whats up with this?
There were a couple of news bits that I scanned this week that caught my attention, and may be related, (though one wouldn't think do right off the bat...).
The first of these is a report in Newsweek and other online sources regarding a soon-to-be-released documentary and book about the historic Jesus. The book and film document an archeological discovery that some claim to be the actual burial place of Jesus and his family and what is left of the physical remains of the well known Rabbi from the 1st century, CE, (also known as AD). I have not read the book or seen the documentary, (it will air on the Discovery channel March 4th), but have seen in the news reports that the producers of the film believe that the find is authentic, that this is the historic Jesus, and his family, including his mother and Mary Magdelene, who, the produders claim was Jesus' wife, and a son, whose name was Judah. I commented on this when the claim was first made, (last year--you look it up), and I won't go real deeply into it right now.
The other story that I relate in a strange way to this one is the saga of Jim Zumbo, a writer for various sporting and outdoor life magazines, and a spokesperson for some manufacturers of equipment that caters to that type of individual. Mr Zumbo apparently made a remark, in print, that was critical of those who use assualt weapons for hunting such ferocious maneaters as prairie dogs.
Now I am a guy who backs the right to own, carry and use firearms in a responsible manner, and I did not find too much fault in Jim's logic; it seems to me that the practice is a lot like using
dynamite to dig holes for fence posts. It would seem, to the untrained eye, to be overkill, inexact, (to say the very least), and its utility would be in the actual use rather than the elimination of a varmint. (Exactly how small can one chop a rodent with 39 .223 bullets?).
In any case, I relate the two stories by the reaction that they evoked. Mr Zumbo effectively committed professional suicide with his comment, his association and endorsement deals were cancelled, his columns in the magazines suspended, and he found himself in the sites of the big Kahuna of firearms-related issues, the NRA, who immediately attacked his opinion and banished him from the ranks of those who think correctly, (that is, along the lines of the NRA).
The NRA found it justifiable to sacrifice Mr Zumbo's right to free speech and his own considered opinion, because, as they noted in their commentary, that "their rights were under attack".
In the case of the book/movie, some members of the Christian community are up in arms that someone would even think, (let alone suggest), that there might be some artifactual remnants of the life of Jesus that don't exactly conform to the company line.
These illustrate one of the defining characteristics of twenty-first century American culture, an apparent fear of discussion or dialog one those issues that one considers to be paramount in his or her life. One need not agree, or even participate in the discussion, to be entitled, for some perverted reason, to attack with any means available any person who does so indulge his or her "rights".
This seems to be true in religion and politics especially, although I am certain that the trait permeates nearly all aspects of our life, (though I can think of no instances where one has been fired from a cooking magazine over the use of molasses over brown sugar...).
Lets get a grip on things folks, the ability to express and possibly exchange ideas makes America what it is, not the jealous protection of ones own notion of truth. I am sure that what I write tends to piss a lot, (well, one or two of you), off at times, but the great thing about this forum is can engage in debate, or simply ignore it, without any threat to owns own intellectual, ideological or spiritual autonomy. We all have a right to our own opinions and beliefs, if these are so fragile that they cannot stand up to somebody elses opinion, then they really aren't worth much.
Hope the NRA doesn't ban my blog....
The first of these is a report in Newsweek and other online sources regarding a soon-to-be-released documentary and book about the historic Jesus. The book and film document an archeological discovery that some claim to be the actual burial place of Jesus and his family and what is left of the physical remains of the well known Rabbi from the 1st century, CE, (also known as AD). I have not read the book or seen the documentary, (it will air on the Discovery channel March 4th), but have seen in the news reports that the producers of the film believe that the find is authentic, that this is the historic Jesus, and his family, including his mother and Mary Magdelene, who, the produders claim was Jesus' wife, and a son, whose name was Judah. I commented on this when the claim was first made, (last year--you look it up), and I won't go real deeply into it right now.
The other story that I relate in a strange way to this one is the saga of Jim Zumbo, a writer for various sporting and outdoor life magazines, and a spokesperson for some manufacturers of equipment that caters to that type of individual. Mr Zumbo apparently made a remark, in print, that was critical of those who use assualt weapons for hunting such ferocious maneaters as prairie dogs.
Now I am a guy who backs the right to own, carry and use firearms in a responsible manner, and I did not find too much fault in Jim's logic; it seems to me that the practice is a lot like using
dynamite to dig holes for fence posts. It would seem, to the untrained eye, to be overkill, inexact, (to say the very least), and its utility would be in the actual use rather than the elimination of a varmint. (Exactly how small can one chop a rodent with 39 .223 bullets?).
In any case, I relate the two stories by the reaction that they evoked. Mr Zumbo effectively committed professional suicide with his comment, his association and endorsement deals were cancelled, his columns in the magazines suspended, and he found himself in the sites of the big Kahuna of firearms-related issues, the NRA, who immediately attacked his opinion and banished him from the ranks of those who think correctly, (that is, along the lines of the NRA).
The NRA found it justifiable to sacrifice Mr Zumbo's right to free speech and his own considered opinion, because, as they noted in their commentary, that "their rights were under attack".
In the case of the book/movie, some members of the Christian community are up in arms that someone would even think, (let alone suggest), that there might be some artifactual remnants of the life of Jesus that don't exactly conform to the company line.
These illustrate one of the defining characteristics of twenty-first century American culture, an apparent fear of discussion or dialog one those issues that one considers to be paramount in his or her life. One need not agree, or even participate in the discussion, to be entitled, for some perverted reason, to attack with any means available any person who does so indulge his or her "rights".
This seems to be true in religion and politics especially, although I am certain that the trait permeates nearly all aspects of our life, (though I can think of no instances where one has been fired from a cooking magazine over the use of molasses over brown sugar...).
Lets get a grip on things folks, the ability to express and possibly exchange ideas makes America what it is, not the jealous protection of ones own notion of truth. I am sure that what I write tends to piss a lot, (well, one or two of you), off at times, but the great thing about this forum is can engage in debate, or simply ignore it, without any threat to owns own intellectual, ideological or spiritual autonomy. We all have a right to our own opinions and beliefs, if these are so fragile that they cannot stand up to somebody elses opinion, then they really aren't worth much.
Hope the NRA doesn't ban my blog....
posted by eccentric recluse at 7:09 PM
13 Comments:
Let's put aside that gun owner's rights are as touchy a subject as abortion rights.. and that proponents have learned a need for zero tollerance. Whether that's right or wrong is subjective, for sure.
I don't think anyone's free speech rights are the point on this Zumbo deal. If a local sports writer in Green Bay said, "Football is too violent to be a sport. The city of Green Bay would be better off with a baseball franchise"... He'd surely lose his side-line press pass, any local endorsements and probably his job... And rightfully so.
Free speech doesn't mean free of consequence..
So the NRA seems to think it's a good idea to go berzerk on prairie dogs? That makes them sound pretty stupid, doesn't it? Chucks the notion of responsible gun ownership right out the window.
As for the remains of Jesus' family, I think I'll need quite a bit of proof before I believe they're authentic. But shouldn't any real Christian want to learn as much as they can about Jesus, not bury their head in the sand?
I completely agree, many Christian leaders frown upon people (even their own followers) asking too many questions. Could they be afraid that their belief system won't hold up to scrutiny?
Not that anyone cares if you shoot a groundhog 1 or 10 times; and it doesn't even matter. Why is it irresponsible gun ownership because the gun is capable of more than the task at hand ?
This contempt for a gun because of how many rounds it can hold is sillier than non-binding resolutions.
Just because a guy chooses to varmit hunt with his .223 AR-15 (an excellent varmit round by the way), doesn't mean he's gonna go berzerk. And even if he did... WHO CARES. What is irresponsible about putting a few extra rounds into an already dead varmit ?
This is bizarre PC for sure... It's a non-issue. Zumbo chose to make one out of it.
To anonymous, I agree that there is no assurance that there won't be consequences for any opinion, and I for one do not oppose the ownership or use, (I will forgo the term 'responsible for the moment), of these weapons, I just find it to be possibly counterproductive to the cause of the NRA, in the same way that I find it counterproductive on the part of the evangelical community to oppose any person, fact, finding, or opinion that goes against the official line.
Personally, speaking as a gun owner, I find the NRA to be more like an industry promotion group than an issue-oriented activist group. In the same way, I see many religious, (not all of them Christian), groups as being something besides an evangelical undertaking.
E_R
It's the old abortion rights syndrome. Supporters are sometimes forced to take pointless stands that even appear counterproductive to the "middle-of-the-road" observer, because of the old, "don't cede even reasonable points", else risk losing ground to those who'd take ALL your rights.
Don't underestimate the NRA's position as an over-funded, irrational PAC... Because they are. I guess it's a necessary evil when gun-grabbers will let how a gun looks, or its magazine capacity, label the owner/user as irresponsible.
p.s. I don't hunt anything, ever; for no other reason than I can't kill, even a groundhog and not lose sleep over it. BUT.. I own an AR-15 and if I were to go varmit hunting, it's an ideal choice.
Shooting a groundhog into tiny bits is irresponsible because it is neither for food nor for pest control. It is splattering blood and guts for some sort of sick entertainment.
I agree that it's also counterproductive to the NRA's image. Why would they want to be seen as a bunch of berzerk hillbillies?
See what I mean ?
Remember, I don't hunt.. for food or pest control. I do have friends who hunt though, for the sport of it (don't ask me, I don't get it). If I did hunt varmits for the sport of it; I'd still use my AR-15 because it ideal for that type shooting. And I aint no hillbilly, nor are my friends (even if they do squeeze and extra round or two, from 200 yards away, into the already dead groundhog).
Somebody *wink* is letting their own, narrow-minded images make an issue out of a non-issue.
Thanks anonymous, that was the point of this whole post, except I was aiming at another subset of 'somebodies'. *wink*
I'd imagine a subset lending itself to going berzerk for blood and guts, can/will do it with a target pistol, shotgun or garden hoe.
That somebody shoots groundhogs with a semi-automatic rifle isn't any reflection of themselves or the weapon.
If anything it's more humane than wounding critters with .22 target rifle and leaving them in a field to suffer.
Logic is of no use to those who let irrational, emotional images help them pass judgement.
Having a little trouble tracking the conversation because of all the "anonymous" by-lines, but, this was a good point you made about everyone feeling they have the right to some recourse simply because someone "attacks" their "freedoms." I suppose in some cases this amounts to not letting an opposing viewpoint get the last word in--the stuff of which arguments are made--but I think some are losing their perspective.
Worth noting.
thanks Roy. as an additional example, in today's paper there is a short article that cites Dr. James Dobson calling for the removal of another evangelical Christian from his (apparently) influential position as he backs some action on global warming.
One apparently cannot be simply oriented one way or another, one is either "all" liberal or "all" conservative, with all others being considered as simply wrong and unworthy of any consideration, position or opinion.
Vote libertarian. Not that they are so hot, but they haven't had time and muscle enough to develop these calloused positions...
Post a Comment
<< Home