Should Iran have the right to own atomic bombs?
| Posted On: 04/27/07 12:34:55 AM |
Age 34, MN |
There is no doubt in my mind that the college shooter Cho Seung-Hui was an evil man, filled with sinful violent thought. But what made him dangerous was not his hatred alone. What made him dangerous was that he was a psychopath - armed with a gun.
I am a conservative evangelical Christian who recently moved to the US. I was deeply saddened by the tragedy at Virginia Tech. I know that evil is real! But I am also saddened to see how tragedies like this are used for political battles on EITHER side. This country is so bitterly divided that one seems incapable to admit that the other side could have suggested something right. The issue of stricter gun control to protect innocent American citizens should not be used for more political devision. It should be a matter of responsibility and common sense for all.
Dr. Bermans article seems much more politically motivated than he might admit. Yet it misses the point. Guns do kill! 33 slain bodies can testify to this. How many people could Cho have killed with a sling shot or a knife before being stopped? His evil nature allowed him to think up such a horrible act. But it was a set of hand guns that allowed him to carry it out and kill so many. His evil nature was one issue. His easy access to guns another.
You do not need to be a "liberal without shame trying to throw the US into tyranny" - as Dr. Berman titles those who think differently - to realize that America needs stricter gun laws if a psychopath who underwent counseling for his frightening violent nature is sold two guns with no questions asked. Politics aside! This country needs to prevent tragedies like this! The comparison of a psychopath killing with a gun and a drunk driver with a car is unpersuading. Few drunk drivers kill 33 people at a time. Cars are made for transportation. Guns are made as weapons. And weapons can kill fast, effectively and in high numbers.
Most people agree; while the US has the right to own atomic bombs, Iran must not. The US is a democracy. Iran a totalitarian regime expressing evil and hostility. Should one allow Iran to have nuclear bombs and destroy Israel, and then claim "Bombs dont kill, dictators do!"? Yes there is evil in the world. And nothing is worse than evil armed with the means to kill and to destroy. It is inconsistent to implement arms control in the world but oppose them in ones own country. The US Constitution was written in 1776, at a time when guns were used to hunt, to protect ones life, family, home and property and to prevent totalitarian governments. Today, while enjoying freedom, guns are used in thousands in street fights, gang wars, drug mafia, organized crime, domestic abuse, while becoming ever more powerful, faster and deadly. Not to mention numerous children being killed by a gun they found.
To call everyone asking for stricter gun control a shameless liberal is shortsighted and insulting, especially after a moment of tragedy. Some have true intentions to save lives and not see kids get shot and killed in schools and colleges. One could just as well claim: "The bodies have not been buried yet and people parade for more rights to wear guns. Maybe some people "have no shame" on either side?
I assume that no tragedy would persuade Americans to give up their right to bear arms, and I respect their constitutional rights. But there needs to be regulations and restrictions. The Constitution must not serve to allow every citizen his own atomic bomb to defend himself against the nuclear devise of his neighbor. This would not create a safer society but spiral into uncontrolled chaos and hierarchy and ultimate self-destruction in the name of freedom. Is it worth to arm every law-abiding citizen along with every potential criminal, gangster and psychopath and accept any kind of tragedy just to keep the unrestricted right to bear arms?
Rev. Dr. Bermans article was not written to comfort a nation in a time of grief. It rather reflected his personal strong apathy with his political opponent. But not by bringing more resentment and arming every citizen, but by furthering love and understanding and denying evil the means to kill and to destroy, can we make our societies a safer place.
Respectfully, Challenger07<><
|
Re: Re: Virginia Tech Massacre, Liberals Have No Shame!!!
| Posted On: 04/26/07 02:38:00 PM |
Age 31, IN |
IF it turned out - and as yet we don't have the requisite evidence one way or another - that Cho suffered from a severe mental illness, such as schizophrenia, would that change your perception of his culpability at all? I think it should (assuming that he did not voluntarily bring about his own schizophrenia, which seems like a reasonable assumption). Do you think there are any cases in which we should say that there are "mitigating factors" that diminish (or even remove entirely) moral responsibility? I don't see how you could deny that there are such cases. After all, it wouldn't be difficult at all to get YOU to do something horrible, by simply injecting you with a few chemicals. Do you agree? And do you agree that being so injected would diminish (perhaps entirely) your moral responsibility for "your" actions whilst under the influence of those chemicals? (Obvious conclusion: so what's the difference between that hypothetical case, and cases in which people suffer from debilitating mental illnesses?)
|
Re: Virginia Tech Massacre, Liberals Have No Shame!!!
| Posted On: 04/24/07 01:25:26 PM |
Age 44, NJ |
The evil of Psychology is never more prevalent than in the justification of evil doers. There is no way this young man that killed 33 people and then in the ultimiate sign of his self centered heart killed himself, there is no way this man could be classified as anything but evil. A rapist is called so if he rapes, then why is a man not classified as evil when he does evil? Why? Because Psychology, the Religion of the World, says man is inately "good", in direct opposition to what God Himself says, that man is desperately wicked (read "evil") and there is no good thing in him...
It clearly is time Christians stop justifying Psychology and reject it utterly as the lie it is. Psychology is nothing but an attempt to remake God into what sinners can accept and worship without fear of judgement. Psychology is the worship of self, and NO Christian can say this is acceptable, or he is not a Christian.
Patrick Burwell, OnlyJesusSaves.com
|
|
|
|
|
