Atheists are a small minority in the U.S.  Advocates of gun control might be a minority in America as well. In light of the recent shootings in Aurora I am curious as to how atheists in this network view the lack of gun restrictions.  There are probably divergent views.

I have trouble believing that both presidential candidates are steering away from any call for reform after the horrific mass shooting. In my opinion it is insane to allow citizens access to assault weapons that can kill scores of people in a few minutes.  It was even more shocking to hear on a news show that a family had to raise money to pay for the immense hospital bills for one of the victims while they were already crippled with medical bills from the mothers fight with breast cancer.

As a Canadian I came to stand with my U.S brothers for the reason rally and freedom from religion.  I would be willing to come down to the capitol and march for two other important causes.  Gun control and universal health care.

Views: 12392

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

And I had finally given up on this discussion. People get emotional when you challenge their religion. People get emotional in the U.S. when you challenge their right to bear arms - even semi automatics.

This was just too tempting not to mention.  Atheists are at fault.

The "right to bear arms" is indeed a religion. Skokieguy (Larry) shared this at Joe.My.God.'s article "Bump Stocks Sell Out Nationwide Over Ban Fears":

Latin cross made out of (semiautomatic?) rifles

I'll also share that link, and this next one, at Politics, Economics, and Religion:

So Few Americans Understand What the Second Amendment Is Really About—or Its Dark History (Thom Hartmann, AlterNet) subtitled "The Second Amendment is an anachronism that's no longer relevant today."

Geez, the liberal pansies like Hartmann are at it again!

What keeps them from understanding the world they inhabit? Happily, we progressives and conservatives together outnumber them.

Interesting links. Grinning Cat. I guess irony is lost on some people when I showed the link that blamed the shootings on atheists.

Tarring someone with a label is not constructive when dismissing all their ideas or point of view. How do you win the argument by saying well who going to listen to X because they have admitted to being an Atheist - and you do not actually dispute their individual arguments.

Does Hartmann make some reasonable researched points? Or do I just need to know that he is a liberal pansy to dismiss everything he says.

And Tom - you just knew I would breathe life back into this discussion - isn't this the time to do it - when another crazy person is capable of using legal weapons to kill 58 and injure 500 people. I think i resisted the impulse with some of the many minor mass killings. But this link should bring you up to speed on all the times I did not speak up.

Mass shootings

Russell, I leave Canada's problems to Canadians and I leave Mexico's problems to Mexicans.

America's wanting to make the world safe for investors doesn't concern you?

As to Hartmann, he is saying what he and so many liberals always say: "Only criminals should have guns."
Russell, I knew you would breathe life back into this discussion, in which you say other people get emotional. As if you don't do the same.

What keeps you from understanding that when people unthinkingly increase the earth's population, then other people--from those who rule nations to nobodies like a guy in Las Vegas--are going to try to reduce the population? Try thinking. At least once!

Tom, why do you have to be so rude. Does it benefit you to be so caustic? 

Joan, you've heard or read the saying, "If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen."

The kitchen is metaphor for politics, and what you consider rude is candid, direct, straightforward, etc in politics. It's also necessary for seeing through the lies that "polite" people tell.

Yes, if I am in a boiler room, I could expect to hear language fitting politics. In my kitchen, when people disagree, they spell out the disagreement in clear, concrete, terms fitting a gentleman. There is no place for insults, put-downs, trivialization, discounts, or demonization. 

You are a dear and trusted friend, Tom, one who challenges me all the time. I like your challenges. Why are you gentlemanly with me and not with others?

Thanks, Joan, for the belated clarification. I was for a while concerned that you had seen rudery(!), not frankness, in my remarks about overpopulating the earth.

Gentlemanly? Madame, I deny that slur!

I am however gentle with people who are themselves gentle or who have felt unjust violence. (There's a backstory to that but it's long and lunchtime is now.)

Oh, for goodness sakes, Tom, rub it in with your gentlemanly/madame comment. I know, I act as though I have my nose up some butt; and I know you are very gentle with me. I don't think you make any points with others when you write as though you are a thug!

Thanks Joan. It takes courage to speak up to a bully.

I don't know how being polite makes you a liar.

We can all learn from people's perspectives from different cultures. As a Canadian, I just listened to a book written by an English lady on the culture of Denmark. "My year of living Danishly". Fascinating country that ranks as the happiest in the world. I would like Canada to be more like Denmark which offers free education and better health care. Canada ranks 7th while the U.S. is not in the top ten.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service