I am called to live by the principle of 'Do to others as I would want done to myself.' If my kids or wife were in danger of harm or death, I would hope someone who had the power to protect them would step in and save them from danger. I would do the same for others.
There were two trees in the garden of Eden. This principle is extremely helpful to me in dealing with the gordian knots moralism attempts to straightjacket people within. “There is only one answer” type of thinking is a maddening labyrinth that many philosophical and theological questions create that can paralyze people in the face of doing good to others. Ridged moral codes, a fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, replace the fruit of life that God intended us to eat and now offers us in the way of Christ.
What is good and right in the moment for the other person trumps the self-focused legalist mindset of what will defile my perfect moral perception. One posture of action sees the other person's needs, the opposite is consumed with one's own self. Jesus did a whole lot of good that was seen as bad by the second group of thinkers.
I believe the best religiously influenced laws are the ones that extend the most freedom of choice to people.
Eric,
Freedom, I am not sure what is meant here. Looking at the truth, for that will set us free., England and Australia face similar ethical challenges of banning assault weapons (notice the term, not guns but assault weapons) fifteen years ago. Neither have had to deal with an unhinged mass murders killing their innocents since facing the truth. Since Columbine, we have had 84. Speak about the freedom of 20 set of parents having to dispose of Christmas presents never to be open. Jesus is watching us, and if we fail to speak truth to evil then we fail our faith. For no one civilian needs a bushmaster, a weapon that killed 27 people in around than ten minutes with most victims having as many as eleven rounds. No Christian can defend this under any rubic of freedom.
Be sure, as we who fight for sane gun laws have warned after Columbine, the rest, there will be more innocent blood, and if we stand by, Jesus will remember. Evil thrives when good pastors are silent.
2nd Amendment is law. Intent was protection from gov, as it stands, with that original intent Bushmasters or equivalent is logical.
80 people die each day in America from guns, 70-80% of those are out of jail, repeat offenders. Criminals.
Disarming people doesn’t makes any sense to me as a constitutionalist or a Pastor.
I pray and call the police, just as I pray and call the doctor.
Defense isn’t immoral.
In the founding fathers day, arms were for the militas. They were also single shot muskets. Washington, Jefferson and rest had no idea of semi-auto weapons. It you extend the term do you have a right to atom bombs? Tanks? We draw the line, I just want to draw it at weapons that no hunter would use or is over kill in terms of self defense, unless one is being attacked by a whole division of soldiers. (Even in this case, these soldiers would win) But again, England and Australia are good examples. Neither are despotic and both remain democracies.
Finally, you buy into the lies of the demonic NRA. No one uses assault weapons for defense. They are created for attack and are used for attack. The call to ban them is not a call to ban all guns, only the ones that are created to kill massive amounts of people. (Many places ban them in hunting because since they were developed to kill large amounts of people, they are practically useless in hunting.)
The reason I call the the NRA leaders demonic is because they are. When you realize that Tom Mauser, whose son was brutally gunned down in Columbine, was met with taunts that his son died because he was not armed as if arming teenagers in High School would be the answer. He was then flooded with death threats by NRA members for advocating the banning of assault weapons. And please keep to assault weapons not gun in general. a pistol or hunting rifles should not be part of the conversation. By coupling it with all guns, the NRA does a good job of distracting for their masters the gun manufacturers or they Master, the Master of Lies.
Read a suffering Dad’s arguments and tell me if there is any reason for ar-15s or weapons the are made to kill large amounts of people. If we continue to allow these weapons there will be more Sandy Hooks as those who warned that they would be more Columbines. We were right. For the future of victim’s parents I do not want to be right. If we Christians fail to answer this culture of death, then Jesus tells us it is better to have a mill stone around our necks at the bottom of the Ocean. The Bible is clear.
Read Tom Mauser about guns and see his site about his son, a victim of the NRA and tell me if you are really in favor of assault weapons.
http://www.danielmauser.com/cliches.html
These issues provoke faith & feelings, I understand the passion but I’m not in agreement. I vote according to political convictions informed my faith but not based on faith. My faith isn’t applicable to all. I voted for Ref 74 based on constitutional law not my personal faith view of sin. I try to be consistent on issues and not shift on matters I may disagree with in my faith life. I believe people are accountable to God for their choices not me. What people do with freedom is a reality I face everyday. I live with the consequences of all kinds of freedom. I choose liberty over legislative legalism.
We have laws for guns. Have you shot an AR-15? It’s semi-auto and so are most pistols. You ever shot a 9MM?
Both can kill fish in a barrel.
I’m for legitimate safety laws.
Intent of the constitution is logical and it played into the invasion plans of the Japenese in WW2. They knew Americas citezens were armed abd an invasion would be with astronomical loss.
War not hunting is what arms are for and in a post 9-11 world it’s reality not NRA hype.
The lie about the WWII, is that a lie propagated by the NRA. The Japanese for invading the US mainland. They understood that even attacking Pearl Harbor would be a huge risk as having a fleet so far from support would be dangerous. Indeed Tora,Tora prove them right.
You right that passion and feelings fuel the debate, but it is the gun lust, because in the decade plus that I have been involved (since Columbine) in the debate, not one legitimate reason has been given for not bannig such weapons. To answer you question, yes I have fired a glock. It was fun and gave a false sense of power, it gave me the reality of gun lust. It is this gun lust that is used to sell these weapons. It is this gun lust that makes guns debate hard. GK Chesterton was correct in saying opinions coming from lust resists any reason, logic or rationality. It makes people ignore even their own faith.
I’ve not met these blood-lusty, demonic, godless people who have turned their back on their faith that you speak of but I’m slightly isolated in a crime, drug, violent prone neighborhood. My almost deaf, widowed neighbor who sleeps with a 45 under her pillow, doesn’t fit that description, nor the handful of other congregants that own assault rifles. I’m sure those people are out there, I’m told they are, but I don’t know them. I’ll just take your witness to their reality.
Irrationality is truly part of the debate, it’s especially visible when we start demonizing people instead of debating issues.
I am in agreement with freedom and responsibility for our own actions. I have several guns and have no lust for them, don’t even fire them that often, but I thank God for the right to have them for my own defense. All totalitarian governments ( the evil smart ones) have confiscated weapons in order to minimize resistance from the citizenry as it moves to consolidate power and control. I would wager to guess that the majority of murders that have occurred in the last century around the world were perpetrated by governments, not private citizens. Pastors being silent is wrong in both directions, Nazi Germany being the prime example. Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that Hitler confiscated weapons, then went about exterminating populations. Stalin did it, and China as well. Deaths were in the tens of millions. Having weapons is not all about hunting, even though an AR-15 works well for varmint hunting. It’s also about resisting other groups who have similar weapons such as repressive government. As far as England and Australia go, I’ve watched video from citizens in Australia at least, who are bemoaning their giving up so easily, because now their government is trying to redefine the term “home invasion”, so it won’t seem like there’s so many since the ban. I’d say that given then number of weapons out in the population in the US, the violence we see is not comensurate to the mass number of weapons out there. It convinces me that there are many like me out there, law abiding, people loving folks who just want to be able to protect themselves.
Ah the widow does not sleep a bushmaster, so she is not in the discussion. Of the others you speak off, all i can do is quote our mutual friend, St Paul by looking at the fruit. England, Australia, Canada and Europe bam assault weapons. These countries , of course, has not eliminated murder or even mass murder, but the US has had more incidents in the last year than those in the last decade. A fact. The bitter fruit of death and innocent Blood is clear to Paul and the biblical witness.
What about the 50 odd million dead from repressive government, or do you think that is justifiable and deserves no resistance?
“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington
First President of the United States
oops sorry, bogus quote, scratch it. The real one is here:
Among the many interesting objects, which will engage your attention, that of providing for the common defence will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace. A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a Uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent others, for essential, particularly for military supplies.
-George Washington’s First Annual Message to Congress
8 January 1790, New York City (http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/union/state1.html)
Eric, we already control guns. You can’t own fully automatic weapons. You can’t own rocket launchers. These are undoubtedly weapons that would help repel some hypothetical invasion on our own turf if our private citizens had them. (Though probably catastrophic to our society in other ways.) Are you for rolling back the regulations on these kinds of weapons? If not, why are you against regulation of high-capacity magazines?
Dennis,
You do know the Nazi DEREGULATED gun control. The 1938 gun laws were in acted to water down the 1928 laws. Before all weapons had to be registered, after 1938, only hand guns. So, the use of these laws by the NRA is ,,, surprise ,,, a lie. But again the issue is most if the democratic world including England, Australia, Germany etc passed good gun laws and they do not have Sandy Hooks. If we stay with the same laws more children will die. It is clear moral choice, Cheap plentiful assault rifles means dead innocent kids. That is the choice. As a Christian, the choice is clear.
Banning and regulation are two different beasts.
I’m for regulation.
I’m comfortable with a modern look at “regulated” as long as we stay with: necessary, security, free, right, keep amd bear, not infringed.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a Uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent others, for essential, particularly for military supplies.”
Thank you for positing this. I agree with Washington. We sane assault weapon advocates are calling for “but discipline” Our current laws, especially those that DID NOT EXISTS during Washington’s time are the least disciplined arms in the history of this nation
I’m one of the most liberal people I know, and I’m not asking for a gun ban. Nor are any liberal media personalities. Nor is any liberal politician that I know of. We want to ban the high capacity magazines used in most, if not all, mass shootings in the past two decades. I think to be consistent, you should be on that side of the argument, not the side that drags its feet at every social call for reform and human betterment.
My consistency has been honest attempts to understand and interpret law in light of constitution. Not all of us have such a gift of perfect positions on everything.
The constitution should be there to help us, not stubbornly holding fast to itself while children are gunned down. In a sane America, it wouldn’t even be a debate — stop selling people-killing-tools to people killers. I think the issue for people against further regulations on guns is that one paradigm of America (let’s call it the Wild West paradigm of fearless individualism in a harsh world) is having to give way to a new paradigm and people who like the old paradigm just fine are having a hard time accepting it.
No sane society would defend the right of killers to have more efficient killing tools.
Is it true or not that upwards of 50 million or more murders have been committed by repressive, totalitarian governments in the last century?
Dennis,
Yes, it is true that 50 million people were killed. You have a difficult task before you, though. Most those totalitarian had popular support in the rising. You have to prove that the banning assault weapons was the cause of the killings. We know that many totalitrian countries build highways as did non-totalitarian countries. Most of the free world has banned these weapons and they have not become totalitarian. You also have to answer this ma of shame. these are the mass shootings worldwide. Notice how rare it is in other countries, while the NRA has made the US look like a Christmas tree, a Christmas treee of Horror that dishonors our Lord. http://o.canada.com/2012/12/14/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996/
You can comfort yourself with fantasies of fighting off totalitarian government, but our gun laws have lead to the death of innocent children and (listen closely) will lead to more children dying for our insane gun laws. Fantasies will not bring back the children.