my comparisons.
1) about neutrality
Take a policeman, a soldier, an ambulance man, a laywer of the Home secretary, a nurse of a public hospital, an OSCE military expert for disarming, an expert in refugee aide or an economic expert that invests in poor, unsecure regions..... they work all for peace and security , social and humanitarian stability but each of them in different areas, some in civil committments of peace and security others like the soldier in a military committment of security.
- The policeman could support security by fighting against drugs,- the ambulanceman support security through civil defense,
- The OSCE military expert could work in a special disarming committment and would work out measures to disarm conflict parties or implement equal standards in OSCE Participating states,
- the financial or social expert could through clever investment in stabile companys or schools to hedge new secure jobs and education,
- the "religious law attorney" could carry out a committment for the Ministry of Interior to support the civil security in regard of freedom of belief, assembly or personal freedoms of women or establishing a charity.
- the Ministry of defense would work out military strategies with the NATO.
All these honorable persons would in their own field work for peace and security in different U.N. structures.
>>>Neither does simply the fact that the a single state supports "peace and security" as general policy by various measures mean that a christian citizen cannot be policeman or ambulanceman or laywer in a department like the Home office.
>>>Nor does the fact that the inter-governmental United Nations supports "peace and security" on global level by various different measures not constitute a hindrance to support human rights of freedom of belief or freedom of assembly or implementing fundamental law standars in the countries.
2) Is supporting a project always friendship with the world
Co-ooperation, support, assistance vs membership with the U.N.-"world" does likewise not necessarily mean bad conduct or "friendship"
I try to compare the cooperation with U.N. or OSCE structures on the subject of human rights with working as an employee in a project an this together with other colleagues at a employee meeting.
The personal freedoms, rights and obligations in a project cooperation, the " constitution " of the project could be discussed in a teamwork.
The goal would be secure and peaceful co-operation in the team and in the company, a good living with each other.
And that does certainly not mean that all employees share all values and become friends, e.g. they would not obligated to pray with each other, or to speak a dirty language, or to have unclean conduct with immoral thoughts and relations at the meetings, they wouldn even not be obligated to listen to poor jokes or about the latest developments of the gun possession. It would be simply a job as usual for a better project living, a "conditional partnership".
There is no danger at all in a fair respectul cooperation to tint yourself with someones dirty thoughts. It would rather be an employee's and citizens' duty to co-operate with governmental structures.
I think that co-operating with U.N. and other govermental structures in human rights is a civil or moral duty.
But what is with the U.N Charta, can christians support a U.N. charta as they already did by publishing information about the Int. Declaration of human rights?
Was in 2002 the dis-associating of the Department of Public Onformation of the U.N done because of
- public and internal turmoils after the public uncovering of a duplicity between NGO partnership (1300 NGOs) and the condeming as false hope of mankind?
- or because of the awareness that the U.N. charta could not be supported?
- or because the DPI Department was connected to much with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) ?
Department of Public Information http://www.un.org/en/hq/dpi/
NGO page http://outreach.un.org/ngorelations/
My opinion: There maybe some areas, or activities in the U.N. structure like in any government that are difficult (military), and the hopes of the U.N. maybe lately unaccomplishable or overexagerated, but that does not mean that it is a "false hope" for the mankind, that U.N. works against Gods kingdom. Hope and working for security and peace is important in every area of our life and important for governments.