Get ready for the next round of attacks on the 2nd.

Grady wrote: But another nice attempt to tie 2nd amendment supporters in with the religious right.

It's not an "attempt", and the percentage of 2nd Amendment supporters that are tied in with the religious right greatly outnumbers those that aren't....

Source?... Sorry, I read it somewhere, so I'm not quoting it...I'm just "talking about it."

archer wrote:

Vatican Welcomes Obama Gun Control Proposal
01/19/13 10:16 AM ET EST AP

The Vatican's chief spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said Saturday that 47 religious leaders have appealed to members of the U.S. Congress "to limit firearms that are making society pay an unacceptable price in terms of massacres and senseless deaths."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... 10885.html

Where does this leave conservatives who are both religious and anti gun control?

Just like cafeteria Catholics choosing what we want to believe.

Where does this leave conservatives who are both religious and anti gun control?

I believe we are called Protestants...

otisptoadwater wrote:

Where does this leave conservatives who are both religious and anti gun control?

I believe we are called Protestants...

touche'

It is, however, changing

There is a split in American pews over gun control. In the weeks since the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, many Christians are wrestling with gun control, an issue they once held as a sacred, untouchable right.

For years gun control was championed by Catholic and mainline Protestant churches, but now many evangelicals are joining the growing choir of Americans asking what can be done.

http://christianchurchestogether.org/gu ... community/

so what now?

on that note wrote:

Raees wrote: You can have my car when you pry the steering wheel from my cold, dead hands.

So you understand where some of the gun folks are coming from. Some things are important to people.

:happier:

Again, that was sarcasm.

2 quick minutes on the Goog reveals:

254 million cars - 270 million guns - fairly even.
85 gun deaths per day - 93 driving deaths per day - fairly even.

But hey - accidents happen. according to the logic, we should do away with speed limits, drunk-driving laws, headlights and seat belts, right? i mean, accidents are going to happen, and people drive after drinking every single day without hurting anyone at all.

Something the Dog Said wrote: The comparisons between regulation of motor vehicles and guns is absolutely irrelevant. Each one should be considered on their particular merits and issues. If there is a lack of regulation of motor vehicles, then that issue should be examined based on the unique particularities of that issue, not compared to something that has no relevance to that industry. This is just a common tact by the NRA tools who want to deflect from the examination of the role of firearms in society. Why not have an honest discussion of that issue rather than deflecting from it?

[/b]
Which is why I ceased posting responses........(1st bolded).........2nd bolded is an EARNEST question. Deflection is a popular tool in
MANY threads.JMO

A post was moved from here and added to the already existing thread in the Ring: <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href=" www.285bound.com/285forum/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=25594&start=10 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=29&t=25594&start=10<!-- l -->

Anyone who doesn't realize obvious sarcasm is STILL "not the brightest bulb in the package."

There...You can move this one too...

Raees, you could really help me right now by finding a good image or cartoon with someone holding a bear's arms or something like that.