Comments on: Tax the “Mega-Corp’s” Really Killing California

By: Sven

Sven — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:48:32 +0000

As I stated in the comment, Bob, that I know that was referring to Spiritual warfare in it’s context. Again, I was just using that as a reference along with the Peter example of where weapons are spoke of and not against of.

You’re story is a touching one I think in the end, ya, it’s much better to give up your wallet, car, house, whatever, in protection of your life. I just feel we shouldn’t be so dogmatic to ignore gun ownership as you started this debate with ‘I ignore such comments when Christians speak of it’ (paraphrasing.)

I feel we’re, maybe me, are turning this into some gun debate and that’s not even my original point. Yes, I too can go off on bunny trails as well. Sorry.

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:19:12 +0000

You didn’t really mean to write that, did you?!? If you’re serious, then you’d better include the entire passage, and that includes verses 10-13. “We do not war against flesh and blood…” Also remember that all but one item in that list is used to protect oneself, not cause injury to another. And what is the offensive weapon? The Word of God. It’s not a physical weapon to use against a physical enemy. In fact, according to this passage, we don’t have a physical enemy. Two nights ago I listened to a man who watched his father die of a gunshot to the heart while they were out shoveling snow. His life was spared because he handed over his wallet. What he learned as he matured was that the killer was not his enemy. The enemy is the principalities and powers of the kingdom of darkness. This young man who was sixteen when his father was killed. A couple years ago he performed the wedding of the man who drove the car at the killing. The weapon that he used was the Word of God, not a gun. Had he used a gun, the young men who killed his father would have died that night and never been able to experience forgiveness, repentence, and redemption. The big picture and the long term is more important than the short term and the small picture. We are not called to worship our families, we are called to worship God.

By: Sven

Sven — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 04:25:47 +0000

Brian, you crack me up! Ya, maybe TuPac isn’t dead. I was wondering myself when I saw his new album show up on iTunes last week. hehehehe, too funny.

I get your point and yes, they are criminals shotting criminals. I was just trying to point out that not all thugs have semi-automatics.

Bob, I grew up with a hunter. He didn’t believe in keeping the guns in the house though he did say that if anyone every tried to force there way in, he would rush for his riffle in the garage and defend his family. My father is an experienced and trained gun owner. I believe anyone with a fire arm should be, too. I agree with Jon’s stats that most do more damage then not when they own a gun in their home, but many of those statistics also include neighborhoods such as your own were people can’t afford training. It makes a difference.

Since you brought Jesus into this, I say look at the Scriptures and see what they show about defense. I can think of Ephesians as one where it talks about the breast plate of righteousness and the sword of truth but what’s missing from Paul’s description of Spiritual warfare? Armor to protect your back. Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, knew retreat was not an option and writing in the days of Roman occupation, his example was well understood. Granted, this was of a Spiritual nature, the point is still there was no running involved. Further, I can find no other Scripture that instructs God’s people to retreat, though I could have easily missed it somewhere. I guess if you could give me an example for me to better understand your point, that would help.

Look, again, I’m no pro-gun psycho. I just think having the option to have a gun to protect yourself is a good option. Texas allows citizens to carry concealed weapons and guess what? They have one of the lowest death rates by a gun. Why? Because the criminals aren’t sure if THEY are going to get shot if they attack someone. Good luck with that San Fran!

By: brian

brian — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:55:59 +0000

Sven, that was a really good point with TuPac. I now see your side. The guys that have guns for protection end up shot, TuPac, 50 cent and the list goes on.

btw…I am not even sure TuPac is dead. I mean he has released more albums since his “death” then before it.

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:53:58 +0000

I didn’t say Jesus is “anti-weapon,” but I don’t think He’d own a weapon for the reason that you gave - self-defense. I’m not anti-gun, but I don’t need a gun since I’m not a hunter. Owning a gun for self-defense is stupid, as Jon correctly pointed out. Someday you might have to use it, but it is highly unlikely, and even more unlikely that you’d be able to use it effectively.

By: Sven

Sven — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:38:55 +0000

Poor disadvantaged corporations, Jon? I’m not saying they’re the best thing since apple pie but heck, scaring them out of the state will definitely contribute to “poor disadvantaged citizens” for sure. When there’s no rich to tax ’cause they all went East, then how we going to feed the poor? You and TOS avoid that as do most believe in high taxation for the rich.

To clear the gun thing it all up, I’m not a gun tooting, NRA card carrying, Republican. I just believe that the right to bear arms was such an important thing that the forefathers made sure it was on one of the first articles in the Constitution. That’s all.

As to the gun and Jesus, Bob, I don’t think it’s wrong for a Christian to own a gun. Remember, Peter had a sword — the gun of that day — in the garden to defend Jesus. Yes, Jesus told him to put it away after Peter sliced the Roman’s ear off, but he didn’t tell Peter, “I can’t believe you have a sword. Why do you have a sword?” Instead, Peter was the rock in which the church was built on. So, I don’t think Jesus is anti-weapon.

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:01:24 +0000

Sorry Sven, but you’ve been sipping a bit too heavily of the Republican Kool-Aid. I can’t comment a whole lot on CA taxes, I’ve never even visited the state, but any Christian who advocates for guns in their homes usually turns my ears off at best. For some reason there’s this mentality that Jesus would gun down any thief who came near Him (I know that’s an exageration of your point ). The reality is that He’d do the exact opposite. I’ve lived in some of the toughest neighborhoods in Illinois (including Chicago’s west side during the riots of the early 90’s), and I have never had, nor will I ever advocate for, a gun.

Isn’t this the second time in a month we’ve had this discussion around here? Whazzup?

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 08:08:27 +0000

There you go again advocating for those poor disadvantaged corporations again.

Seriously, I think business has the best advocacy money can buy.

And I didn’t know you were so passionate about gun ownership. Or is this simply another slippery-slope scare tactic? What’s that statistic saying that a gun owner is 12 times as likely to shoot themselves or a child than to stop an intruder? Something like that.

By: Sven

Sven — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 06:28:52 +0000

I agree, we do need to pay for our services but when you force business out of state who left to pay for them?

By: TOS

TOS — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 06:26:27 +0000

Yeah, Walmart & Starbucks pay todays tax rates, and they are still springing up everywhere. Yet Disneyland saves millions of dollars they should be paying in property taxes because of prop 13. As usual, you miss my point and hear only what you want to hear.

And I believe in Capitalism just fine, thanks. I also believe in paying for taxes, to pay for things like roads, firefighters, police, public education, the military, etc. As some like to say, “democracy isn’t free.” It does seem some aren’t willing to pay for it.