But comments I saw out on the internet a few times got me thinking: the comment was, "That could have been any one of us." And this is just so wrong and disrespectful that I feel I need to vent a little.
It's an okay sentiment at best, one of solidarity with the family, but it entirely discounts that James Foley was badass. And not like katana-wielding-badass: he shot things only with his camera, and his curiosity and bravery going into war-zones armed only in that manner amaze me. I have not done anything like that in my life, to be sure, and I admire him for his conviction and caring. He cared for the peoples' stories, and made friends even among his captors. Truly badass.
But the people commenting "it could have been us" aren't even other journalists, mostly (and I'm not referring to the ones who use the phrase in that manner). The people I saw commenting were... white American Christians. And that was the "us" they meant. James fit this broad category (as do I, it's that broad), as he was a Catholic whose faith motivated him deeply... but that's not all that's required to find oneself killed by ISIL. No, for that, American Christians might have to get off their butts and care about what was going on halfway around the world. They might have to be able to interact respectfully with other cultures and religions and take an approach other than advocating carpet-bombing cities ISIL currently controls. It would require a sense of daring beyond what I possess, for sure.
The goal with the comment, then, was basically trying to take ownership of what is not theirs. It is in the context of making jingoist, hawk-ish statements about what our military response should be. It is in the context of trying to paint all Muslims as ISIL minions, and obscuring the (many, many) other people of non-Christian faiths that ISIL has also killed, not to mention all the civilians in those cities who've found themselves suddenly behind enemy lines. This is why I said it disrespects Mr. Foley, and why I believe it is an unChristian sentiment, somewhat ironically - it is tribalist, it is stuck on violence, and it tries to take from his sacrifice and pretend like the speaker would be as brave or noble in death as he was. The difference is that Foley was brave and noble in life, as well, and lived out his faith by going and doing and caring. Let us aspire to that, for ourselves, and take risks to learn other people's stories. Otherwise we're further from being James and closer to being ISIL, just with different hats, killing indiscriminately due to ethnicity or nationality or assumed religious affiliation, and perpetuating a bloodthirsty religious feud.
