Louisiana lawmakers won't find a gun in the Bible: Jarvis DeBerry

[jimmyzshack]

http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2010/05/louisiana_lawmakers_wont_find.html

During this legislative session, Rep. Henry Burns, R-Haughton, authored a bill that would allow congregations to have armed security if that's what those congregations would like. Haughton's bill struck some people I know as another crazy example of gun-happy legislators trying to increase the number of places where it's legal to carry a concealed weapon. Last year, Rep. Ernest Wooton, R-Belle Chase, failed in his attempt to legalize concealed weapons on the state's college campuses, and it seemed to some that Burns' bill was more of the same kind of craziness.

 

[CloudStrife]

That's writer's a **** brain. Celebrating guns and the right to self-defense, which is under assault quite frequently nowadays, is not worship. If DeBerry wants to interpret it as such, I hope his pastor didn't mention mothers on Mother's Day.
And there were plenty of swords in the Bible.

 

[oleheat]

Gee, maybe he's right. Perhaps we should strive to strictly seek a non-violent solution to everything....

You know- like they do in Jarvis DeBerry's community.

 

[CloudStrife]

And David used a slingshot. Projectile weapon right there.

 

[Gus McCrae]

Actually, I think he's mostly right. Firearms shouldn't be a spotlight in the Church. It shouldn't be a big deal in the Church. Also it sounds like Wooton wasn't quite on the ball when discussing the religious aspect.

I do think the writer is wrong on his interpretation of carrying a weapon with the "live by the sword" comment as most gun toting Christians will point out the "sell your garment and buy one (sword)" passege, but I generally agree that Church has nothing to do with guns and if you bring one, it shouldn't be why you are there.

 

[CloudStrife]

I don't see anything wrong with celebrating your God-given right to self-defense. Normally it would just a part of life and not a big deal, but in today's world, unfortunately, it's something we can't take for granted.

As for living by the sword, Shaolin monks are a good example of people who were pacifists that trained to fight. They didn't go around looking for a fight, but if one found them, they didn't plan on being on the losing end. Being armed doesn't mean one's life revolves around violence.

 

[Gus McCrae]

I don't see anything wrong with celebrating your God-given right to self-defense. Normally it would just a part of life and not a big deal, but in today's world, unfortunately, it's something we can't take for granted.

As for living by the sword, Shaolin monks are a good example of people who were pacifists that trained to fight. They didn't go around looking for a fight, but if one found them, they didn't plan on being on the losing end. Being armed doesn't mean one's life revolves around violence.

The idea of a "Gun Day" at Church is just silly. You go to Church to worship, learn, ask for forgiveness, pray, and be thankful. You can thank God for your right/ability for self defense, but beyond that isn't what Church is about.

Maybe we should have a "Fast Car Day" at Church!


For your second part..... Living by the sword isn't about being able to defend yourself, it's about using your sword to make a living. It's a reference to the wild and violent. Gangbangers would be a modern day intrepretation of living by the sword.

 

[CloudStrife]

The idea of a "Gun Day" at Church is just silly. You go to Church to worship, learn, ask for forgiveness, pray, and be thankful. You can thank God for your right/ability for self defense, but beyond that isn't what Church is about.

Maybe we should have a "Fast Car Day" at Church!


For your second part..... Living by the sword isn't about being able to defend yourself, it's about using your sword to make a living. It's a reference to the wild and violent. Gangbangers would be a modern day intrepretation of living by the sword.

You don't have a God-given right to a fast car, so I'm not sure how that is at all similar.
Like I said, if we can't celebrate something God-given, we shouldn't celebrate anything Earthly in church. Parents, kids, health, success... none of it.

That's what I said. I just used an example of someone who is armed but does not live by the sword.

 

[Gus McCrae]

You don't have a God-given right to a fast car, so I'm not sure how that is at all similar.
Like I said, if we can't celebrate something God-given, we shouldn't celebrate anything Earthly in church. Parents, kids, health, success... none of it.

That's what I said. I just used an example of someone who is armed but does not live by the sword.

The guy was talking about having firearms as the centerpiece of a service by having a "bring your gun to church" day. A gun is a material item not the right to self defense. It's just a tool. It shouldn't be the centerpiece of a service.

 

[oleheat]

The idea of a "Gun Day" at Church is just silly. You go to Church to worship, learn, ask for forgiveness, pray, and be thankful. You can thank God for your right/ability for self defense, but beyond that isn't what Church is about.

Maybe we should have a "Fast Car Day" at Church!


For your second part..... Living by the sword isn't about being able to defend yourself, it's about using your sword to make a living. It's a reference to the wild and violent. Gangbangers would be a modern day intrepretation of living by the sword.

Of course you do. However, none of what you mentioned will stop a crazed ex showing up to put a 9mm in the head of the person they think did them wrong, along with whoever else may get in the way- or simply look like they'd make a nice target to pad the stats with.

But a church member with a gun could.

 

[CloudStrife]

Why do you think gun ownership is so fiercely defended? It's not because we think they're really cool, and it would be unfair if our toys were taken away. Today firearms are central to defense.

 

[Gus McCrae]

Of course you do. However, none of what you mentioned will stop a crazed ex showing up to put a 9mm in the head of the person they think did them wrong, along with whoever else may get in the way- or simply look like they'd make a nice target to pad the stats with.

But a church member with a gun could.

I never said anything against having a gun at church, I am all for it. It just shouldn't be the centerpiece of a service.

 

[CloudStrife]

I'm sure there was a related Bible lesson, and they didn't just put a gun on a fancy pillow and place it on the altar.

 

[Gus McCrae]

I'm sure there was a related Bible lesson, and they didn't just put a gun on a fancy pillow and place it on the altar.

The writer doesn't come out and state his position on the law. I can read it one of two ways.

1. He's not for it.
2. He's for it or it doesn't matter, but we don't need to be making a big deal out of it.

Important points from the article:

Clearly one can be a gun-toting Christian without making gun-toting central to Christianity.

I don't believe the government should tell a church how to handle its affairs.

I wouldn't attend a program where weapons are celebrated as something sacred

Just as you ought to be able to be a gun-carrying Christian without making guns an object of worship, you ought to be able to make an argument for religious freedom without sounding religiously ignorant.

This article had little to do with the bill.

 

[oleheat]

I never said anything against having a gun at church, I am all for it. It just shouldn't be the centerpiece of a service.

I figured you were- but I'd bet my last dollar the writer of the op-ed isn't.

 

[oleheat]

The writer doesn't come out and state his position on the law. I can read it one of two ways.

1. He's not for it.
2. He's for it or it doesn't matter, but we don't need to be making a big deal out of it.

Important points from the article:



This article had little to do with the bill.

I believe the timing of the article very much makes it so- but that's just my opinion....

 

[Gus McCrae]

I believe the timing of the article very much makes it so- but that's just my opinion....

Hey may or may not be for this bill. I'll concede that he probably is not for it.

As for the timing? It's actually perfect timing for the discussion because that is about to become a reality. IMO, we should pass the bill and not make asses of ourselves about it.

IMO, the article is mostly right. Church shouldn't be about bringing your guns, you should just have them there in case they are needed. (I added the second part)

 

[oleheat]

Hey may or may not be for this bill. I'll concede that he probably is not for it.

As for the timing? It's actually perfect timing for the discussion because that is about to become a reality. IMO, we should pass the bill and not make asses of ourselves about it.

IMO, the article is mostly right. Church shouldn't be about bringing your guns, you should just have them there in case they are needed. (I added the second part)

Fair enough.

 

[Hardballing]

Jarvis DeBarry is...well...Jarvis DeBerry.

As for the bill, me packing a CCH under my suit coat is no one's business but mine own imo. Do I do it? No, not really.

But I grew up the son of a Baptist preacher in rural and not so rural Alabama, and Louisiana and what occurs in churches during a Sunday service will ASTOUND you. In MANY instances they are a magnet for the mentally unbalanced and today, many of those folks are armed.

So having someone sane packing is not always a bad idea.

Just saying is all.

 

[S&W4ME]

A Shepherd must defend his flock.