Saturday, March 2, 2013

LOUISIANA DIOCESAN CONVENTION PASSES RESOLUTION ON GUN VIOLENCE

2013 Resolution R-2 AS PASSED

From: The Rev’d John H. Craft, Chaplain, Chapel of the Holy Comforter, and The Rev’d William H. Terry, Rector, St. Anna’s Church

Purpose: To Advocate for the Reduction of Gun Violence in America

Resolved, that the 176th Convention of the Diocese of Louisiana in response to the recent deaths from gun violence, including the loss of 28 of God’s children in Newtown, Connecticut, and escalating urban violence resulting in over 2,000 gun-related deaths since 2007 in Louisiana alone, commends and joins with other faith communities in an emerging moral consensus and with a prophetic voice by calling upon lawmakers at the federal, state, and local levels to take the following steps:
(1) Recognizing the sanctity of life, we urge the support and adoption of state and federal firearms legislation to promote safety, education and responsibility in the purchase, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition.
(2) Recognizing the sanctity of life, we urge the support and adoption of tighter controls, including background checks,on all gun sales and purchases.
(3) Recognizing the sanctity of life, we urge the support of mental healthcare reform, including adequate funding and improved care.

(4) Recognizing the sanctity of life, we urge the support of programs and policies discouraging our culture’s glorification of violence.
And be it further resolved that the 176th Convention of the Diocese of Louisiana encourages all members of the diocese to work within our congregations through prayer, preaching, education, and advocacy, toward eliminating all violence that kills so many of God’s children in our nation.

Thanks to Ormonde at Facebook for the link to the text of the resolution.

15 comments:

  1. There were several attempts to water down or defeat the resolution, from some of the "it's not guns, it's people" crowd, but the resolution had overwhelming support. I was proud of the convention. We've turned a corner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ormonde, I'm proud, too. Same-sex blessings and now this. My cup runneth over.

      Delete
  2. Now that's what the Church should be about... Thanks Bishop Bubba!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed, David. Bishop Bubba could not have done it alone, but he exercises leadership in a firm but non-confrontational manner that seems to work well.

      Delete
  3. As many people are killed in homicides involving cars in this country every year as are killed in homicides involving guns. Will the Diocese be taking a stance against car violence next?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come now, RonF, you make it too easy. To drive a car, one needs a LICENSE. In order to get a license to drive a car, one must take a test to prove competence to operate a motor vehicle. If one owns a car, the car must be REGISTERED in the owner's name, and even private sales require that the registration be transferred to the new owner's name. If we had similar requirements by law for gun ownership, perhaps the diocese might not find it necessary to take a stance.

      Delete
    2. RonF, vehicular homicide is often lacking the intent of putting a gun in someones face and pulling a trigger. As Mimi points out there are more regulations for the use of vehicles, including in some states drivers education requirements, vision requirements, testing, etc. Further there are numerous laws governing the use of vehicles such as texting and driving that are outlawed and enforced. If you purchase a motor vehicle (all of which have registration numbers on file with the government-unlike firearms) you must license it and indeed insure it. Perhaps we should require "Responsibility Bonds" for firearms. Frankly, vehicular homicide is comparing apples and oranges. One may want to even question the applicability of the Second Amendment and its origins and intent as being applicable anymore since the first "modern war" - the Civil War or otherwise called "The Great Rebellion or War for States Rights." It was not private fire arms that supported that 'rebellion' over a "tyrannical government' it was mass produced state of the art weaponry purchased from foreign powers or produced in armories on both sides of the Mason Dixon Line. But I have said too much very likely already.

      Delete
    3. Grandmere, you do not address my question. I didn't say anything about registration or licencing. If we call homicide where guns are involved "gun violence", why do we not call all homicides "[tool_used] violence", and refer constantly to "car violence" and "hammer violence"? Why is it that only when guns are involved that we refer to the tool and not the killer using it?

      Delete
    4. Fr. Bill, I can say the same for you. I mentioned nothing about licensing gun owners, doing background checks or maintaining a gun registry. I simply asked what the logical reasoning is for referring to violent acts committed using guns in a different fashion than violent acts using cars, blunt objects, knives, etc. I don't see where you've addressed that.

      Delete
    5. Grandmere, you do not address my question. I didn't say anything about registration or licencing. If we call homicide where guns are involved "gun violence", why do we not call all homicides "[tool_used] violence", and refer constantly to "car violence" and "hammer violence"? Why is it that only when guns are involved that we refer to the tool and not the killer using it?

      Delete
    6. RonF, when a person deliberately kills a person or persons with a vehicle, the law calls it vehicular homicide. That's fine with me.

      Delete
  4. You're right.. Bishop Bubba couldn't have done it alone--thanks to your delegates..

    ReplyDelete

Comment moderation is enabled. Anonymous comments are permitted so long as they are signed. Please use a name, any name, and sign your comment in order that one anonymous commenter may be distinguished from another. Thank you.