Willravel

It's the equivalent of someone shooting at you, so I'd assume that just as if bullet 1 missed, bullet 2 would be on its way, if punch 1 missed... you get the point. Depending on who you ask, turn the other cheek either means don't respond to violence or it means don't allow violence to make you violent (those do mean slightly different things). I don't want this to get too theocratic, though. Leave us say that shooting someone in church for shooting at you isn't turning the other cheek.

FelixP

I'll try to stick to the point. I don't see the big deal with this. A church is a building no different than any other. God is everywhere, so how is taking your strap to church any different than taking it to the gas station? Don't you know that Jesus and Moses used guns to slaughter the egyptian army?

__________________
Free will lies not in the ability to craft your own fate, but in not knowing what your fate is. --Me

"I have just returned from visting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world." --Douglas MacArthur

biznatch

Well, shit. Sort of related: Shooting at US Holocaust museum
This really sucks.

What I can't help but wonder is whether a change in gun laws could have affected the outcome of this incident.

__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread

Daniel_

Sorry all - been away from the PC for a couple of days.


People who self identify as Christians, whilst not following the teachings of Jesus are at best misguided, and at worst hypocrites. The rules are clear (and frankly rather odd - I'm not even sure that they can all BE followed) and not up for negotiation - it's not supposed to e easy to follow them, it's supposed to be a test of faith.

As far as I'm aware, Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality - there's things in the old testament that can be interpreted as condemning it, but then there's equally damning strictures against prawns, bacon, and haircuts, and congress hasn't ruled on barbers shops or surf & turf.

I was taught that we can now ignore the rules of the Jews, because Jesus died for our sins. Therefore, we can eat bacon, wear our hair how we like, have a prawn cocktail, and be as gay as we want.

The right to bear arms is clearly stated to be in order to raise a millitia to prevent the tyrany of government. That is unlikely to happen to you suddenly in a carpark.

Not at all - I'm saying that if you are a Christian you should not carry guns in church OR elsewhere. The point is that the people with guns outside Church may well not think of themselves as Christians, but those IN Church probably do. I think that it should be the Pastor's duty to educate the congregation in what the rules actually are, not to tell them that the rules are flexible to fit their desire to call themselves Christians whilst hanging onto their weapons.

Jesus was in favour of passive resistance - he said turn the other cheek, he said if under duress do DOUBLE what you are forced. I'm not saying it's something I can do, but it worked for Ghandi.

Final question: in the beatitudes who did Jesus say would inherit the Earth?

Was it the armed who defend themselves, or was it someone else?

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

dksuddeth

not sure what other laws would have prevented a felon from obtaining a rifle.

---------- Post added at 09:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 PM ----------

taken a bit out of context, don't you think?

the right isn't there in order to raise a militia. the militia should already be there, that's why they called them minutemen. The rest of it is to ensure that no government entity can restrict the right to arms by citizens period.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Daniel_

Maybe I missed something - there always seemed to me to be a clear link that makes the permission to bear arms conditional on the ability to form a militia.

You commented that the militia should exist. I agree. If this is the case, maybe you should say "If you have joined a milita organisation for civil defense, you can bear arms". That would prevent anyone saying "I need it for home defense" or "I want to go hunting". The point should be (to me) if you're not in a milita, the right to bear arms doesn't apply to you.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

shakran

I happen to agree with your interpretation of the intent of the 2nd. The supreme court does not. They ruled that we can have guns. They didn't say we can have guns as long as we sign up for a militia. So, by judicial review, we are free and clear to have guns, and my original point stands.

Regarding your other comments to my post, you pretty much said what I am saying. Yes, I suppose having a gun in church if you believe that Jesus told you never to fight is hypocritical. But christianity as a whole is hypocritical as hell. You are correct when you say that Jesus never said anything about persecuting homosexuals, but he did say, as I mentioned, to love thy neighbor and to avoid passing judgment on people. A sizable percentage of American christians are vehemently anti-gay, and therefore are hypocritical. And if we want to get technical, you are judging this church and its congregation over the gun issue, and therefore so are you.

The point is that assuming Jesus existed, it is highly unlikely that he expected his words to be followed to the exact letter. It is further unlikely that what is written in the bible is exactly what Jesus actually said. If you synthesize Jesus's teachings down to their core, they work out to something along the lines of "Don't be an asshole, and treat people nicely to the extent possible." That's a better way to approach his teachings, I think, than to take the verbage literally and as-rote. After all "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" could be twisted to justify rape. "I'd sure like her to have sex with me so. . ."

All this boils down to the point that as long as these churchgoers are living their lives to the moral standard they believe their church requires of them, they are not hypocrites. Obviously the church does not include as part of that moral standard "don't carry any guns." We don't know how literally that church interprets the new testament, and so we can't really pass. . judgment. . on them on the hypocrisy question.

dksuddeth

This 'interpretation' would require someone to think that they only have the rights that are afforded to them via the constitution or the government. This is not correct. The 'people' have all, every, unlimited rights. The constitution only provides specific enumerated powers to the federal government.

So, while the 2nd Amendment states that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, it provides, as it's only singular textual limitation, that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

this doesn't say that the right of the militia, or the right of those enrolled in a militia, or even that the right shall not be infringed as long as you enroll in a militia. It say 'the right of the people', plain and simple.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

MikkOwl

I think that places where mass murders typically occur (by someone with a firearm) are the ones who could use a few non-mass murder people being armed. Then there would be a chance of putting a stop to the mass murder from going as far as it could have, or discouraging it completely before it even happens. If some religious places don't want firearms there, then that's their problem. No one is forced to go there to begin with.