Yet another church shooting, this time at a Unitarian congregation in Knoxville, and yet another chance to ask: Where is the religious community's voice on gun control? The numbers are staggering: 30,000 Americans die each year from gun violence, but gun control has not emerged as a significant agenda item for faith-based organizations, even though the massacres seem to get worse--look at the Valentine's Day shooting at Northern Illinois University and the April 2007 shootings at Virginia Tech that left 33 people dead in the worst case of gun violence in U.S. history.
Moreover, religious organizations, specifically churches, seem increasingly vulnerable. This WorldNetDaily piece lists the number of church shootings in the last couple of years, most notably the December 2007 shootings at a missionary training center near Denver and a well-known megachurch, New Life Church in Colorado Springs, which left four people dead. (The gunman was stopped by an armed guard.)
The problem, of course, is that many view the Second Amendment with reverence that surpasses even the First Amendment, or their reverence for Holy Writ, and polls show that while the public is still supportive of some gun control laws, Americans are increasingly against further restrictions. (Check out this ReligionLink edition for other facts about the issue, and links to pro-gun Christian groups--among them my favorite, as a Catholic, the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, a group that promotes self-defense through gun ownership and is named after a Catholic seminarian in Italy whose "marksmanship and proficiency with handguns single-handedly saved" a village from a band of nationalist soldiers in 1860.)
Most faith groups have statements endorsing some form of gun control, but insiders will tell you that liberal religious groups don't see the issue as a winner, while conservatives don't want it to distract attention from their pro-life campaigns. One of the best initiatives out there is the God Not Guns Coalition, a project of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The coalition held its first nationwide "God Not Guns Sabbath" in September 2007.
Some will accuse advocates of gun control of "playing politics" with tragedies like the one in Knoxville, much as was done after Virginia Tech. As if such episodes should cause us to keep quiet rather than speak out. Trying to draw conclusions from actors and their targets is perilous; the Knoxville shooter was apparently a down and out fellow who was angry at liberals--odd, as liberal policies may have been his best chance--but in all these cases we are dealing with psychologically unstable people. Access to guns is the problem. (I wonder how many will highlight the Knoxville case as an example of anti-religious bias in the U.S., as was done with the Colorado shootings.)
Barack Obama is of course "gun shy" after his comments about "bitter" working class types and guns and religion--and his moderated reaction to the landmark US Supreme Court gun ruling last June (The District of Columbia v. Heller) shows he is, probably wisely, not about to make gun control a campaign issue.
But that doesn't mean religious organizations shouldn't be more vocal, or give him cover (so to speak). Instead, religious leaders--generally with the exception of inner-city congregations--would rather ignore the issue. Others, like the leadership of New Life Church in Colorado, say the shootings show why churches should have armed guards and congregants should pack heat. Not what Jesus would do, I think.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Nathaniel,
"Every since we became independent of God this country has been on a downward spiral."
Would you be so kind as to tell us when exactly America became "independent of God"? Or, when it was 'dependent on God? All this time, I thought there was supposed to be freedom of religion in America. That would of necessity mean that there must be freedom from religion too. God, spare us from some of the 'religions' (or should that be the religiosity) of some of your followers.
"Everything and anything goes."
Nonsense.
"No one likes for their indiscretions (sin) to be called out."
True. Partly because we've been admonished that only those without sin get to cast the first stone ('calling out the "sins" of others'). That ain't your job, Nathaniel. It's already taken, and by One far more qualified for the position.
You are clearly speaking of homosexuality (though you don't seem to have the guts to say it directly, couching it in terms like "their indiscretions" and the smarmy reference to people saying "I was born this way"). Here's a hint: you say it's about "what we do or what we want" instead of referring to what we are. If God were so down on homosexuals, you'd think God wouldn't have created so many of us. Another hint: it isn't a "lie" when gays say they were born this way. Speaking of "poor science", you might actually want to read a few science books instead of relying on quasi-'righteous' religious clichees.
"But what does the Bible say about such practices, behavior and thought."
Well, it says a lot about the bearing of false witness. It says a lot about not judging others. It says a lot about doing to others what you would have done to yourself. Perhaps we should all start smears and innuendoes to make our points - then you'd be getting done to you what you so clearly do to others.
"It clearly outlines what is acceptable behaviour to God, without killing sodomites or anyone else."
Nathaniel:
Following advise in the Bible solves nothing. How many folks were killed by God reigning his rath on somebody or a group etc. because He was ticked off? That book is full of violence, rape, adultry, incest wars etc. They may not have had guns then, but they found unique ways of doing folks in. How is that any example of how to live? The NT may be a bit better, but it isn't a perfect example either. Going back to a god solves nothing...lots of wars have been fought because of that belief and the feeling that "God is on our side", lots of people have been killed because they didn't believe in someones version of a god...The Crusades "forced" conversions...all in the name of getting back to god. I don't think so. Getting with God wouldn't have stopped the nutcase that hit the Unitarian church in Knoxville or any the other nutcases in the past.
Nathanial, one other thing...very simple. Pagans say:
"First do no harm". Simple, but not always easy. Good advise.
Proudbutscaredliberal said:
"And your hiding behind the New Testament doesn't give you cover, because Jesus never said a thing about gay people. Jesus did, however, have a lot to say about loving one's neighbor and God, not judging, taking care of orphans and widoes, and lots of other things that too many Christians these days choose to ignore."
Jesus addressed sin in its many forms, which includes homosexuality, adultery, murder, lying, drunkenness, etc. Other than blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, He did not elevate one sin above another - sin is sin. And Paul specifically mentions homosexuality in his litany of sins in 1 Cor. 6, but does not dwell on that particular sin - it is just one of the sexual sins listed, along with adultery, etc. The important thing is that Jesus cam to save us from ALL of our sins, regardless of what they are. He has called us to turn from our sins and to live for Him. That is what we as Christians should focus on - not what sin is worse than another.
One problem with trying to equate restrictions on driving with gun control is that the 2nd amendment specifically guarantees the right to keep and bear arms - there is no equivalent Constitutional right to drive a car.
And keep in mind that without the 2nd Amendment, none of the other rights would be secure. Without an armed populace, a despotic government could easily take away the rights to speech, to assembly, to freedom of religion - because who could oppose them? That idea, more than any other, was the driving force behind including the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights in the first place.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.