My thoughts on Church shootings..

by DATA-DOG 18 Replies latest watchtower beliefs


    Disclaimer: I do not approve or condone any acts of violence that result in the deaths of innocent persons.

    Alright.. Let me just say that I have no idea what motivated the latest mass shooting, nor do I condone those actions. I am, however, beginning to understand why some individuals may feel that violence is their only choice, although I do not approve of that choice.

    When I read topics on this forum that concern religion and legalism, topics that drone on and on, getting nowhere, I feel extremely frustrated. Yes, religions are given certain freedoms, but many are obviously going beyond the spirit that motivated the separation of Church and State. That separation is not a license to harm others.

    We are all very well aware of the duplicitous nature of many "religious" organizations, and the lies they tell, including lies of omission. We are also aware of the far reaching and in some cases, permanent damage that these "religions" have caused.

    It seems that they are nearly untouchable. Aside from monetary damages, from which they quickly recover, they suffer very little damage, while the damage they inflict in a myriad of ways, can be terrible. They ruin entire lives. They damage our most precious members of society, our children.

    When you take into account the damage from sexual abuse, the cultish ban on education that some sects adopt, the limiting of individual expression and freedom in order to "guide" congragants, the damage to our futures is incalculable.

    How many great minds have we lost? Just think about that for a moment. How much talent has simply been thrown away? How much progress has been halted?

    The progress of humanity could be likened to the absurdity of a Watchtower construction site. Despite the constant ineptitude, some progress is made. It's as if we endure, despite the best efforts of the self-appointed leaders. A bit dramatic on my part, but it seems that religion is a limiting factor, not something that augments our progress.

    What's my point? Well, it seems as if nothing can be done to stop harmful religions. No offense to those interested in legal matters, but when topic after topic degrades into legalese that obscures morality, it's easy to see why we find our society in a morass of never ending "debates", and I use that term loosely.

    Religions go to mind boggling lengths to protect their own interests. They twist and turn, rebrand, duck and cover, bob and weave. They spend untold amounts of money to protect themselves, so that they can do what's "legal", as if that absolves them of any wrongdoing. It seems that they are very protected from a legal standpoint, but could they be digging their own grave?

    As I stated, I don't know what motivates someone to open fire in a Church. I don't know why a JW in my country decided to blow himself up inside a Kingdom Hall? Did these people feel powerless? Did they feel that there was no other way?

    It seems that society is starting to become fed-up with all the sexual misconduct of those in power, at least I hope so. Social media is being used as a force for good in many cases, yet, along with the more civilized forms of protest, could we also see an increase in violence, especially against abusive institutions?

    I'm just thinking out loud, but I'm wondering if a natural consequence of "religiosity" and legalism, could be violence. The pendulum has to swing back. Isn't that the way of things? I'm just wondering if some "critical mass" could actually be reached? If you reap what you sow, will Religion ironically bring about its own demise?

    Anyway, just wondering what your thoughts are.


  • Bad_Wolf

    If the attacks were happening on JW, Mormon, Scientologist, Muslim, and other high control churches I'd agree. But on liberal churches that really let people do anything they want, not too much into their personal lives, don't do shunning, etc, I do not think that is the motivation.

    Also many mass shootings happen where people traditionally don't have guns. I don't think any laws for concealed owners to not have one in a church, but bars, schools, etc, are easier targets.

  • ThomasCovenant

    If I woke up tomorrow and everyone who believed in god had 'disappeared', and every vestige of religion had also 'disappeared', would I think the world had become a better place overnight?

    After the initial shock and sadness, eventually I think I would.

  • snugglebunny

    So which is more important: The right to bear arms or the right not to be shot?

  • pbrow

    The bottom line is religion is freedom of thought. The most effective way to combat religious thought is to get it in the open and argue with it.

    I agree that many countless minds were stomped out over the years by religion and many families have been destroyed by religion. The alternative however is giving the power of free thought over to a government.

    Destroyed families and stomped out minds are worth it


  • Half banana
    Half banana

    DD, I'm talking off the cuff too but surely the shootings in question have little to do with religion, no more than a massacre at a school is to do with education. Isn't it about the psychopath who sees certain groups as so abhorrent to him or so valueless that he imagines he will feel better for killing some of them. It's about the accessibility of dangerous weapons by people with deranged minds.

    The target for the rest of us must be to recognize those potentially vulnerable to such behaviour and have some social systems in place to help them. Easier said than done.

    I can't help thinking how the JW org is all about being an outsider and fervently looking forward to "the death of the opposers" which is frankly in the same vein as these maniacs who do kill indiscriminately.

  • Simon

    Seems like this latest incident is a domestic / family dispute. Nothing at all todo with religion, race or anything else.

    Pathetic when people see the need to harm others in order to hurt the people they want to.

  • DesirousOfChange

    So which is more important: The right to bear arms or the right not to be shot? ~ SnuggleBunny

    I'm afraid there is not necessarily any connection between the two things. The Texas church shooter was dishonorably discharged for assaulting his wife & child (a violent crime) and it was illegal for him to own a weapon. He did NOT have the right to bear arms.

    Repealing the right for the honest and law abiding citizen to "bear arms" would simply mean that only people who disobey the laws, like the Texas church shooter, would (illegally) have weapons. Likely there would have been even more victims had a local neighbor not had a legally owned weapon. Note the press release:

    The Texas Public Safety spokesman "praised the efforts of “two Good Samaritans” who responded to the shooting, saying that a resident who lives near the church heard what was happening took his own rifle and began firing at the attacker, hitting him at least once." ~ Media quote

    If he had not had a gun, he might have driven his truck into the crowd as they were leaving church. (See recent event in NYC.)

  • redvip2000
    If he had not had a gun, he might have driven his truck into the crowd as they were leaving church. (See recent event in NYC.)

    I rather take my chances with a guy trying to hit me with a truck than spraying bullets in my direction any day.

    Pretty sure that we are just about 10 mass shootings away from waking up and realizing that guns are something that deserve tighter control than the pathetic gun laws we have now. Any day now..

  • sparrowdown

    Yeah, the latest incident seems to be motivated by personal grudge, but I feel your frustration with religion.

    Why they get a free pass when it comes to taxes and a wide berth with stuff like domestic violence and child abuse is beyond me. All I can think is religion must be performing some useful service for the government.

Share this