events · Fear · news · pet peeves · politics

I’m Not Afraid (City for – Ain’t Skeerd)

ter·ror·ism

[ter-uh-riz-uh m]

noun

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

This term is one that is widely used for various groups or factions outside of the United States. What about within our Country?

The hottest of hot topics right now is that of Gun Control. This topic is so steamy it’s impossible to discuss it without someone stooping to such levels including ignorance, derogatory remakes, and name calling. I’m not concerned with which side of the argument you are on – what I’m concerned with is how you present yourself during the debate. Now, my opinion doesn’t really matter, does it? I’m sure there are a few people out there who care, but all in all what I think won’t really affect the world that much. (At least not yet.)

My opinion about this subject is pretty much “take it or leave it”. I own a gun. I have not used this gun in well over five years (that I can remember. I did used to drink a lot though) When it comes to other people owning guns I usually take a “leftist” stance. Maybe I’m just not trusting enough. Isn’t trust supposed to be earned? In any event, I haven’t got a single problem with a well-adjusted human being owning a gun for protection or to help provide for their family. What I don’t like are absolutes.

More and more Americans are taking a stance of entitlement…or at least it seems this way to me. Kids would rather have everything they need handed to them instead of working for it. They assume something is owed to them, just for the simple fact that they were born in this particular Country. “I’m American…find me a job” “I’m American…fix me a sandwich” “I’m American…give me a gun”

What are the things we absolutely need in this world? (Looks like I’m about to contradict myself, but bear with me.) Air, right? We need oxygen to breath, so we can live. Water. We need water to drink…food to eat. The basics. These things are necessary for our survival. We are NOT entitled to these things, for they are more important than that, they are must-haves.

Do we need shelter? Weather permitting, yes and no. Do we need cars? Electricity? Cell phones? No, we don’t. They are very helpful, but not necessary for our survival. How about guns? Do we need guns? No we don’t. I don’t need my gun. Most people don’t need theirs either. Why do I think this? Because I’m not afraid that my Government is going to take mine away from me. Am I delusional because I think this way? Maybe…but I’d rather live a happy life than a scared one, like so many would have me live.

I will not allow my fellow Americans to use different issues to argue this one. I will not allow my fellow Americans to scare me. I will not allow my fellow Americans to Terrorize me. I am not worried about the Constitution being discarded. I’m worried that people will focus too much on archaic, outdated ways of thinking. We the people…have evolved. If you were to tell Thomas Jefferson that he could read the document that he wrote, on a cell phone…he would say, “What’s a cell phone….and are there civil rights across the board?” Would you be ashamed in how we answer this question? (Oops, I used a different issue to argue this one. I didn’t say I wasn’t going to do it. My Blog, My Rules.)

I’ve argued with myself on whether or not to allow comments. On one hand I would rather just hit upload and then forget about it. My two cents aren’t worth a potential headache. On the other hand…I might be accused of being “Yella”, and we can’t have that.

Portrait of Thomas Jefferson by Rembrandt Peal...
Portrait of Thomas Jefferson by Rembrandt Peale, 1805. New-York Historical Society. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

13 thoughts on “I’m Not Afraid (City for – Ain’t Skeerd)

  1. BroJo,
    This is a compelling post.
    “We the people…have evolved”. That’s an important thing to remember; and people often forget it. The feeling of entitlement is the most dangerous concept threatening this, or any, country.
    Well done.
    Red

  2. “We have nothing to fear but fear itself,” FDR told us. By the way, that first definition of terrorism, I would amend to “especially for political or religious purposes.” I’m weary and troubled by the constant admonition to follow a particular philosophy or doctrine or risk non-admittance to a promised land. It’s not just about guns, Jon. That fear thing is pretty insidious! Thanks for allowing comments! xoM

  3. I happen to be for gun-rights, but it’s kinda shameless the way the government and, by externsion, the media are trying to scare is into doing things we don’t necessarily don’t want to do.

    Luckily, I don’t watch the news so it’s not working on me! Fight the power!!

  4. What portions of the Constitution do you believe are outdated? I am always flabbergasted by the recently popular notion that principles and truths have become “outdated” simply by virtue of the passage of time. Have our respective religious beliefs (i.e., the principles, not necessarily theology) become hopelessly outdated, as well? By your way of thinking, they surely have.

    1. Before I start I want to say I’m not my Father or my Brother. I do not enjoy engaging in these discussions. I believe that I might have something to say, but I prefer to say it and then walk away. The back and forth tires me, yet I understand that it comes with the territory. Even so, I’m not afforded the time to keep up with it anymore, and I’m glad to still have my agency to choose whether to continue with a discussion or not. With that being said I’m going to give my answer to your comment above and allow you the last word. (Unless I change my mind of course, I am only human.)

      “Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right” ~ This was written by Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison in 1789 – two years after the U.S. Constitution was adopted. This is recent…the other way. It seems the notion should be popular for a reason. (I can’t answer your question directly. Sorry. I haven’t read it in a while, so I wouldn’t know where, if need be, to begin.)

      Are we really going to compare Religion to Politics? The U.S. Constitution is 226 years old, and written by man. The Bible (or the teaching thereof) has been around for over 2000 years…unofficially collected in 331 by Constantine I, so I guess we can call it 1670 years. The Bible was written by God, through Prophets. I don’t see the connection.

      And yes…teachings did change. Out went the Jewish laws and in came the Ministry of Jesus. So many people call for an Eye for an Eye, even after we were taught to turn the other cheek. I’ve openly spoken out against people using their interpretation of the Bible to help benefit them in their wrong doings.

      The other day you put up a quote from Pope Benedict XVI that said “If you choose to separate yourself from God in this life, then you won’t be with Him in the next. It’s as simple as that.” Should we really think that our Heavenly Father will not allow us, his Children, a second chance to be near him? This quote would have me feel hopeless…and I believe this way of thinking to be outdated.

  5. Fair enough, Jon. I know it bugs you when I comment, but I don’t comment just to bug you. I am genuinely trying to provoke some thought on these matters.

    As for the Bible vs. the U.S. Constitution, I mentioned in my previous post that I wasn’t speaking about theology. Perhaps that wasn’t very clear. The New Testament and the Constitution are quite different, but I wasn’t really comparing those two things. What I am comparing are the principles behind them. Forgetting the Bible for a moment, every religion is based on principles. So is the Constitution. Do principles that we believe in at one moment become outdated 200 years later?

    People make the same argument about the Catholic Church, of which I am a member. Some Catholics (some might call them “cafeteria Catholics”) argue all the time that certain precepts, doctrines, etc. of the Church are outdated, that they need to evolve, etc. This is most often said in conjunction with the Church’s teachings on abortion, contraception, and gay marriage, among others. I suppose it’s one thing to say you just don’t believe the Church’s teaching on those things and offer a rational explanation for your belief (in which case, I think a person might need to seek counsel of the Church or find another Church). It is quite another to argue that those teachings are outdated. The principles behind those teachings haven’t changed for a reason. The Church’s teaching on contraception has been the same since it’s inception. The passage of time has not made the Church’s teachings on contraception any less relevant or less true. The passage of time never makes principles less relevant or less true, unless they were simply wrong to begin with and people, with the passage of time, begin to realize it. DISCLAIMER: I am not arguing the truth of falsity of the Catholic Church’s teaching on contraception, et al. I am merely explaining my position on TRUTH. If anyone wishes to discuss contraception, that’s fine, but don’t hate on me based on what I said above. Thanks.

    I think it is ignorant or, worst case, intellectually dishonest to make the argument that the 2nd Amendment, or any other principle, has become outdated. It was either wrong from the get go or it is still true (of course, this assumes that one knows the original intent of the 2nd Amendment, and one would need to know that before having a discussion about said Amendment). This is one reason why I so despise Barack Obama. He uses the same mantra’s and catchphrases when speaking about so-called “gay marriage.” He says his position has “evolved.” More like devolved if that’s his only explanation. There must be some logic and reason behind such a decision. But, instead of offering any kind of rational explanation for what we believe, we can simply say we’ve evolved and we can more or less believe whatever we want. That is relativism at its finest. Things are either true or they aren’t, and when it comes to moral and intellectual truths, they don’t change with the passage of time.

    Anyway, Jon, the relativistic statements are the reason I usually post here. I think once a person realizes the difference, it’s actually quite liberating. I believe I was in my mid-to-late 20’s before I began to recognize relativism as such.

    Take care.

You Know You Want to Say Something...

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s