Let me say ahead of time that my comments here (along with their inserted comments) reflect the hypocritical use of religion by liberal (I don’t approve of conservatives doing it either in case you’re wondering) elected leaders in the American government much more than it reflects my stance on the issue at hand.
Diane Feinstein (Senator of California) had a press conference today (1/24/2013) concerning her proposal to introduce legislation to ban “assault” weapons. That seems like typical duck-tape politics to me, but the LOL (and that’s the first time I believe I’ve ever used that) moment came when remarks were made by a guest introduced by the senator before the proposal got underway.
The guest was “the Very Reverend Gary Hall” (forget reverend, could someone tell me how a man can be biblically called very reverend??? I wonder if that makes the regular reverend people feel a little smaller???) who represents the National Cathedral (not a church that belongs to God, but a bastion of moral and religious relativism) in D.C.. I’d like to say a thing or two about Gary’s comments and the prayer that followed.
“As people of faith we have the moral obligation to stand with and for the victims of gun violence and to work to end it.“
Statements like this make me wonder in a way that causes exasperation. No amoral law can solve a moral issue!!! It is already illegal to murder someone is it not? Regardless of the weapon being used, murder is a moral issue that this government is approaching in an amoral way. People need to be taught about the spiritual consequences violating God’s law along side the consequences of violating the law of the land.
Gary also said,
“We’ve tolerated school shootings and mall shootings and theatre shootings and sniper shootings and workplace shootings and temple and church shootings and urban neighborhood shootings for far too long, enough is enough…I don’t want to take away someone’s hunting rifle, but I can no longer justify a society that allows people other than military and police to own weapons like these, or that permits the sell of high-capacity magazines….“
If the issue is about the taking/protection of innocent life, then why aren’t all innocent lives given the same intolerant attention and care by Mrs. Feinstein? If life is sacred (and it is) then who sanctified it? How can you look for moral support for an issue like “gun-control” while ignoring real moral obligations to protect innocent lives who live within the womb of their mother? I’ll tell you how…you find someone dressed up in a hypocrite’s costume with a collar and you let them give a speech. Are the 50+ million innocent lives (approximately 3,700+ per day) that have been violently ended not enough? How can one not justify a society that “fails” to restrict the ownership of amoral objects like guns in the way a particular person wants (gun ownership is restricted to law-abiding people mind you) while finding the ability to justify a society that rips apart children piece by piece, or flushes them down the toilet!? Yes, enough is enough, and the pro-abortion senator who called the press conference should be told such.
Gary then prayed,
“Oh God, you made human beings in your image, and you’ve given us hearts with which to feel the pain of others and minds to create solutions for human suffering…we ask all this in God’s holy name….“
Where did the separation of church and state go today? A prayer to God (which I am in support of) sounds like religion to me…maybe it’s because he represents a “cathedral” instead of the church? I don’t know (or do I?). How is that prayers at graduations violate the “separation” rule but this didn’t? How is that prayers around the flagpole violate the “separation” rule but this didn’t? How? Seems to me that the “state” only approves of the “church” when the “church” approves of the “state’s” position. Be a contrarian (you could be called much worse) with that and you might be accused of being a “constitution thumper” (oh wait, that whole “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…” is that little Declaration thing isn’t it?). What solutions are being offered anyways? Are people going to be taught to value life because we’re made in the image of our Creator??? Ah, that would violate that whole “separate” thing wouldn’t it? I guess they’re going to have to convince people who don’t mind violating the law by murdering others that it will be really bad if they do so with weapons deemed unacceptable.
There was much hypocrisy shown on that stage today. It was a show about a political stance, not a stance on a moral issue – murder is already wrong and illegal…unless it’s the murder of victims who cannot speak! Religion for hire is not a religion that brings one higher. Religion for hire reveals a religion desperate to stay in the lamelight. Dress it up in whatever way you want, hypocrisy only washes the outside of the cup while ignoring the nastiness on the inside.
And by the way, Gary, whose name was that prayer asked in again? We have to be careful with that one, don’t we?
May the longsuffering and patience of the Almighty God continue to be with our nation as it has been with us (1 Timothy 2:1-6).