Episcopal Church in Michigan passes gun resolution

[stone space]

Episcopal Church in Michigan passes gun resolution

Niraj Warikoo, Detroit Free Press 9:41 a.m. EST November 3, 2014

The dispute is part of a larger debate among Episcopalians and other mainline Protestants about the future of their churches as they face sharp declines in membership.

The Episcopal Church in Michigan has passed a controversial resolution calling for stiffer gun control, drawing sharp criticism from conservative members who say it violates the right to bear arms.

The dispute is part of a larger debate among Episcopalians and other mainline Protestants about the future of their churches as they face sharp declines in membership.

Some conservatives say the gun resolution is the latest example of the Episcopal Church focusing on promoting liberal social issues such as gun control and same-sex marriage instead of the gospel, alienating congregants. But liberals say that their views are in line with the teachings of Christianity.

By a clear majority, members of the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan — which consists of southeast Michigan and the Lansing and Jackson areas — voted recently to approve a resolution calling for universal background checks on all gun purchases, banning all sales of semiautomatic weapons, high-impact ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and making gun trafficking a federal crime.

snip----------------

Rick Schulte, director of communications for the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, did not comment on the resolution. Supporters say it was a necessary move and one that reflects the views of the Episcopal Church and Christianity. They noted last week's shooting in a Washington state high school as the latest example of gun violence.

"We work to bring God's peace to the world," said the Rev. Chris Yaw, rector of St. David's Episcopal Church in Southfield. "God's kingdom is not of violence; it's of peace."

snip------------------

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/2014/11/03/episcopal-church-michigan-gun-resolution/18382335/

[rug]

1. The more voices the better.

[cbayer]

2. Well, as a gun control advocate, I am glad to see this.

On the other hand, the country is so split that this seems like it is going to alienate a lot of people who may be members.

[upaloopa]

5. Does the NRA care if it alienates you?

If there is to be change it takes standing up and being counted.

[cbayer]

6. No, but they are a gun advocacy group.

That is their agenda.

OTOH, when churches take positions on controversial social issues, there are other things to consider.

[upaloopa]

16. Only to consider what is the right thing to do.

[cbayer]

17. I'm really ambivalent here and I'm not even sure why.

As I said, I am a strong gun control advocate but I think that the "rightness" of my position is really just my POV. DU has really opened my eyes. There are people with whom I otherwise have a great deal in common who are RKBA advocates.

I guess I am apprehensive about creating more division among liberals/progressives without a really compelling reason to do so.

Side note - a lot of churches in New Orleans put up "Thou Shall Not Kill" billboards. I found that a very strong message.

[upaloopa]

18. You don't go back on your ideals because

someone on the other side claims to be a liberal. That is part of the obfuscation. Don't fall for all that gunner bull shit. They will say anything because they are afraid of living life without a gun. Yet society has to put up with increasing gun violence. There is no valid equivalency here.

[cbayer]

19. Well, actually I have known and admired some of them before I found out what their

position on guns was.

I find this confusing.

Me, personally. I would advocate for the strongest gun control legislation there is. I don't and never have owned a gun or allowed one in my home. I don't willingly or knowingly go anywhere where they might be around.

Interesting story that may color my view. I was in New Orleans during and after Katrina. It was terrifying. As you know, there were many days of chaos with no word from the outside.

When the guys with guns finally arrived, I cheered. I had never been so happy to see firearms in my life.

And when I finally got out, I shot a pistol for the very first (and last) time in my life - twice. I just wanted to know that I could.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. False. All forms of violence, including 'gun violence' are on the decline, statistically.

The Firearm Crime Rate, according to the National Institute of Justice National Crime Victimization Survey is exactly 1/4 what it was in 1993, despite record gun sales, and an expanded population (plus two recessions).

'gunner bull shit' would be a more impressive insult, from someone who knew what they were talking about.


http://nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/Pages/welcome.aspx

FBI unified crime report is in-line with the NCVS.
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/violent_crime/index.html

[stone space]

7. I know that I've alienated plenty of my fellow atheists...

...with my support of gun control, so I imagine that you are right.

I don't let it bother me too much, though.

[cbayer]

13. It's so divisive.

I didn't know exactly to what degree before I started posting here.

I was under the extremely incorrect belief that liberals/progressives pretty uniformly supported gun control.

Couldn't have been more wrong.

I tend to think there is a compromise somewhere, but like Israel/Palestine, I don't think anyone knows what it is.

[AtheistCrusader]

33. Depends on how one defines 'gun control'.

Almost any gun owner, regardless of political affiliation, approves of SOME sort of gun control. For instance, even the most stalwart republican would answer in the negative if you asked if they wanted to remove ALL gun regulations, including the prohibition on selling guns to felons.

It's just a matter of degree and method.

[stone space]

37. More divisive than offering sanctuary to immigrants?

I have to imagine that churches that offer sanctuary catch a little flack from some of the folks sitting in their pews at times.

Speaking out (and acting out) on anything is not necessarily going to make anybody win a popularity contest.

[cbayer]

48. I don't think offering sanctuary is divisive within a liberal/progressive community, but

guns are.

I think there is a lot of religiously based reasons that can be applied to the issue of sanctuary, but not so much to gun control.

It's not a bout popularity. I guess in the long wrong, my concern is in strengthening the democratic party and, in particular, the liberal/progressive wing of that party.

[stone space]

49. There is quite a bit of anti-immigrant sentiment...

...among self described liberals in my experience.

And I've seen religious folks use religious arguments against swords and spears, arguments which presumably extend to more modern weapons like semi-automatics as well.

[cbayer]

53. I really haven't seen anti-immigrant sentiment in this community.

I'm using DU as my guide here.

I think anyone voicing anti-immigrant sentiments would be banned from this site. But full on RKBA support is not only acceptable but quite common.

I am torn.

[stone space]

54. I haven't been at DU long enough to know what's acceptable here and what isn't.

This is just one of many websites for me.

But anti-immigrant sentiment is not new to me. I encounter it all the time.

[AtheistCrusader]

60. Fortunately, I'm not religious.

I don't 'turn my other cheek'. Thankfully, I am not bound by such a ridiculous proscription.


On immigration... I would kick the gates down myself if I could. Someday this nation won't have any immigrants to deal with, because people aren't going to want to come here anymore. We destroy ourselves a little bit with every single one of them we turn away. We should be grateful they seek us out and want to join us at all.

I have the President's back on Amnesty, and anything else within his power to move the needle on this issue.
Congress, sadly, is a lost cause for at least 2 years.

[stone space]

61. I'm not religious, either.

But I do take the prophesy in Isaiah 2:4 quite seriously, having had the meaning explained to me many times by Militant Christians in a quite convincing manner.

As for immigration, I'll be sitting on pins and needles in anticipation all day today.

[AtheistCrusader]

62. I too, have hope. And I'm normally a huge pessimist.

http://www.msnbc.com/the-cycle/obama-executive-order-immigration

[Curmudgeoness]

24. I don't know any fellow atheists here

who are against gun control. Maybe there is one who supports gun rights, but I haven't run into those people you speak of. You certainly would not alienate me in regard to your support of gun control, but the broad brush is another thing.

[stone space]

25. I'm not thinking of here at DU. (nt)

[Curmudgeoness]

26. Good to know. I was wondering. nt

[stone space]

27. I'm afraid that guns are a religion for some.

And I've at times gotten the impression that they act as a drug for some as well.

Guns are the opiate of the masses...

[AtheistCrusader]

32. Mine mostly sit in the safe.

In fact, on average that's about all they do, 99.9% of the time.

[rug]

50. That's the pronounced libetarian streak.

[shenmue]

3. Watch Gordon Klingenschmitt lose his poop over this

"This is crazy! How can you? American freedom!"

I bet he says something that pops up on Right Wing Watch pretty soon.

[rug]

8. I have no idea who this is but I love this sentence.

Watch Gordon Klingenschmitt lose his poop over this

[shenmue]

12. An extremely crazy right-wing minister and tee vee show guy

Runs his own Web show type thingy, "Pray in Jesus' Name." Was chucked out of the military as a chaplain after he refused to stop wearing his full dress uniform to private political events.

Here are some tasty morsels of his craziness:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/search/node/Gordon%20Klingenschmitt%20type:blog

[rug]

15. "Klingenschmitt" reminds me of the Star Trek joke.

How is toilet paper like the USS Enterprise?

They both circle Uranus and pick up Klingons.

I'll just go back to the Lounge now.

[Dont call me Shirley]

22. LOL

[upaloopa]

4. Which gospel has the second amendment in it?

Was it Matthew Mark Luke or John?
Gun nuts wonder why they are called nuts!

[shenmue]

10. The Gospel According to Nobody in the Dang World

That's who.

[freshwest]

23. +1

[atreides1]

9. Hmmm

"...drawing sharp criticism from conservative members who say it violates the right to bear arms."


But if God is on their side why do they need a gun?

[cbayer]

11. Such a silly rhetorical question, don't you think?

[AtheistCrusader]

31. Same reason they look both ways before crossing the street. Their god doesn't exist.

Remember that next time some jackalope tells you god has a plan for him. Ask him (or her) if they look both ways before crossing the street. If not, they must not trust in 'the plan'.

[stone space]

38. I look both ways when I cross the street, and...

...that has nothing to do with me being an atheist.

What I don't do is walk around like a fool toting an AR-15 and endangering the lives of the people around me like this ammosexual gun nut does with impunity.

As atheist, it's against my religion.

[Rhiannon12866]

14. Good for them!

I was baptized in the Episcopal Church.

[Damansarajaya]

20. I'm a practicing Episcopalian, and, dude, this is really stupid.

Since Jesus doesn't say anything about guns, they should just stick to what He did say.

[Dont call me Shirley]

21. Jesus would not have packed heat.

[NaturalHigh]

28. Curious...

If this were almost any other issue, a lot of people who think this is a good thing would be furious that a church was speaking out on a political matter.

[stone space]

29. You mean like...

...immigration?

[AtheistCrusader]

30. What the fuck is 'high impact ammunition'?

Armor piercing pistol ammo has been illegal for 20 years, nationwide. Not just sale, simple possession lands you in federal prison. Rifle ammo makes little difference for humans. Soft tip hunting rounds for normal deer will go through commercial body armor like it isn't even there.

UBC's are a good idea. No qualms there, and gun owners like me are constantly exhorting other gun owners to belly up to the bar and be a part of crafting such legislation, so we don't end up with a fucking nightmare like I-594, which is a disaster, and will be overturned in court. UBC can be done, but it has to be done properly.

Banning all sales of semiautomatic weapons is impermissible per Heller vs. DC. And would probably lose us who knows how many elections in the future. It's a dead issue.

'High-capacity ammunition magazines' according to whom? My standard sized mags for multiple firearms I know would give the VPC and Brady folks a conniption fit. And again, there's always the 'common use' Heller provisions.

As for gun trafficking a federal crime, that's fucking impossible for now, now that the asshole brigade has taken the house and senate. Last year the S. 54: Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 failed to pass. We need to take back Congress to get it passed. Sad, bill seems like a no-brainer to me. Probably why the repugs hate it.

[stone space]

35. I'm opposed to that one.

impermissible per Heller vs. DC

Do you have a breakdown on which Supreme Court Justices voted in favor and which voted against?

[AtheistCrusader]

39. More complex than that.

That was Scalia's wording, but the dissents varied on which mechanism by which the 2nd was protected. P&I, DP or 'other'.
And it further makes little difference for me, because there is no ambiguity in my state constitution version of the 2nd amendment.

[stone space]

40. Do you have the breakdown on which Supreme Court Justices...

...voted for Heller and which Supreme Court Justices voted against?

I understand that it was a 5-4 decision.

[AtheistCrusader]

42. Yes it was. And as I daid, you should read the dissents, because they aren't outright 'No's'

[stone space]

43. Do you know who voted in favor and who dissented? (nt)

[AtheistCrusader]

45. Kennedy, Alito, Thomas, Roberts, written by Scalia.

Stevens, Ginsburg, Beyer, and Souder filed 2 separate dissents.

All of which you know full well, and I don't care that that is the case.

[stone space]

47. Thank you. I recognize those names.

I've seen that same crew vote the wrong way on issues that come before the US Supreme Court before.

[AtheistCrusader]

51. Broken clock/twice a day.

Heller is fine with me. Still allows controls. Just because it doesn't allow certain bans doesn't make it a bad decision.

[stone space]

52. That crew is not right twice a day.

Not in 5-4 decisions.

[AtheistCrusader]

55. Kyllo v. United States

Scalia and Thomas joined Breyer, Souter and Ginsburg.

Ok, maybe just once a day, assume a digital clock. But some of them have surprised me from time to time.

[stone space]

56. Not the same crew. (n)

[AtheistCrusader]

57. Correct. The makeup of the court has changed over time.

The two republican assholes I cited, however, crossed party lines on that issue. Surprisingly so.

[stone space]

58. Nobody crossed over in Heller.

The two sides lined up exactly as one would expect, and Kennedy chose a side.

[AtheistCrusader]

59. Except the 'no's' were a qualified 'no' that doesn't exactly mean 'no' but 'you should do this

differently'.

Also, Stevens was wrong on 1/4 of his dissent. The NFA *is* constitutional, and will remain so. (Many of the provisions of the NFA could be constitutionally applied to more than just automatic weapons as well.)

Heller is a mixed bag, you see in it what you want to see in it. In reality, it opened a major door for further gun control regulations. I, personally, am an advocate of extending the NFA to cover semi-automatic weapons as well. (Though the 200$ tax stamp is too high)

The NRA publicly cheered the decision, but the NRA/Republicans/Conservatives are actually quite bitter about a couple bits of language in Scalia's majority opinion.


Breyer's dissent, I agree with; the trigger lock mandate is constitutional. But Heller was about more than just trigger locks, pre-Heller district of Columbia amounted to an outright ban on handguns, period. There was a permit process for which, apparently, zero were ever issued. That is an outright infringement. As Heller correctly found.

Breyer's, IMO, correct dissent was a victim of 'bundling' multiple aspects of a case together. I see absolutely nothing unconstitutional about safe storage laws, and the court's decision was silent on the matter, IIRC.


Edit: And the effective ban issue was AGAIN addressed in MacDonald vs. Chicago.

[stone space]

36. How many bullets do you feel you need in a gun?

'High-capacity ammunition magazines' according to whom? My standard sized mags for multiple firearms I know would give the VPC and Brady folks a conniption fit. And again, there's always the 'common use' Heller provisions.

[AtheistCrusader]

41. I generally accept the mfgr's recommendation.

Aftermarket high-cap usually either weighs too much, or has reliability issues.

For instance, the shitbag that shot Giffords, used a 33 round mag that is used only by one military in the world, (Spain) and only used for one role; hostage rescue. Its meant for immediate max violence, and not really intended to be reloaded at all. The mag has such a large spring, to lift the stack of ammo, that the floorplate has a tendency to break, dumping your ammo on the ground. It also makes it easy to jam on reload. So they use it for a role that doesn't require reloading.

If you want to ban the sale of such a material, I'm not going to put up a huge fight, but I question the utility of doing so.

My standard carry arm holds 15+1, and that is my personal preference. I have some that hold as little as 10+1, but no less in a semiauto config.

[stone space]

44. Where do you carry it?

My standard carry arm holds 15+1, and that is my personal preference.

[AtheistCrusader]

46. In the woods.

I live far enough into the sticks, I'm a five minute walk from two state forests.