How cute.

A slew of misguided clergy in the Quad Cities area of Illinois submitted an editorial piece urging that gun ownership be sharply restricted except for hunters and sport shooters.

In other words:  Guns suitable for self-defense against other two-legged predators should be “controlled”.

Their screed follows our reply:


Dear Quad City Clergy:

The gun control you advocate is racist, classist and sexist.  The vast majority of Americans don’t support those things.

Furthermore, human beings have experienced a time when ownership of weapons was prohibited to the common man.  It was called the Medieval times and most of us have no desire to return to that lifestyle.


Clergy against self-defense


We stand together in shared pain and loss at the recent spate of gun violence in our country.

Though we come from varying faith traditions, together we share these common beliefs:

  •  We proclaim some form of the Golden Rule, imploring us to treat one another as we’d like to be treated.
  •  We believe in the sanctity of human life.
  •  We consider it unacceptable to allow a culture of violence to reign in our households, our neighborhoods and our nation.

These common understandings suggest that, while we all need to respect the rights of hunters and sport-shooters to have access to their weapons, we also need to respect the vulnerability of human life that is threatened by allowing weapons to be too easily available. People of good conscience need to take this conversation back from the extremes into real life in which real lives are at stake.

We acknowledge that access to guns is but one part of the issue, however, the consequences of our inability to have this conversation should be obvious by now. Those who believe it hasn’t happened to them or theirs should take notice — gun violence happens to all of us when it happens to our neighbors, near or distant. We are all immeasurably impoverished when one person needlessly dies. How much more loss can we bear? We are united in the belief that we have lost too much already. Please join us in imagining and creating a safer world.

Dr. Talia I. Alvi, Muslim Community, Bettendorf; Imam Saad Baig, Islamic Community, Moline; The Rev. Robert Bowlin, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Davenport; The Rev. Joyce Chamberlin, Presbyterian Church, USA, Milan; The Rev. Tim Darmour-Paul, United Church of Christ, Davenport; The Rev. Becky David, Spiritual Care, Genesis Health System, Davenport; Pastor Brian Fischer, American Baptist Church, East Moline; The Rev. Dave Geenen, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Rock Island; Rabbi Tamar Grimm, Rock Island; The Rev. Bob Hamilton, United Church of Christ, Elkhart Lake, Wis.; The Rev. Randy Heckman, United Church of Christ, Moline; The Rev. Rich Hendricks, Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community, Davenport; Cantor Gail Karp, Reform Judaism, Davenport; Rabbi Henry Jay Karp, Reform Judaism, Davenport; The Rev. Janet Lepp, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Rock Island; The Rev. Katherine Mulhern, United Church of Christ, Davenport; The Rev. Jean M. Norton, United Church of Christ, Davenport; The Rev. Dr. Mary N. Pugh, Presbyterian Church, USA, Blue Grass; The Rev. Ron Quay, Churches United of the Quad-Cities, Bettendorf; The Rev. Frank Samuelson, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Rock Island; The Rev. Dr. Pamela S. Saturnia, Presbyterian Church, USA, Davenport; The Rev. Jay Wolin, Unitarian Universalism, Davenport

9 thoughts on “Clergy vs. Guns: Guns Save Life’s response…”
  1. I object to the term “gun violence”. There is no such thing, and that term was invented by the anti-gun folks just to demonize guns. It is criminal violence no matter what is illegally used. The clergy who agreed with this nonsense is calling every lawful owner of a lawful weapon that THEY DON’T LIKE a criminal. There should be a boycott on every single one of the ministries signing on to this.

  2. Just another reason why I will not follow a group of people who are so out of touch with their surrounding flocks. They acknowledge the rights of hunters??? Dont remember that specific right spelled out. I remember the right to keep and bare arms.. No one group has special rights.. We all have these rights.. Note to the clergy.. Shut your mouth if you dont have a clue.. When you open your mouth you appear dramatically more ignorant..

  3. The aforementioned clergy represent liberal leaning organizations. My guess is that many, if not all of these organizations support a woman’s right to “choose”, i.e. abortion.
    They claim that, “We believe in the sanctity of human life”. If only they would come out as strongly for an unborn life, as they do post born human life they wouldn’t be perceived as such hypocrites.

  4. One of the many reasons that I chose, years ago, to end my attendance in any “organized religion”. I have an unending Trust in the Good Lord; I do not need to submit to the will of Man.

    These “religious organizations” have become, for the most part, political shills bent upon imposing their beliefs, whether true or not, upon the masses. Having done battle (non-violently, of course) with anti-gun clergy in the past, I know the type. If they really were to do their jobs, they would understand that God has placed the duty and responsibility upon us all to defend and protect innocent life against evil.

  5. It never ceases to amaze me. The anti’s NEVER tell you that the James Holmes of the world are NOT a part of our so-called “gun culture”, they are FAR OUTLYERS. So far as I know, not one of the anti’s can come up with a foolproof way of deterring this kind of person. But they continue on, regarding every gun owner as a potential criminal eventually driven to shoot up a crowd. Just the mere POSSESSION of a firearm makes a person unable to resist this temptation. It is my firm belief that there is and will be so much anger and resistance if our government ever attempts to confiscate or even severely restrict guns to hunters and sport shooters that they will wonder what hit’em. Even the docile Americanus Gunnus can be cornered just so far before he retaliates. Bear that in mind!

  6. I agree with the good clergymen completely in their list of common beliefs. It’s the people who want to accost me in my home, on the street, in my workplace who do not align with those beliefs. Because they choose not to live in such a manner does not mean that I am going to sacrifice myself to their evil ways, I will not be one of the dead who is unable to speak for whether or not I wished I had a gun when I was attacked. Think of all the people whose lives have been lost but cannot speak for themselves. How many would be abhorred to hear people such as this who insist that it was good for them to die empty handed? It’s rather like the saying that “there are no atheists in fox holes”, you don’t really know a persons position until they’re faced with their mortality; unfortunately too many succumb to it.

  7. I find it laughable that the Muslim clergy who signed this letter, spit on a person’s right to self-defense, but are absolutely silent about Syria’s Bashir Assad gunning down his subjects. Are these mullahs so stupid that they don’t realize that it’s governments led by Bashir Assad types that are doing – and have done – most of the killings?

  8. Hunters and sport shooters are exercising side-benefits of the right to arms, not its primary purpose.

    Its primary purpose is to shoot PEOPLE – people who immediately and unavoidably threaten our lives and well being.

    These people need to get that through their heads. Their arguments are facially misguided.

Comments are closed.