Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  2 3 4 5 6  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
02:56 PM on 02/20/2013
I won't bash christians and their beliefs, but...glass houses aren't the safest places to live...thats all. If there are a people filled with hatred toward others...its def them. One thing I agree with geniuses...if criminals want guns...they will get them...and they will get them before you can even concieve that you may need one. More dependency on the government for our own protection. I know there is a serious problem in America...but its not guns. Its people. Lets solve that. We can definitely do that. It starts with you...not everyone else...you. Stop complaining and grab life by the balls already.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chaotician1
02:24 PM on 02/20/2013
Frankly, a better course is to force the 2nd Amendment to be fulfilled in its entirity! To allow citizens to have weapons for the purpose of supporting the nation and opposinh internal tyranny.....citizens must be active in the local militia(modern days thats the National Guard), be trained and certified periodically(at least annually), and be subject to pyscholoigal evaluation periodically(At least annually). The weapons and ammunitions of an active Guard person could be kept at home(such as Sweden, Switzerland, and Israel) or in local armories; these weapons are "real" military heavy weapons; not some ineffective "rip-off" replica, not some bulked out hunting rifle, and certainly not hand guns of any sort! All non Guard weapons can then be sensibly regulated as they are not protected in any way by the 2nd ammendment and there is little reason or purpose for such weapons to be in homes except possibly in rural areas. One adendum required is some stiff penalties for criminal use of any weapon such as at least life imprisonment for such possesion or use during a crime and I would not be opposed to automatic death penalty for such a terible act!
04:58 PM on 02/20/2013
So you want people to have military weapons at home. Would you also then go along with the limited access and very, very strict control on bullets-like in Switzerland and other countries? In many cases the ONLY place to get bullets for you military weapon is at a shooting range and you MUST shoot all of them--you cannot take home bullets with your guns. Is that what you will accept also-since you are promoting a system like those countries.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chaotician1
05:17 PM on 03/05/2013
Hey, I'd prefer no weapons at all or limited to direct contact weapons such as knives and swords perhaps. I thought the Swedes had ammo, but I'm not sure. I think as a practical political agenda; making the 2nd amendment only apply to Militia(Guard) weapons is a hard to fight interpretation, probably forces SCOTUS to clarify at some point, and gives weapon control and removal politically viable options.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Molon Labe762
Sic Semper Tyrannis
08:07 PM on 02/20/2013
militia is by its nature unregulated, the national guard is, hence, the national guard is not militia.. just thought id point that out
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:45 AM on 02/23/2013
So what do you believe the constitution means by 'well regulated militia'? Not being snarky, just wondering.
photo
pdferguson
Micro-bios? We don't need no stinkin' micro-bios!
02:09 PM on 02/20/2013
For anyone who thinks the second amendment cannot and should not be changed, go read the THIRD amendment (which absolutely no one can remember, with good reason), and see if you still think amendments cannot and should not ever be updated or repealed.

The Constitution is a living document, a fact that seems to have been lost in the past few generations.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
demsd
97% of Republicans LOVE Social Programs
03:52 PM on 02/20/2013
There is a difference between Can and Should.
05:14 PM on 02/20/2013
Sorry, but the Third Amendment has not been changed, nor should it be. And no, the Constitution is not a living document. Those of you that think it has been lost in the past few generations miss that until the 20th century, that concept did not exist.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SylvreWolfe
01:43 PM on 02/20/2013
And another reason to really hate the catholic leadership. We are not a theocracy, get out of our government!!
05:27 PM on 02/20/2013
No reason to hate the Catholic leadership, and particularly not here. The Catholic leadership does not support America Magazine. Interestingly enough, it is a liberal publication, and not indicative of Church positions at all. But as to Catholics staying out of government, it won't happen. Over a fourth of our Congress and 6 or 9 Supreme Court justices are Catholic. Don't kid yourself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VinZenTexaN
God welcomes his victims
01:16 PM on 02/20/2013
Haven't so-called Christians figured it out yet?
Over past 10 yrs, we have seen "Christians" make a mockery of this country and the Constitution.
People came here originally to escape religious prosecution.
That's why we have separation of church and state. In our US Constitution. Have you guys EVER read it?
Your whole gimmick appears to be that you guys want "attention". You aren't willing to go about your daily business like the rest of us
We're all supposed to "notice" you and "bow down and acknowledge you" as somehow different and better than the rest of us.
We've heard your message ad infinitum, and we're beyond bored.
You represent "nothing we want".
I repeat, "You guys have NOTHING we want".
And, I am familiar with the New Testament, and I think it's a total travesty that you guys stole the term "Christian" and twisted it to such a degree that it bears NO resemblance to Christ's teachings.
A few years ago, it occurred to me that if you guys are right---and I'm wrong---I'm fine with going to he*l. Because MY idea of "h*ll" would be to spend eternity without you guys.
05:30 PM on 02/20/2013
Are you referring to Catholics? As to your position generally about Catholics, you would be wrong, given that the Church created the New Testament, not the other way around. But as to America Magazine representing the Church or Catholics, it no more does so than does the National "Catholic" Reporter, that has been declared non-Catholic.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VinZenTexaN
God welcomes his victims
10:27 AM on 02/21/2013
The real axis of evil is Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. And lets not forget how all religions are always calling for the end of mankind so they can fulfill their evil prophecies.
11:49 AM on 02/22/2013
Id rather have the Catholic Church and all other religions around but no guns rather than the reverse.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Branner
Religion is the infection the bible is the disease
12:54 PM on 02/20/2013
Okay, so let me get the this straight, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, but are they saying that we should NOT have the right to bear arms? If that is correct then I have two questions to ask this group. 1. what the hell is wrong with you? and 2, do you know that criminals don't care about law and will obtain a gun regardless of any law?
05:31 PM on 02/20/2013
Tom, I agree. And to be clear, as a Catholic, America Magazine does not adhere to Catholic teaching, and is not indicating the Church's position on this issue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Branner
Religion is the infection the bible is the disease
05:36 PM on 02/20/2013
That's good, that is actually a bit reassuring. If anyone had the thoughts they do, they'd be mentally unfathomable.  No one has to like gun laws or support them, but to advocate repealing a gun amendment is just stupid.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
doophis
Idiota Maximus
12:28 PM on 02/20/2013
The editors offer a great question: Is the context in which the Second Amendment was written still the context in which the Second Amendment is applied? In other words, for this great law to remain a great law, and for the Constitution to remain a great document, the people who are sovereign over it - the American People - must ask these questions so as to keep the laws current. If nothing else, we must ask these questions, for the laws cannot remain current, or great, if the framework in which they live and breathe is not the same framework in which the laws are carried out.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
demsd
97% of Republicans LOVE Social Programs
03:54 PM on 02/20/2013
In what context do you think the Second Amendment is or should be applied?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Molon Labe762
Sic Semper Tyrannis
08:10 PM on 02/20/2013
the 2nd amendment is very clear, we don't need to update or revise or change a thing..
photo
Cori527
Gay democrat agnostic vegetarian!
08:58 PM on 02/20/2013
"the 2nd amendment is very clear, we don't need to update or revise or change a thing."...

It is very clear that it is totally and completely irrelevant in today's world and needs to be completely revamped or simply discarded.
11:50 AM on 02/22/2013
Actually, it's not clear at all. Does "right to bear arms" allow you to have an ICBM in your backyard?
12:06 PM on 02/20/2013
Interesting that the vast majority of christian religious leaders call for substantial restrictions on gun ownership, yet a substantial (yet still minority) of christians demand the right to own those very weapons.

Makes one wonder what happened to the sanctity of human life, huh?
05:33 PM on 02/20/2013
The sanctity of human life comes from protecting it. America Magazine does not equate to Catholic teaching.
11:52 AM on 02/22/2013
Many Catholics are consistent on issues of life. capital Punishment is opposed by many Catholics.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
racmd
Just riding the wave of life
12:00 PM on 02/20/2013
I am all for equality...let's get rid of the first half of the First Amendment and you can take the Second.....
05:34 PM on 02/20/2013
Both suggestions are equally incipid.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
racmd
Just riding the wave of life
09:45 PM on 02/20/2013
You shouldn't take things so seriously..it will make you old before your time...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wbthacker
Can YOU pass the Turing Test?
10:59 AM on 02/20/2013
Why doesn't the Catholic Church do what it can, instead of calling for the entire country to change the Constitution?

The Vatican can simply declare that owning a handgun signifies preparedness to commit murder or abet suicide. It's like keeping a box of condoms by your bedside, a constant temptation to commit a sin. Therefore, Catholics cannot own handguns.

When Catholics confess to their priests they'll be asked if they own a handgun, and if they affirm the priest will explain they can't be forgiven until they repent and get rid of the weapon. Unable to attain a state of grace, the pistol-owning Catholics will be denied Communion and be on the path to Hell. This would motivate them far better than any civil law that can only send them to jail.

This is entirely within the Vatican's power. If Catholics believe handguns need to disappear, let them lead by example.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fraublucher2011
11:15 AM on 02/20/2013
wow one of the better opinions on guns and those who are religious..
I trust guns in the hands of gun owners..and I do not trust those who wanna take their little toys away from them..The Second amendment was placed there for a specific purpose... leave it there..
05:40 PM on 02/20/2013
The Church does not want to take your guns from you. This Magazine's editorial board, progressive in nature, does.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
demsd
97% of Republicans LOVE Social Programs
04:00 PM on 02/20/2013
"The Vatican can simply declare that owning a handgun signifies preparedness to commit murder or abet suicide."

Then they would also have to declare that owning knives, bats, pharmaceuticals, or poisons, and having hands signifies preparedness to commit murder or abet suicide.

Keep in mind that the 2nd amendment was not added for religious reasons.

One reason I find religious people to be so sanctimonious? Christians [etc] insist that our fore-fathers where these God fearing, bible thumpers -- yet they created a document that seems to suggest otherwise.
05:42 PM on 02/20/2013
I disagree with your assessment in two regards. First, the Church has not taken this position, only a liberal publication in this country. Secondly, the Founding Fathers were largely God fearing men, and the document does not suggest otherwise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wbthacker
Can YOU pass the Turing Test?
10:52 AM on 02/20/2013
Finally, the Catholic Church says something that makes sense.

"Americans must ask: Is it prudent to retain a constitutionally guaranteed [...] right when it compels our judges to strike down reasonable, popularly supported [...] regulations?"

Absolutely! The people clearly support the administration's idea of requiring employee health insurance to pay for contraceptives. Yet the public will is being stymied by a small minority who shelter behind the concept "of religious freedom."

"If the American people are to confront this scourge in any meaningful way, then they must change. The Constitution must change."

Repealing the First Amendment seems extreme, but he's right. The Catholic Church IS a scourge, and the Bill of Rights was never meant to allow a fanatical minority to control government policy by choosing ridiculous beliefs, then using the First Amendment to impose them on the entire nation.

"We thought the fundamental question here is, is the Second Amendment in the 21st century still useful law"

And I ask the same about the First. Surely we can prevent Congress from establishing a religion without having to endure idiocy like churches acting like political parties and interfering with our national discussion on health care, abortion, stem cell research and gun rights.

No, I'm not serious about changing the First Amendment. Unlike the Catholic church, I RESPECT the Constitution, even when it protects freedoms that annoy me, like the Church's freedom to speak out against freedom.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fraublucher2011
11:19 AM on 02/20/2013
I have no respect for your opinion if you only now feel you must agree with the Catholic Church..besides it's not the catholic Church but just a small representation of it.. you on the other hand have your own agenda ..I own no guns Don't need them... but I respect the rights of others to have them... they've always had them and have always killed someone with them... still guns make people feel safe.. mental issues is the issue to take up.. make better people .. then ...no problem..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wbthacker
Can YOU pass the Turing Test?
04:59 PM on 02/20/2013
"I have no respect for your opinion if you only now feel you must agree with the Catholic Church"

You mistake me; I'm parodying the Catholic Church by talking about religious freedom the same way they talk about gun rights. But I can see how my writing style could have misled you.

Still, my closing paragraph should have been pretty clear.
05:45 PM on 02/20/2013
Sorry you feel this way, since the Catholic Church didn't say anything here. Your example establishes that the Church is not taking this position. The Catholic Church is not a scourge. The LACK of religion is the scourge, and is responsible for far more problems in this country than the existence of religion. In areas of the country where people attend Church, the crime rate is lower. Your misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights is obvious.

The Church never took this position, because it knows that nuts like you will be out there wanting to take away religious freedom.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wbthacker
Can YOU pass the Turing Test?
12:20 PM on 02/21/2013
"The Catholic Church is not a scourge. The LACK of religion is the scourge, and is responsible for far more problems in this country than the existence of religion"

So why did all those priests molest children? Was that a LACK of religion? If the priests themselves don't benefit from religion, who does?

My earlier posting was a parody of the magazine's position. I was illustrating how odious it is to treat the First Amendment the way these schmucks want to treat the Second.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
solar diablo
Est nunquam molestum lupo quot oves existant
10:48 AM on 02/20/2013
I think the magazine is wholly cognizant of the fact that the 2nd Amendment is, in all probability, not going anywhere. It is probably also aware that America is so saturated with firearms that it makes the idea of, say, deporting every illegal immigrant in the country look like a logistical cakewalk by comparison. In short, for better or worse, guns in America aren't going anywhere.

That said, I think what the magazine was trying to do was spark a conversation as to what relevancy an 18th century amendment describing what amounted to rural militia armed with flintlock rifles has to do with a 21st century American suburbanite having the right to own a hi-powered weapon like a semi-automatic M-16 (the AR-15 rifle).

I'd also argue that it's completely consistent for a Catholic (or any other Christian) magazine to question the current gun culture in America, if one takes Jesus' unambiguous pacifist attitudes seriously. Christians are supposed to be pro-life, right? And sorry, arguing that it's pro-life to protect yourself with a gun from other people trying to kill you with guns doesn't make for the strongest case, theologically speaking.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Grada3784
Dogmatic Dictators, believers or not, not welcome
10:44 AM on 02/20/2013
The Roman Catholic Church will go pro-gay marriage before that will ever happen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PlumDumpling
Oh my paws and whiskers!
10:39 AM on 02/20/2013
Now this is Catholicism at its best. This I am proud of. As for the hierarchy: Romans, go home!! You are hurting our children.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
freemarie
10:12 AM on 02/20/2013
From the article: There is also the argument by the National Review's David French, who wrote recently that bearing arms is a God-given right that Jesus would have approved of.

It all started in Genesis second chapter: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

And man has ran with that and has been running rough shod over the planet ever since. I am not impressed.

As for the magazine, to post such an editorial shows that they are exercising the wisdom they have been given. Good for them.