GOD AND GUNS…5.5.09
by SteveFrom our United Methodist General Board of Discipleship:
Guns and prayer
A reflection on issues that still divide us
By John Basel
April 20 marked the tenth anniversary of that horrible day at Columbine High School in Colorado when more than a dozen students were killed by two classmates. That senseless shooting, the fourth highest death toll in U.S. history and the deadliest at a high school, caused me to reflect on some of the issues brought to the forefront of our national agenda as a result.
An e-mail conveying Darrell Scott’s testimony before a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee shortly after those shootings began again making the rounds again. As a parent of one of the students killed that day, Scott gave a passionate voice to those who support prayer in school and little or no control over guns. He sees a connection between the events of that day and how our government has dealt with those two issues.
He sees a connection between the events of that day and how our government has dealt with those two issues. In the e-mail, the prologue to the transcript of Scott’s speech insinuates that he was the only one asked to speak. He was one of eight.
The prologue also says Scott’s speech was not received well and surprised those listening. His statement wasn’t received any differently than any of the others.
The e-mail states that he spoke at a special session of Congress. It was not.
Those hyperbolic twists of fact aside, Scott did give an impassioned speech as a justifiably angry and hurt parent. His child was brutally and wrongfully taken from him in the horrible massacre that was Columbine.
His child was brutally and wrongfully taken from him.
While moving, though, the e-mail’s resurrection of Scott’s speech begs for a rebuttal from those of us who see things differently, especially in light of the shootings at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois universities, to name but two of the many shootings since. It is important for our national dialogue and appropriate to offer a contrasting view on these important issues.
The e-mail opens by boldly stating: “There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness.” How easy it is to suppose that God speaks for your side.
Does God really oppose gun control and favor school-led prayer? Doesn’t the Bible say that prayer is a deeply personal matter not to be done in the public square for all to see?
Others involved in that horrific day at Columbine support sensible gun control. Patti Nielson, for example, acknowledged many societal factors could have contributed, but 15 lives wouldn’t have been lost, she said, if the pair didn’t have guns. “And the shocking thing,” she said, “is that they got those guns so easily from a gun show.”
Scott used the cliché “guns don’t kill, people do” to justify his position that gun control is needless. Using that logic, we can say that it is not cars that kill, people do. Yet, we have far more restrictions and controls over our cars than we do our guns. Aren’t guns more dangerous than cars?
Aren’t guns more dangerous than cars?
Scott expressed concern that people were blaming the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) for the tragedy. Instead, he said the blame should lie squarely on the shoulders of Congress for making prayer in school illegal. In a prayer he wrote, Scott says, “You’ve outlawed simple prayer, now gunshots fill our classrooms.”
How do you make the leap from no prayer to gunshots in classrooms? Besides, only school-led prayer is not allowed. Private prayer is always allowed and guaranteed by the Constitution.
Scott goes on to say that we don’t need gun control, we need God. Yes, we do need God, but that is certainly not the job of the government. It is every parent’s responsibility to teach their children the level of spirituality and/or religion they see fit.
I agree with Scott that: “We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc.”
That’s some pretty good stuff, but Scott goes on to say that because we don’t have prayer in school, “we have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence.”
Our nation enjoys a large and diverse spirituality where the freedom to practice religion or not is thriving. It is our government, by way of our Constitution, that does not endorse or deny the practice of any particular religion. Personally, I like it that way. I absolutely don’t want our government teaching my child religion. That’s my job and my church’s job.
If you perceive that as refusing to honor God and “opening the door to hatred and violence,” then you’ve become part of the very hatred and violence you claim to abhor. It is such a cynical view of the world. Put this hatred behind you so you can see all the beautiful acts of faith and spirituality that occur all around us on a daily basis.
Scott further states: “No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.”
There’s certainly some truth to that, but any security expert will tell you that the harder you make it for someone to break into your house the less likely it is that someone will break into your house. Likewise, the harder you make it for those who shouldn’t have guns to get guns the less likely it is that they will get guns.
Will you ever be able to completely eliminate such illegal activity? Of course not. But if having sensible gun laws prevents even one needless death, then it is worth it. Sensible laws and parental involvement is what can prevent future Columbines from happening.
If having sensible gun laws prevents even one needless death, then it is worth it.
Scott stated that on that day school prayer was brought back to our schools by the kids trapped by the gunmen. It’s certainly understandable that anyone in that position would pray, but Scott claimed that politicians would try to prevent that from happening.
Scott’s declaration perpetuates myth. Only school-led prayer is not allowed.
The Houston Independent School District has children from virtually every country in the world. They practice every religion in the world. Whose God would they pray to and which prayer would they recite if school-led prayer were allowed?
Scott seemed so concerned about the NRA being the scapegoat for gun violence in schools. Certainly, there was some finger pointing, but it may have been well-deserved. Since the Virginia Tech shootings, the NRA has been quietly supportive of efforts in Congress to tighten loopholes on instant background checks.
Similarly, closing the loophole that allows anyone to buy guns from an unlicensed gun dealer at a gun show would provide much needed help in preventing those who shouldn’t have guns from getting them.
I have tremendous respect for Scott. His unwanted place in history gives him a special voice to which we should all listen. I believe he is misguided, though.
Imposition of school-led prayer will not make violence go away.
The lack of school-led prayer in schools has nothing to do with the rise in gun violence in schools. The imposition of school-led prayer will not make violence go away.
Let’s look instead at the amount of graphic violence our kids are exposed to on a daily basis through television programs and video games.These desensitize them to violence.
The responsibility lies with us, the parents, to be closely involved with our children’s lives and to let them know every chance we can they are loved unconditionally. We have to keep any guns we own locked up. Most importantly, we have to teach kids that violence is never the answer in resolving hurt feelings or conflicts.
The subcommittee hearing at which Scott spoke was covered by the Associated Press and reported in several big-city newspapers. It was an unusually large amount of coverage for a House subcommittee hearing. It was not ignored.
As we mark the tenth anniversary of this dark day in U.S. history I suspect it will once again get some well-deserved attention as should the opinion of others who were there. The e-mail closed by encouraging recipients to send it to everyone they can. I concur that the issue is of utmost importance, especially since I originally drafted this article, two more mass shootings have occurred. I only implore that if you do forward this particular e-mail that you append a more complete version that expresses both sides of the gun control and school prayer issues.
RSS
You are still being lied to. Big time. If you want to find out what really happened at Columbine I suggest you read what the eyewitnesses had to say:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/columbineeight.php
Could you please point out the lies? Thanks.
Anyone who believes there isn’t prayer in school, hasn’t been in one during testing. ‘Prayer in school’ is a phrase used when someone wants to say ‘teach my religion in school’, and disguise it. People claiming to support it should, generally, be considered to have hidden agendas.
Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, Northern Illinois University, and countess other schools in which senseless violence has occurred, cannot help but stir emotion. They are attacks on the children, the very hopes and dreams, of an older generation, and call into question everyone’s safety. Add Oklahoma City, the Pentagon, and the World Trade Center in New York, and you’ve sampled some of Americas most violent acts outside of open warfare. Centuries before anyone involved in these acts were born, every civilized culture had, in multiple ways, outlawed wanton violence, imposing harsh penalties on those who would perpetrate it. In the US alone, there are *volumes* of statutes and case law defining what physical acts are prohibited and billions of dollars spent on security and law enforcement, yet our court dockets remain overwhelmed with those accused of committing these violent acts, and the trafficking of arms into places where they are illegal remains a lucrative business. Does anyone really believe another law will change this?
The United States has one of the best armed civilian populations in the world. During World War II, Japanese Admiral Yamamoto is said to have told the Emperor, “We cannot invade the mainland United States, there would be a rifle behind each blade of grass”, a testimony to this, and America’s resolve. What is this security worth? Can it be measured?
Americans own almost as many guns as autos, and on any given weekend thousands upon thousands of rounds are fired at matches across the country. Yet the percentage of firearm caused deaths, even including illegal activities, is a fraction of automobile deaths. If licensed drivers practiced the same level of safety observed at shooting events, how many accidents would be avoided? What’s the speed limit on your street?
As one person put it, “I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.” The Supreme Court has ruled, repeatedly, law enforcement is under no obligation to protect anyone, they are charged with bringing people to justice after the fact. They recently ruled the Second Amendment, like the other nine in the Bill of Rights, is an individual right. Without singling out *any* amendment, this document was the best effort to define the rights people have *regardless* of government – the things that government may not interfere with. It is extremely difficult to change, for just that reason. Any individual or group who disagrees with any portion of the Constitution is welcome to attempt change, but until that change is ratified, the whole document is, literally and figuratively, the law of the land. That the American people have allowed themselves to become polarized by one issue or another is far sadder than any of our physical tragedies. It is far past time for us to reaffirm the rights of We, the People, and demand our representatives defend, equally, our right to worship as we choose, to speak openly of our feelings, to defend ourselves, families, and countrymen, to be safe from unwarranted invasions to our privacy, and to have fair access to our courts. Anything less is criminal, deliberately less, treasonous. Again, the Bill of Rights is a whole document. It is *not* a liberal vs. conservative treatise, and we must *demand* our representatives stop committing the treason of using it so.
Bj