Pope vs. Gunowners

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

Men have been manufacturing weapons since the beginning. Both the bow and/or a spear was used to hunt beasts (to eat) and to go to war with other peoples. Guns are just another one of the same, to do what the former always did. 

Lots of folks support the manufacture of guns for hunting. Lots of guys love to hunt.

 

 

it's not about guns for all their varied uses  - it's about weapons of WAR.    

People who hunt don't use sub machine guns or worse.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not

I wish these folks would just say it, just come out with it, "we are against machine guns" (period)

That would make conversing over what they actually said more of a breeze to go in and out of and less about trying to figure out what the heck they really did say half the time.

The pope must get the short end of the stick because lots of folks dont understand his language and are at the mercy of an interpreter that can lay it out correctly.

 

 

[Ezra]

This makes me think of something:  people, leaders, businessmen who say they are Christians, and they manufacture weapons!  This brings up some distrust:  they say they are Christians!  “No, no, Father, I don’t manufacture, no, no….  I only have my savings, my investments in the weapons factories.”  Ah!  And why?  “Because the interest rates are a little higher….”  And even being two-faced is hard cash, today:  to say one thing and to make of it something else.  Hypocrisy….

So the Pope did say that Christian people involved with the manufacture of weapons are hypocrites.  What about those like the Vatican security who use those same weapons for protection? I take it that is not hypocritical?

 

But let’s take a look at what happened in the last century:  in 1914, 1915, in 1915 exactly.  There was that great tragedy of Armenia.  So many died.

“Without referring by name to the Islamic State (Isis), whose jihadists are largely responsible for the persecution, the pope deplored reports of "thousands of people, including many Christians, driven from their homes in a brutal manner; children dying of thirst and hunger in their flight; women kidnapped; people massacred; [and] violence of every kind." [The Guardian]

Why did the Pope not name Turkey or ISIS?

[thereselittleflower]

 

This makes me think of something:  people, leaders, businessmen who say they are Christians, and they manufacture weapons!  This brings up some distrust:  they say they are Christians!  “No, no, Father, I don’t manufacture, no, no….  I only have my savings, my investments in the weapons factories.”  Ah!  And why?  “Because the interest rates are a little higher….”  And even being two-faced is hard cash, today:  to say one thing and to make of it something else.  Hypocrisy….

So the Pope did say that Christian people involved with the manufacture of weapons are hypocrites.  What about those like the Vatican security who use those same weapons for protection? I take it that is not hypocritical?

 

But let’s take a look at what happened in the last century:  in 1914, 1915, in 1915 exactly.  There was that great tragedy of Armenia.  So many died.

“Without referring by name to the Islamic State (Isis), whose jihadists are largely responsible for the persecution, the pope deplored reports of "thousands of people, including many Christians, driven from their homes in a brutal manner; children dying of thirst and hunger in their flight; women kidnapped; people massacred; [and] violence of every kind." [The Guardian]

Why did the Pope not name Turkey or ISIS?

Ezra, I posted a link and what the Pope actually said.  

If that is not enough to show you you are barking up the wrong tree here, and  you desire to persist in taking his words out of their proper context, there is nothing more I can say.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

Although, when I look up the kind of gun the vatican police use it shows the Koch MP5 sub-machine gun

 

 

You can see them demonstrated over at youtube, but wouldnt that be considered a weapon of war?

 

 

[thereselittleflower]

Although, when I look up the kind of gun the vatican police use it shows the Koch MP5 sub-machine gun

 

 

You can see them demonstrated over at youtube, but wouldnt that be considered a weapon of war?

 

 

 

The context of his remarks are war.

He said nothing about use by civil servants or private use.

And the weapons of war are much more heavy duty than that.

Do you see them carrying missile launchers?

Stinger

 

Edited October 6, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

Although, when I look up the kind of gun the vatican police use it shows the Koch MP5 sub-machine gun

 

 

You can see them demonstrated over at youtube, but wouldnt that be considered a weapon of war?

 

 

 

The context of his remarks are war.

He said nothing about use by civil servants or private use.

And the weapons of war are much more heavy duty than that.

 

 

 

The context of his remarks was not to use weapons of war for war? But he might be okay with machine guns used by civil servants or private use?

Heavy duty depends on the times, whose the judge, and what comparisons between weapons one is making, if times, then Im sure George Washingtom might agree that having a machine gun would have kicked their musket butts when it come to the kind of weapons they had versus what we have today. All things being relevant no machine gun the public can get a hold of today anyway can equal what the millitary has in power above those though. For the most part at least.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2015 by AFlameOfFire

[ayin jade]

 

This makes me think of something:  people, leaders, businessmen who say they are Christians, and they manufacture weapons!  This brings up some distrust:  they say they are Christians!  “No, no, Father, I don’t manufacture, no, no….  I only have my savings, my investments in the weapons factories.”  Ah!  And why?  “Because the interest rates are a little higher….”  And even being two-faced is hard cash, today:  to say one thing and to make of it something else.  Hypocrisy….

So the Pope did say that Christian people involved with the manufacture of weapons are hypocrites.  What about those like the Vatican security who use those same weapons for protection? I take it that is not hypocritical?

 

But let’s take a look at what happened in the last century:  in 1914, 1915, in 1915 exactly.  There was that great tragedy of Armenia.  So many died.

“Without referring by name to the Islamic State (Isis), whose jihadists are largely responsible for the persecution, the pope deplored reports of "thousands of people, including many Christians, driven from their homes in a brutal manner; children dying of thirst and hunger in their flight; women kidnapped; people massacred; [and] violence of every kind." [The Guardian]

Why did the Pope not name Turkey or ISIS?

Ezra, I posted a link and what the Pope actually said.  

If that is not enough to show you you are barking up the wrong tree here, and  you desire to persist in taking his words out of their proper context, there is nothing more I can say.

 

 

And I showed a separate speech from this year in which he said exactly what I posted about.

[thereselittleflower]

 

This makes me think of something:  people, leaders, businessmen who say they are Christians, and they manufacture weapons!  This brings up some distrust:  they say they are Christians!  “No, no, Father, I don’t manufacture, no, no….  I only have my savings, my investments in the weapons factories.”  Ah!  And why?  “Because the interest rates are a little higher….”  And even being two-faced is hard cash, today:  to say one thing and to make of it something else.  Hypocrisy….

So the Pope did say that Christian people involved with the manufacture of weapons are hypocrites.  What about those like the Vatican security who use those same weapons for protection? I take it that is not hypocritical?

 

But let’s take a look at what happened in the last century:  in 1914, 1915, in 1915 exactly.  There was that great tragedy of Armenia.  So many died.

“Without referring by name to the Islamic State (Isis), whose jihadists are largely responsible for the persecution, the pope deplored reports of "thousands of people, including many Christians, driven from their homes in a brutal manner; children dying of thirst and hunger in their flight; women kidnapped; people massacred; [and] violence of every kind." [The Guardian]

Why did the Pope not name Turkey or ISIS?

Ezra, I posted a link and what the Pope actually said.  

If that is not enough to show you you are barking up the wrong tree here, and  you desire to persist in taking his words out of their proper context, there is nothing more I can say.

 

 

And I showed a separate speech from this year in which he said exactly what I posted about.

Where would that be?

 

[Omegaman 3.0]

Theresa, maybe you should read thread before posting in them. You had to be told three times, that it was acknowledged that those were not catholics blessing weapons, Jade responded with a post that showed the pope talking about guns, and then you ask, "where would that be?" You know, there is this thing we do, called scrolling up, and this other thing we do called reading the thread, that would go a long way in you being informed on what you are trying to respond to.

For that matter, since you are focused on the weapons of war, it is good to know that the pope is, in an inderect way, condemning the Crusades. Sure, they did not have stinger missiles, but they did have weapons of war.

Maybe you could go to Rome and be the Pope's body guard, you sure go out of your way to defend him here!

 

By the way, Jade's post was here: http://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/193165-pope-vs-gunowners/?do=findComment&comment=2276417 

[thereselittleflower]

Thank you for your opinion.  Omegaman.

Bless you.