Dr. King and the "Guys With the Guns" at the NRA

Sara - posted on 08/03/2010 ( 28 moms have responded )

9,313

50

584

We now know that the National Rifle Association will be joining Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin for Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th Anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. Is it possible to imagine a greater offense to the legacy of Dr. King?



The NRA, the leading purveyor of the noxious notion that guns are legitimate tools of political dissent, will be standing in the historic shadow of Dr. King, the apostle of non-violent protest. Dr. King resisted calls to violence from within the civil rights movement with these words: "There is more power in socially organized masses on the march than there is in guns in the hands of a few desperate men. Our enemies would prefer to deal with a small armed group rather than with a huge, unarmed but resolute mass of people...." As history shows, the civil rights movement touched the moral conscience of our Nation, and ended the Jim Crow era, by pursuing Dr. King's path of peaceful sit-ins and marches, rather than resisting Bull Connor's water hoses with bullets.



What would Dr. King have thought of the wild cheers that greeted the NRA's Wayne LaPierre, when he said this at last year's Conservative Political Action Conference: "Freedom is nothing but dust in the wind till it's guarded by the blue steel and dry powder of a free and armed people . . . Our founding fathers understood that the guys with the guns make the rules." The idea, long promoted by the NRA, that the Second Amendment is really about ensuring the threat of violence against the government as a legitimate strategy to achieve political change, is now an anthem of the Far Right. As Sharron Angle, the Tea Party candidate nominated by the Republicans to run for Harry Reid's Nevada Senate seat, put it recently, "If Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies." In other words, if the Right cannot change the direction of the country through peaceful discussion and dissent, it will be time for the "guys with the guns" to "make the rules." We have seen the words of political intimidation translate into action, as guns have been openly brandished at Tea Party events and town hall meetings.



What irony could be more cruel than the NRA's presence on the steps of the Memorial to President Lincoln, on the Anniversary of Dr. King's speech, a stark reminder that both these American icons were struck down by gunfire in acts of political violence? John Wilkes Booth and James Earl Ray were "guys with the guns" who sought to change the direction of our country through armed force. We need no more powerful demonstration of the horror that can be too easily justified by the insurrectionist ideas of the NRA and its Tea Party friends. And what could be uglier than the planned appearance of guitarist Ted Nugent, an NRA Board Member, who once said that "apartheid isn't that cut and dry," because "all men are not created equal"?



The "Restoring Honor" rally is being sold as an entirely "non-political" event that simply will pay tribute "to America's service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation's founding principles of integrity, truth and honor." But the ideological agenda is barely concealed. "Help us restore the values that founded this great nation," says Beck's promotional material. What values have been lost that must be restored? Who lost them? How should we restore them? The theme of "lost values that must be restored" is indistinguishable from the Tea Party demand, "We want our country back!" The NRA's presence is an implicit statement that if our values cannot be restored throughout peaceful dissent, the "guys with the guns" will be there to restore them through other means.



In his "I Have a Dream" speech, Dr. King said this: "We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence." The appearance of the NRA at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28 shows a shameful contempt for Dr. King's memory and the principles of non-violent protest for which he lived, and died.



We must have faith that Dr. King's legacy will remain strong enough to ensure that the guys with the guns do not make the rules.





Ok, I know this is a biased article, but I honestly want some input from some of our right-wing friends. Thoughts?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Rosie - posted on 08/10/2010

8,657

30

315

i agree to an extent with that pamela. but the problem with some christians today is they seem to be extremists, and take the word of god waaaaay to literally and twist it into something that fits their racist or homophobic, or sexist agenda, or whatever that person fancies-usually all.
there are way to many people doing this, i'm not saying all christians do it, but alot of them do. it's the main reason why i turned from christianity, i couldn't stand hearing all them using the bible as a reason to hate or disapprove of people diffferent than them.

Pamela - posted on 08/09/2010

1,496

104

41

You know Diane, I don't necessarily disagree with you on this. I think we should be able to protect ourselves, our families and property - however I don't think we need AK-47's or bazookas to do so. So I'm all for us having the right to bear arms, but within reason and with some regulatory laws in place.

Pamela - posted on 08/09/2010

1,496

104

41

I think it's highly likely that MLK would have been a pro-life advocate. But his pro-life advocacy would have extended beyond just getting babies born. Right before his assassination, he was taking up the cause of the poor. He was moving into issues of poverty and the systemic oppression of poverty for all races.

I don't know what MLK's stance on private gun ownership was. I know that he chose to walk the path of peaceful resistance in the face of extreme violence. He chose to turn the other cheek. He didn't agree with the tactics of the Black Panthers nor did he agree with Malcolm X's stance on the use of violence to defend African Americans (which was very similar to the Black Panther's philosophy).

This lends an example to all of us regardless of our faith or non-faith; perhaps the path of peaceful resistance is the best path of all? Because MLK succeeded in the face of horrendous and extreme violent opposition. It lends an example though even more specifically to those of us who follow Christ. I think Jesus himself would transcend all parties - Right or Left. I think he'd have both sides incensed at him because he wouldn't represent their interests. He would represent the interests of his Heavenly Father and God's interests are usually quite different than ours - Right or Left.

The path of peace is far harder to walk; it is far easier to lash out in rage and anger, than it is to turn the other cheek and forgive.

I don't think MLK would be supportive of the NRA. I'm not sure what his views were on gun-rights were, but we can probably draw some conclusions about from his life. I agree with you Diane in that he would have stood up in love against the NRA (were he against them).

Diane - posted on 08/06/2010

694

18

30

MLK said, "There is more power in socially organized masses on the march than there is in guns in the hands of a few desperate men. Our enemies would prefer to deal with a small armed group rather than with a huge, unarmed but resolute mass of people...."



But we do have the second amendment…..” A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”



I am sure King was not talking about doing away with this. I do see your point however. King stood for peaceful protest, and free speech. He would be appauled at the laws today that are on the books. And I say this not to start the debate up again only to make a point. Abortion. He was a devoted believer in Christ and he loved life. He would have protested marched against this law like his niece who is pro-life and active in Silent No More and Right to Life events across the country.



Is it possible to imagine a greater offense to the legacy of Dr. King than the abortion laws on the books today?



“As Sharron Angle, the Tea Party candidate nominated by the Republicans to run for Harry Reid's Nevada Senate seat, put it recently, "If Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."



In other words, if the Right cannot change the direction of the country through peaceful discussion and dissent, it will be time for the "guys with the guns" to "make the rules."



We have seen the words of political intimidation translate into action, as guns have been openly brandished at Tea Party events and town hall meetings.”





Congress is not doing the will of the people. We are a Republic and we vote people in to reflect our beliefs, to do OUR WILL. But these people we elect are not people, they are politicians who are doing their own agendas. This is no longer happening. Take HEALTH CARE. Twenty states have voted to throw out the health care overhaul bill. THE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THIS. Will Congress listen? Will Obama come to grips that the country does not want this? The Right want the views and feelings of the people represented and honored. When will our voices be heard?





Like Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."



I believe that good people outnumber those who are bad. But it seems that the bad guys are making the rules and going against what the people really want. Like in California…with gay marriage. The people voted….and now a liberal judge overturned their vote. Why even vote today, what does it mean, obviously nothing.



Like Health Care, states are now voting to throw the new health care law out. I am not talking about one state I am talking about twenty states have joined the fight.



“"I Have a Dream" speech, Dr. King said this: "We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence."”





I believe that too. And I have no doubt that there will be no violence at the Lincoln Memorial event on August 28. People might have guns…but they will not use them…only show that a peaceful demonstration can happen even if you are armed. Who knows if any of the demonstrators marched with guns, in Kings day. The thing is nothing happened. What is important is that we have the right by law, to be armed. The people who are armed across the country….are not the bad guys or the problem. The problem is the government.





“We must have faith that Dr. King's legacy will remain strong enough to ensure that the guys with the guns do not make the rules.”



But the guys with the guns…(SCOTUS, WASHINGTON) have made the rules. Our Founders wrote the Constitution, they said it is our right to be armed. SCOTUS is supposed to listen to both sides of a legal case and then decide who should win the case by looking at what the law says about who should win. They decide what the law means, and they act on it. How many times have they screwed up on this one? They directly took their gun and aimed it at every unborn in the womb.



It would be interesting to see what Dr. King would say about the present administration; what is going on today and what has gone on since he was murdered.



Would he be for same sex marriage? Abortion? Ilegal immigration? Would he have stood on scripture or been politically correct and said what society said was right?



Martin L King videos….





He wants to do God’s will. He sees the promise land….this is Christian scripture. And as a devout Christian man, what is important to him is what God says is important.



I believe God sent him as a gift to mankind, an example that we don’t see too often.



These are some of my favorite quotes.



“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction....The chain reaction of evil--hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars--must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.”



Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength To Love, 1963.





What would he think of the party system today and the hate they have for one another? Has America lost her objectivity. Is winning more important than loving and giving in?





"Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true."



Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength To Love, 1963.





I firmly believe he was pro-life and would have marched against abortion. Everything in his being attested to this because he was a non violent man and as we all know abortion is violent.



"I am aware that there are many who wince at a distinction between property and persons--who hold both sacrosanct. My views are not so rigid. A LIFE is sacred. Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being. It is part of the earth man walks on; it is not man."



Martin Luther King, Jr., The Trumpet of Conscience, 1967.



He saw the connection of the church in relation to the survival of our nation. He said the church needs to do MORE.



The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.



Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength to Love, 1963.





Whether it is civil rights issues, securing the border, abortion, religious freedom, free speech and for King, Jesus Christ….find a passion.





“If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live.”



Martin Luther King, Jr., speech, Detroit, Michigan, June 23, 1963.



I think we have come a long way since Kings statement and we have more to go…but this one makes me want to cry, because it is so true. I love this statement.....I look to this statement when I get down...it puts things in order and reminds me that I am so blessed. King would say however that even the pain was worth what comes in the end...and that would be standing on the mountain top with God.





"Being a Negro in America means trying to smile when you want to cry. It means trying to hold on to physical life amid psychological death. It means the pain of watching your children grow up with clouds of inferiority in their mental skies. It means having your legs cut off, and then being condemned for being a cripple. It means seeing your mother and father spiritually murdered by the slings and arrows of daily exploitation, and then being hated for being an orphan."



Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, 1967.



Even though I did not agree totally with everything he said.....I admire and love him and believe he was a great man of God.

Kelly - posted on 08/03/2010

700

16

37

Oh for the love of Pete............ Are some people really so desperate to discredit the Tea Parties and what they are accomplishing? "Can't imagine a greater offense to the legacy of Dr. King?" Really? Why are some so unbelievably scared of guns in the hands of responsible citizens? I really don't get it. The fact is, the Tea Party rallies to date have been relatively non-violent, and completely tame compared to say, the protests at the G20 summit.

As far as your particular questions Sara, I am trying to decide if it is worth the effort to craft a response.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

28 Comments

View replies by

Diane - posted on 08/17/2010

694

18

30

“The problem though Kati is that the Bible is anti-gay. You can't get away from that. Which is why I'm always confused when gays are Christians. I can't imagine being part of a religion that calls for your death - even if it's no longer enforced.”
The Bible states what God says is right. It is a roadmap for Christian to follow.
Well if a gay is a Christian and they are having sex, then they are sinning. This is scriptural. Jesus never called for their deaths. That was in the OT. Well ya know…you only touched on one sin in the bible.
Lets look at some others. If you lie…….it is sin. If you commit adultery, it is a sin. If you murder its sin. If you swear on Gods name it is a sin. If you lust, if you covet, if you steal……….they are all sins. There isn’t anyone sitting in any church that is not a sinner. However, the bible says repent and do it no more. If you are a Christian who is willingly sinning…this is not pleasing to God and He disciplines those He loves.
As for guns…I hate them and we do not own a gun. But we are thinking about getting a couple. We live along the highway where the drug runners and illegals come through. We had an elderly couple tied up last year by illegals who broke in and robbed them blind. They lived at the end of our street. So this violence is closed to home.

Rosie - posted on 08/11/2010

8,657

30

315

see jen, and diane i guess i played the whole christian thing half ass for 5 years i'd say, before that i was all about it-just had never heard ONCE any mention of homosexuality being a sin. i don't know if it was the church that i went to, or the fact that i was younger and they didn't deem it an appropriate topic for a teenager. my mom gave me the option of not going to church when i was 16, and i stopped going, but still went on happily believing. the year i got married i got married in chads families church. i was appalled at the teachings, and how gay people were somehow sinners for loving someone of the same sex. for the next 5 or so years i just told myself that i could just ignore that part of the bible, and still be christian. finally it became to much for me to bear, and i had to turn away. but back on topic...:)

as much as i would love to get rid of guns altogether, i understand the want for them. hell, i actually like going out and shooting a gun, my dad used to take me when i was younger, and i had a knack for it. but i truly believe that if there were less guns there would be less gun crime. but alas, the 2nd amentment is what it is, i cannot change that. i do feel that the date and place is a horrid choice. for petes sake the man was KILLED with a gun. the whole thing is reaking with over the top NRA pride and it goes over the top, around the curve, and up another hill too much. some other date, some other place and i'd be happy as a clam. :)

[deleted account]

The problem though Kati is that the Bible is anti-gay. You can't get away from that. Which is why I'm always confused when gays are Christians. I can't imagine being part of a religion that calls for your death - even if it's no longer enforced.

Diane - posted on 08/10/2010

694

18

30

“however I don't think we need AK-47's or bazookas to do so. So I'm all for us having the right to bear arms, but within reason and with some regulatory laws in place.”

Well I can agree with that….I do no t think that the second amendment was specific on that. There should be regulatory laws of course.

Janessa may I ask who today is getting lyched? You live in the past. We should remember it of course……but I HAVE NEVER LYNCHED ANYONE AND MY NEIGHBORS HAVE NOT EITHER.
Could you tell all of us where this is happening today? I mean what do you want whites to do??? You attribute slavery and the KKK to every white it seems. Why should I pay for something that I did not do ? Should we hate all Germans because Hitler was a German? Should we hate all Cambodian people because of Pol Pot?

You do not have any clue whatsoever who attends Tea Party meetings. The head of ours is black…….LOL. We have peope of all colors and cultures. If you think it is only white men you are wrong.

“ I am so glad i am not american i would have no idea what i would do if i was black in american I am so happy everyday i am canadian as a black person.”

Well to tell ya the truth I am glad you are not an American too. We do not need people here who blame and hate people just because of past history. We need people who bring the races together as one. You feel you are entitled. I do not think black people in America have it so bad. AND...

I think you are very misguided about which political party is the rich one Janessa. I posted something about this remember in the Obama Mamas group and then got tossed out because they did not like what I had to say. No free speech in that Community.

Six of the top ten richest politicians are Democrats.

http://www.forbes.com/2002/10/29/cx_dd_r...

Here are the richest politicians in Congress.
Seven of the top ten are Democrats.

http://innovation.cqpolitics.com/cq-roll...

Thirty of top fifty are Democrats.

27% of Showbiz Dollars Go to GOP?

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tag/de...
http://www.wilshireandwashington.com/201...

Are all these Democrats giving to the poor…most their salaries? Don’t tell me that Republicans have all the money or is the richest party. The Democrats just want everyone to think they aren’t.

Kati you said this, “ but the problem with some christians today is they seem to be extremists, and take the word of god waaaaay to literally and twist it into something that fits their racist or homophobic, or sexist agenda, or whatever that person fancies-usually all.”

I think it’s the opposite. I think people take the scriptures change them to fit HOW THEY WANT TO LIVE.

God says adultery is sin. So could any case be made for adultery? God said lying is a sin. Can a case be made for lying? God said sex outside marriage is sin. Can you make a case for sex outside marriage? NO, No and no.

If it is extreme to love God to honor the things Jesus said ……..then I AM EXTREME. What do you think extreme means……? The thing is you are blaming followers for what CHRIST COMMANDS AND SAYS IS RIGHT. You will not be able to find one example of God condoning same sex unions/marriage.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments God says to lay with someone of the same sex is an abomination. Now how can we change that? It says that no one is to do this. Jesus said to love even your enemy. I might not agree with someones sexual preference but that does not mean I hate them. I stand on the Word and I am not going to cave into political correctness or what society at the time says is moral. Its all or nothing for you. If I do not buy hook line and sinker into gay unions…..I am racist, homophobic and sexist. Who is not tolerant here?. It’s not me hating…….it’s the other side hating. I do not hate someone for not being a Christian. I would have to hate many people in my own family who are not believers. So why should someone hate me for not believing that same sex unions are ok?

“it's the main reason why i turned from christianity, i couldn't stand hearing all them using the bible as a reason to hate or disapprove of people diffferent than them.”

Well I am not going to even presume to know why you turned from God…I will say this about SOME PEOPLE. I am NOT pointing at you per se…..
I believe a lot of people turn from God…that never had God to begin with, not in the true biblical sense When you become born again in the Spirit…you are made new. It says “few will enter the gate”….so those who do not make it, never had the Holy Spirit, He never convicted them. Did you ever see the Left Behind movie. In it the Priest was left behind. Obviously he was not born again and thought he was.
Jenny said, “I believe Jesus was a communist if we must label it. No government authority and equality for all. Working together for the common good. You can gaurantee there is no political party he would have supported and he would have abhorred Capitalism.’

Well He was the Son of God…that was his label. He said……..and honored the government.

Paul used the words be subject in Romans 13:1,5. He was telling his people to recognize the authority of the government and to submit to it. This willing subjection involves obedience to the laws that are established by those in authority. He explained that God established government with our best interests in mind. He also stated in Romans 13:1, "The authorities that exist are appointed by God." Although there are repressive and God-denying governments that have perverted their divinely appointed roles, God intended government for righteous purposes.

Romans 13:4-5 points out that civil authority acts on God's behalf to maintain order, uphold justice, punish wrongdoing, and restrict the practice of evil. Laws against murder, rape, child abuse,etc.. reflect God's value on human life and personal property rights.

Peter said that our obedience to the government will be a positive testimony to unbelievers. Martin Luther disagreed with laws…..but he did it peacefully. When I picket abortion clinics, I do it peacefully. But I would never be obedient to a law that forced me to be immoral. Abortion is legal…but if the government forced me to help someone perform them, then I have the right to obstain just like the midwives in Egypt when they refused to murder the newborn Hebrew boys. There are limitations to obedience. Daniel drew the line when asked to violate his religious convictions. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego refused the Kings orders. Queen Esther did not follow protocol. Jesus gave people free will. He did not force anyone to give anything they had to anyone else. The government should NOT BE REDISTRIBUTING THE WEALTH…WE SHOULD BE DOING IT ON OUR OWN. And Christ loves a cheerful giver. There is a difference between giving to someone, and being forced to give.

If you look at parable of the talents, you could argue the exact opposite point about capitalism. The good steward (who increased what he had) was given more by the master. Jesus told us that we would ALWAYS have poor (Mark 14:7), so thinking that socialism would eliminate poverty well….I don’t think that is the case.

Christ really did not talk about the government that much, but you can tell by what He said about other issues how He would feel.

Tithing was an Old Testament law given to the Jews. It was their taxation system. But it all depended on attitude…the attitude of the giver. That is what is important to Christ…what is given from the heart. If you are forced to give…that can’t compare with someone who just gives.

Pamela said, “Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist church in Kansas could make me want to turn from Christianity too.”

You shouldn’t not if you love Christ. You should pray for them that they turn from their warped views of Christ and what He stood for. Nothing could make me turn from the Word. They are an evil group I will say that….but Paul was a murderer and Christ picked Him to do His work. There are evil people in the world…and many Christians are included in this group. But they do not represent the religious right…no more than the 9-11 terrorists represent all of Islam. I think there is another conversation about this.


Pamela said, “I have to look to Christ and I don't see that hate-mongering in him. He mostly focused on what's in our own hearts - and the transformative power that he can bring. I don't think he was beholden to any political system - just God's.”

I agree we do have to look to what Christ said. And that’s why I follow the scriptures especially about sin and he said sex outside marriage, same sex unions….is sin. If you look to what Christ said about one thing….you can’t exclude what He said about everything else. What I see from a lot of people…they constantly talk about the Jesus and love issue. Jesus was more than just about love and helping the poor. He condemns all those that reject Him. He talked about hell more than He ever talked about Heaven. Why? Because He knows that unless people confess Him…they will not have eternal life. HE SAID THIS.
And you are right we are all in this together. God never said that we should walk alone.

Jenny - posted on 08/10/2010

4,426

16

126

Laura, Caeser is dead now so we don't need to render to him anymore ;)

Pamela - posted on 08/10/2010

1,496

104

41

I totally get what you're saying Kati. Imagine how frustrating it can be for those of us who are not extremists and don't view the bible as a tool for hate and malice...it is amazingly frustrating. Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist church in Kansas could make me want to turn from Christianity too...I throw up in my mouth just a little when I hear that man spew his vomit onto people. I have wrestled with the Religious Right's agenda (not literally of course - which would be interesting to say the least. Smack down with Dobson and Land:o) They focus strictly on a few issues but ignore a whole lot of others that are just as important (and perhaps more?). I have to look to Christ and I don't see that hate-mongering in him. He mostly focused on what's in our own hearts - and the transformative power that he can bring. I don't think he was beholden to any political system - just God's. And God seems to be really interested in how we interact with the poor, the marginalized, etc. "Doom!" cried Isaiah "to those who enact unjust legislation, taking advantage of the poor, the widow (or unwed mother) and the orphan". So I try to keep my eyes on that and on Christ himself and to remember that we're all in this together.

Isobel - posted on 08/10/2010

9,849

0

282

I'd say socialist...because he believed in rendering to Caesar, that which is Caesar's...AND obligated his followers to pay a tithe in order to help those less fortunate :)

Jenny - posted on 08/10/2010

4,426

16

126

I believe Jesus was a communist if we must label it. No government authority and equality for all. Working together for the common good. You can gaurantee there is no political party he would have supported and he would have abhorred Capitalism.

Pamela - posted on 08/09/2010

1,496

104

41

Actually Janessa - Jesus was very much for the poor and the oppressed. His proclamation in Luke 4, where he quotes Isaiah, is all about bringing the good news for the poor, freedom for the prisoner and for the oppressed...

Janessa - posted on 08/09/2010

444

38

28

Someone said Jesus would not be for neither party i agree. But i know he would be for the poor people and those who suffer. He would so not be for the republicans because they gave and gave to the rich. He was and always been with the poor i wonder if any republicans actually read the bible?

Janessa - posted on 08/09/2010

444

38

28

Wow that he is digusting what the tea party is doing. I find it really weird sarah palin defends people who are racist. I mean she is married to a none white person maybe if people in her party start lyching native americans maybe she might speak out then. Because she has defend tea party members who are racist agianst blacks, latinos. I am so glad i am not american i would have no idea what i would do if i was black in american I am so happy everyday i am canadian as a black person. Dr king would be more for minorties and poor that was what his movement was about.bBut he would try to reason with the tea partiers like sarah palin and glen becak and on with peace.

Diane - posted on 08/09/2010

694

18

30

Well one thing is certain...he was a godly man who practiced what he preached. He followed our laws...even though he might have disagreed with them. I believe he would have peacefully worked to change them.
The second amendments give us the right to bear arms. I believe we have a right as citizens to protect ourselves and our property.

Diane - posted on 08/06/2010

694

18

30

It all depends what you think he stood for...and he would have stood with his enemies, in fact he did just that.
So if he had been against guns in this way...he would have stood up in love....not hate.

Rosie - posted on 08/06/2010

8,657

30

315

i think i threw up in my mouth a little.



i do believe they would have a non-violent protest, i'm just not understanding the place and the date. it's a slap in the face to all that dr king stood for, and it makes me ill.

Krista - posted on 08/03/2010

12,562

16

842

Yeah, regardless of my own feelings on the matter, from a sheer public relations point of view, it's terrible timing.

LaCi - posted on 08/03/2010

3,361

3

171

Blah. I think this is irrelevant, honestly. I don't even know what to say about it. If they have guns, and yet aren't using those guns, it's still completely nonviolent. I don't find it insensitive or offensive at all, honestly.

ME - posted on 08/03/2010

2,978

18

190

How did they think it would look to plan a pro gun rally on the anniversary of (arguably) the greatest peace activist our country has ever seen...Have they NO SHAME? No Sense?

Sara - posted on 08/03/2010

9,313

50

584

I'm honestly curious, Kelly. But you can answer or not answer as you see fit obviously.

I think the article makes some valid points, though it's obviously biased and the author is not pro-gun. I just thought it would make for a good discussion.

Krista - posted on 08/03/2010

12,562

16

842

I'm not anti-gun by any stretch of the imagination, but this just seems really tone-deaf and insensitive on the part of the NRA.

ME - posted on 08/03/2010

2,978

18

190

I'm appalled by this mockery of Dr. King...but I'll wait to hear what the others have to say about how this particular event is supposed to look to people who know what he stood for...I've never believed that "might makes right"...but it seems that's all the (radical) right has going for them today...threats, fear, and anger...scary stuff...

Sara - posted on 08/03/2010

9,313

50

584

To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.

---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
As David Hardy explains, "Adams was thus mindful of the uses of arms (i.e., legitimate self-defense and militia duty) and concerned about misuse for mob action or anarchy."

Sara - posted on 08/03/2010

9,313

50

584

This is the part I'm most interested in getting some comments from the other side of the political spectrum on: "Help us restore the values that founded this great nation," says Beck's promotional material. What values have been lost that must be restored? Who lost them? How should we restore them? The theme of "lost values that must be restored" is indistinguishable from the Tea Party demand, "We want our country back!" The NRA's presence is an implicit statement that if our values cannot be restored throughout peaceful dissent, the "guys with the guns" will be there to restore them through other means.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms