58 votes

We are defending the right to bear arms with the wrong argument

I see a lot of back-and-forth about the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms and it dawns on me that we are going about this completely the wrong way.

The first thing I notice is that people use the Constitution to justify keeping and bearing arms. The Constitution is very sacred, however, the right to arms is not created by the Constitution. It isn't even created by the founding fathers. It is a right endowed upon us by our Creator. When you use the Constitution as the "force" behind our right to keep and bear arms, you allow the enemy of your rights to declare those rights void by declaring a portion of the Constitution void. Without a doubt, there are people that would give up a portion of the Constitution to enjoy undeserved safety.

Another major problem with using the Constitution as the basis of our rights is that it leaves the debate up to the interpretation of the words of the Amendment itself. The words are just a means of communication. While they do serve as specific instruction to the government exactly what to do with an armed people (shall not be infringed), it does not by itself stand the test of time. The words themselves tend to take on slightly different meanings over time. That means that same Amendment will have different meanings to different people at different times. This is the source of the "militia right vs. individual right" argument.

Another thing I notice is that people argue the intent of our founding fathers when defending our rights. This leaves the argument up to the various interpretations of the several statements of the founders. The founders couldn't agree on a lot of things but they were very good at compromise. The argument then shifts to our recollection of those statements and our recollection of what the founding fathers intended.

In order to make our arguments infallible to the enemies of the right to keep and bear arms, we must defend the rights on behalf of a higher power. A power higher than government itself. Indeed, the right is not derived from people, from government, from paper, or from the intentions of a group of people that passed away a long time ago. The right to keep and bear arms is one of the inalienable rights endowed upon us by our Creator. Our founders recognized that people had these rights. Of course, they also knew that governments didn't always respect those rights so they did write them down as a set of instructions for our government. What you must keep in mind is that our rights exist not by grant from the government, but because we have a right to life and liberty. How do you preserve a right to life and liberty if you do not have the means to protect it. It is why the rhinoceros was given a strong horn by its creator, to protect its life. It is why the shark has so many teeth. Whether you are predator or prey, your only right to life is your willingness to preserve it. I can not reinforce this enough, it is simply by our Creator's design that we have such rights.

Never let someone argue that changing the sacred document of the Constitution, or that any mild piece of legislation can ever take away our right to self defense. The government didn't give us the right to self defense, so it can never take it from us. It was never theirs to begin with. It is no less cruel to disarm a free people than it is to cut the horn from a rhinoceros.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Actually

The Constitution WAS ratified without the Bill of Rights. They were added about 3 years later, as the supporters promised (honorable men back then as opposed to now.)

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

Yes, you are 100% correct.

Yes, you are 100% correct. It was ratified based on the "promise" of a Bill of Rights to be added.

it is our closing argument

that will matter most.

let them argue.
let them debate.

my rights are not open to discussion.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

Phxarcher87's picture

George Washington

George Washington

JUDGE; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY; PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; FIRST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; “FATHER OF HIS COUNTRY”

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.122

While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.123

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.124

I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.125

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Phxarcher87's picture

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; DIPLOMAT; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA; SECRETARY OF STATE; THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.65

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Phxarcher87's picture

John Hancock

John Hancock

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS

Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement.38

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Phxarcher87's picture

Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS

I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.12

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Phxarcher87's picture

John Quincy Adams

John Quincy Adams

SIXTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; DIPLOMAT; SECRETARY OF STATE; U. S. SENATOR; U. S. REPRESENTATIVE; “OLD MAN ELOQUENT”; “HELL-HOUND OF ABOLITION”

The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].8

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Phxarcher87's picture

JOHN ADAMS

John Adams

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; JUDGE; DIPLOMAT; ONE OF TWO SIGNERS OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECOND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.1

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

Another argument

My favorite is the idea that unless the people are armed with decent weapons, the POWER OF THE PEOPLE is only on paper, and at the mercy of corrupt politicians to honor the contract.

Why did this have to become a

Why did this have to become a theological debate?

I used Creator instead of God to avoid this becoming a theological discussion. Christians know who their creator is, as do followers of every other religion, and to some extent, atheists and agnostics.

We all came with rights. It wasn't the government that gave us those rights, and it wasn't the founders that created the government, either. It is a self-evident truth, just as the founding fathers recognized. You don't need a Bible, a Torah, a Koran, etc., to tell you that you have these rights, you just know you do. That's why they are self-evident.

The point was that you don't go arguing that a paper or a person or a body of people is the proof that the right to self defense is a right we all ought to have. Those are arguments that aren't cemented in a firm enough foundation for all the reasons I outlined above.

You don't have to explain why murder is wrong. Everyone knows it is. The same logic applies to self defense. You shouldn't have to explain why you have a right to self defense, everyone knows you have that right. They're just involved in the wrong debate.

________________________________________

Creator?

^

Yes, Jesus

That's His name. It's whose birthday we are celebrating in a couple of days.

"For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

Jesus wasn't born on the

Jesus wasn't born on the 25th....

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Who said He was?

.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

The concept of a Creator

The concept of a Creator extends beyond religious context. Some credit the Christian God, some credit nature, some credit nobody. However, in every case, you didn't just manifest out of nothing. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in omnipotent super-beings. I believe in physics, heat, energy, scientific principles. Nevertheless, I have an awareness of self and part of that awareness knows that I didn't create myself. So whatever you credit as the reason for your existence, know that you were intended to exist with certain inalienable rights.

By the way, Jesus is not a creator. According to Christian theology, he is the son of the creator known as God.

________________________________________

Incorrect

Jesus is not "a" creator, as you say. He is THE Creator, according to Christian theology. As mentioned in a reply below, three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - three separate, distinct Persons - are the one God.

This is why, e.g., Colossians 1:16 tells us: "For by Him [Jesus - see verse 13] all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him."

We are told twice in that verse that Jesus created ALL things. He IS the Creator.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

As man is

a body, soul and spirit. So God is The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God. "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God." John 1:1 "And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (And we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." John 1:14 Jesus Christ is that part of God which we see as he is the "image" of the invisible God. Colossians 1:15
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." Hebrews 11:3

"Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is The Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." 1 Corinthians 12:3

Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams

bad theology

The Father and the Holy Spirit do not have physical bodies - only Jesus does since He has two natures. He is both God and Man.

It's funny how non-Christians like to tell Christians what their theology is.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

Not bad theology

I never said the Father or the Holy Ghost have physical bodies. Jesus does. Being the image of the invisible God, he is that part of God we see.
Jesus is not the Father. The Holy Ghost is neither the Father or the Son. But they are all Jehovah.

" For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" Romans 1:20

To understand the "Trinity" all we need to do is look to Gods creation. Man is created in the image of God. Man is a trinity being a body, a soul and a spirit.
Three distinct parts yet one man. The spirit is not the soul, the body is not the soul or spirit, but they are all human. It is similar with God. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, The word and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." 1 John 5:7 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" Deuteronomy 6:4

Scripture says of Jesus, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Colossians 2:9

As for gun control. Even Peter drew a sword to defend Jesus when the high Priests came to arrest him. "Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus." John 18:10

Even though Jesus told him to put up his sword, he was not told to not carry one. Peter was defending against corrupt leaders.

Merry Christmas

Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams

You are correct

I misread what you wrote. You wrote "So God is The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost." I read that as "So has God The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost."

No argument here - my apologies.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

As an Atheist

I too believe in a creator, not a God. still our freedoms are giving unto us without permission from authority as our founders exclaimed.

Fyi- as per Christianity; Jesus is all three the son, the father, and holy spirit as it is written in John 8:58 Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I AM!”

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

I also am

agnostic. However I just don't see the point in any of this debate...We were all born and we all have the right to defend ourselves against anyone who wishes to hurt us in anyway. Its that simple.

Sorry, wrong

Jesus is not the Father and He is not The Spirit. No Christian believes that. Those three, separate, distinct Persons are the one God, though.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

You are wrong -true Christians believe what freespeech quoted

Jesus said, "If you've seen me, you've seen the Father." "I and my Father are one."

The "trinity"(a word found no place in scripture) is a pagan doctrine going back thousands of years and later adopted by Rome -nothing new under the sun. Here are some trinitarian graphics: http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image...

Colossians 2:9 warns us: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in HIM(singular) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

And as freespeech quoted, Jesus said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."

In Judaism, there is something called the Shema. "Hear O Israel, the LORD thy God is one Lord" That God is one, is the foundation of Judaism which extends into true Christianity.

I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war. Ps 120:7
--
Better to be divided by truth than united in error.
--
"I am the door." -Jesus Christ

Sorry, you are the one in error

As I mentioned above, it's funny how non-Christians like to tell Christians what their theology is.

The Trinity is not a pagan doctrine. The Trinity is the Christian doctrine that within the one Being we call God, there exists three Persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

You might try reading James White's book, The Forgotten Trinity, if you want a clear understanding of Christian theology on the subject. At a minimum, read this article: http://vintage.aomin.org/trinitydef.html

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

I am a Christian

That is why I reject man-made doctrines.

Even though I warned you quoting Colossians 2:8-9, you didn't heed and instead came back citing extrabiblical sources.

You say Jesus is not the father. I leave you and anyone who really loves Jesus for tonight with the glad tidings of Isaiah 9:6.

I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war. Ps 120:7
--
Better to be divided by truth than united in error.
--
"I am the door." -Jesus Christ

Sorry, wrong again

Christians do not believe or teach that Jesus is the Father. Jesus and the Father are two different Persons. Your reference to Isaiah 9:6 is twisting the meaning of scripture. While most translations refer to the Son in Isaiah 9:6 as something like "Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" or "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace," that does not mean He is the Father as in God The Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

This is just common sense. For example, in Matthew 3:17, who said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased?" Jesus? He was if we are to believe what you are saying. Was Jesus calling Himself His own Son? That's just nuts. All through scripture from Genesis to Revelation we see that the three Persons of the Trinity are three different Persons. As James White said, "The doctrine of the Trinity is simply that there is one eternal being of God - indivisible, infinite. This one being of God is shared by three co-equal, co-eternal persons, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit."

So what does "everlasting Father" or "Eternal Father" mean in Isaiah 9:6? It's just a poor translation into English. What it means is Father of the everlasting or Father of Eternity. As Creator, Jesus IS the Father of Eternity. But He is not the Father that we mean when we refer to God the Father, the first Person of the Trinity.

While you have obviously fallen for cultic doctrine, this may help: http://carm.org/everlasting-father

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul