Musings about Mere Christianity and its place in culture, with a hope to advance what has been believed "always, everywhere and by all".
Showing posts with label second amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label second amendment. Show all posts
Saturday, March 14, 2015
Biologos and the Invisible Hand of God
Credit where credit is due, since coming under the direction of Deborah Haarsma, the Biologos.org website has managed tone down the rhetoric against its opponents, even if little has changed in the views presented there. Steven Meyer was recently given space to respond to his critics, and all in all I think the exchange was healthy.
Meyer’s main point in his response was that the folks at Biologos are committed to methodological naturalism and that is the primary thing that separates them from other theistic viewpoints. Evidence of both Biologos more conciliatory tone and commitment to naturalism are apparent in the statement quoted below. (More)
First, there is a general statement of belief in God as Creator, but coupled with a statement of belief in evolutionary science.
Labels:
Apologetics,
creationism,
evolution,
Intelligent Design,
science,
second amendment
Monday, February 04, 2013
Ben Shapiro on Bullies
Not sure I relish all of Ben's recommendations or the notion we have to embrace tactics that lean toward "incivility", but there comes a point where self-defense requires a bit of force. Long video, but worth watching. Bright mind, brave soul.
Labels:
Conservatism,
Politics,
second amendment,
Social Issues
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Guns 3 - The Good, The Bad and the Progressives
Jim Wallis presented the progressive view of the NRA's Dangerous Theology over at "God's Politics". He tries to respond to Wayne LaPierre's cute little formula "“the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” by suggesting LaPierre has a simplistic view of human nature where people are either good or bad. I'm quite sure LaPierre understands that human beings are a bit more complex than white hats and black hats, but that is hardly the point. At a given moment, if a guy who is very bad at that moment has a weapon, it is a good thing for a cop, a security guard, a soldier or a conscientious citizen to be able to stop him - if necessary with a weapon.
But the real howler of an argument Wallis proposes goes like this:
But the real howler of an argument Wallis proposes goes like this:
When we are good, we want to protect our children — not by having more
guns than the bad people, but by making sure guns aren’t the first
available thing to people when they’re being bad.
The utter absurdity of that argument is very simple. Gun laws do not accomplish that goal. Gun laws do not prevent mass murderers from having guns. (More)
Friday, January 18, 2013
Guns 2
The New York Times, hardly a right-wing handmaiden of the NRA lobby, published a surprisingly honest story on Obama's plans for gun control, plans that go "beyond mass shootings". Ah. So the plan is not limited to ending mass murder, but control of firearms that goes somewhere "beyond"...
Key quotes:
"The semiautomatic rifle that Adam Lanza used to shoot 20 schoolchildren and 6 adults complied with Connecticut’s assault weapons ban, the police said, and he did not buy the gun himself."
and "In 2011, 6,220 people were killed by handguns, and 323 by rifles"
and "Better background checks would have had little effect on several recent mass shootings" (more)
Key quotes:
"The semiautomatic rifle that Adam Lanza used to shoot 20 schoolchildren and 6 adults complied with Connecticut’s assault weapons ban, the police said, and he did not buy the gun himself."
and "In 2011, 6,220 people were killed by handguns, and 323 by rifles"
and "Better background checks would have had little effect on several recent mass shootings" (more)
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Guns
The tragic shooting of schoolchildren in Connecticut has led to a significant call for more gun laws, including the absurd trial balloon floated by Joe Biden that president Obama can take some sort of action by Executive order. Such a call shows contempt for the constitution these men are sworn to defend.
Once again, as has happened so often in the past, emotions are set forth as arguments while reason and principle are smothered. (More)
Once again, as has happened so often in the past, emotions are set forth as arguments while reason and principle are smothered. (More)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)