Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:33 pm +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
The 2nd Amendment was designed to allow the population to make a stand against tyrannical authority. Has this caused the average policeman to assume that a lawfully armed citizen will use a gun to kill him and that the appropriate response is to use deadly force first? Who should the NRA support, the cop, or the people?

(134:6.6) If you take every form of modern mechanical armaments and all types of explosives away from strong nations, they will fight with fists, stones, and clubs

(134:5.2) There are only two levels of relative sovereignty on an inhabited world: the spiritual free will of the individual mortal and the collective sovereignty of mankind as a whole.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
nodAmanaV wrote:
Has this caused the average policeman to assume that a lawfully armed citizen will use a gun to kill him and that the appropriate response is to use deadly force first?


I do not think so. The lawfully armed citizen understands, or should understand, that law enforcement has a job to do and should endeavor to assist them in the protection of the community. In understanding the policeman, it is important that we are aware that they are people in our community that want to feel safe and want to raise their families in safety. Why give a highly stressed police officer a hard time when they stop you in a traffic stop. Their job is hard enough and their next stop could be their last. Let's remember that these people are people too.

nodAmanaV wrote:
Who should the NRA support, the cop, or the people?


Both. Cops are people too.

BTW, totalitarian regimes are careful to confiscate the arms of the populace as their first act of control.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
nodAmanaV wrote:
(134:6.6) If you take every form of modern mechanical armaments and all types of explosives away from strong nations, they will fight with fists, stones, and clubs


Until there is a voluntary relinquishment of national sovereignty to a world government in the far distant future, nations will need to defend themselves by whatever means are available.

nodAmanaV wrote:
(134:5.2) There are only two levels of relative sovereignty on an inhabited world: the spiritual free will of the individual mortal and the collective sovereignty of mankind as a whole.


The individual should have the right to self-defence. A nation has the right to defend its people. It comes down to protection. Protection of life and limb, protection of property, and protection of its borders. In this age of global transportation and communication (internet), this protective action may require foreign wars. There will be wars and rumors of war. Jesus did not come to bring peace to this world. He was very clear on this.

Very timely topic, Nod. Undoubtedly controversial, but worthing of discussion as it relates to TUB. This is a very real part of all of our lives. We are all experiencing this, many, firsthand.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
MannyC wrote:
This is a very real part of all of our lives. We are all experiencing this, many, firsthand.

Thanks Louis. Yes, and I hope I never experience this firsthand.

MannyC wrote:
nodAmanaV wrote:
Has this caused the average policeman to assume that a lawfully armed citizen will use a gun to kill him and that the appropriate response is to use deadly force first?


I do not think so.

Then why is this happening so often?

I would like to address the other thing that's happening: The role the "free" press is playing in fanning the flames of discord and distrust and how it's the main factor. Like most compromised institutions, the press being motivated by profit first, is hard at work to insure that it controls our minds. They do this by falsely emphasizing strife and conflict, which keeps us tuned in. They are betraying their sacred ideal of true journalism and knowingly report with great bias.

For example, a case in point:

The reporting of the tragic killing of Philando Castile in Minnesota has included the playing of a livestream video recorded by his girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds. Below is a link to the full video. At no time while viewing this video as a part of a media report have I seen the cop's race mentioned. Have you? However in the full video, she actually does mention it. Why would the press redact it?

At minute 7:19 Diamond Reynolds says:

"It was a Chinese police officer that shot him."

https://youtu.be/85vfSxDm9W8




(81:6.9) Knowledge is power. Invention always precedes the acceleration of cultural development on a world-wide scale. Science and invention benefited most of all from the printing press, and the interaction of all these cultural and inventive activities has enormously accelerated the rate of cultural advancement.

(71:2.10) Freedom of the person. Slavery, serfdom, and all forms of human bondage must disappear.

(71:2.11) Freedom of the mind. Unless a free people are educated—taught to think intelligently and plan wisely—freedom usually does more harm than good.

(118:7.4) Sin in time-conditioned space clearly proves the temporal liberty—even license—of the finite will. Sin depicts immaturity dazzled by the freedom of the relatively sovereign will of personality while failing to perceive the supreme obligations and duties of cosmic citizenship.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
If Dallas shooter Micah Johnson knew that the cop who shot Philando Castile was non-white, would he have been less inclined to go on a rampage?

"when compared with the loyal worlds of the universe, your planet seems most confused and greatly retarded"


Last edited by nodAmanaV on Sun Jul 10, 2016 6:52 am +0000, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
nodAmanaV wrote:
I would like to address the other thing that's happening: The role the "free" press is playing in fanning the flames of discord and distrust and how it's the main factor. Like most compromised institutions, the press being motivated by profit first, is hard at work to insure that it controls our minds. They do this by falsely emphasizing strife and conflict, which keeps us tuned in. They are betraying their sacred ideal of true journalism and knowingly report with great bias.


I could not agree more.


nodAmanaV wrote:
(81:6.9) Knowledge is power. Invention always precedes the acceleration of cultural development on a world-wide scale. Science and invention benefited most of all from the printing press, and the interaction of all these cultural and inventive activities has enormously accelerated the rate of cultural advancement.


They who control the press controls the indolent mind who fails to seek the whole truth and nothing but the truths. Half truths are the most dangerous.

nodAmanaV wrote:
(71:2.10) Freedom of the person. Slavery, serfdom, and all forms of human bondage must disappear.


Indeed. The worst form of bondage is the selective dissemination of knowledge, by the press and others. This power of knowledge can be abused most easily. All forms of power can be corrupted. All corruption diminishes the freedom of the person.


nodAmanaV wrote:
(71:2.11) Freedom of the mind. Unless a free people are educated—taught to think intelligently and plan wisely—freedom usually does more harm than good.


Yes indeed. I will remind all of you that our indoctrination begins now in the kindergarten class. They teach how mankind is the scourge of the planet, an infestation. We are the original sinners by virtue of birth to this species of homosaipians. This is the religion of the idolators that worship Starship Earth. These prejudices must be taught early, they must be carefully taught.


nodAmanaV wrote:
(118:7.4) Sin in time-conditioned space clearly proves the temporal liberty—even license—of the finite will. Sin depicts immaturity dazzled by the freedom of the relatively sovereign will of personality while failing to perceive the supreme obligations and duties of cosmic citizenship.



Being good stewards of our planet does not require the worship of the Earth. God is not nature. Cosmic citizenship begins at home, and let us not forget that we live in Him. God is our home.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
(92:3.9) Religion is the efficient scourge of evolution which ruthlessly drives indolent and suffering humanity from its natural state of intellectual inertia forward and upward to the higher levels of reason and wisdom.

When I was a kid, if you screwed up at school, the Vice Principal would take the wooden paddle that hung on the wall in his office behind him, and give you a good whipping. If you went home and complained about it to your mom, she would have your dad deal you an even more brutal scourge when HE got home.

In 1968, I was 10 years old. 1968 was the year lots of things in our society turned the corner. I remember many of the elders I encountered in the community telling me that we, my generation, would ruin America.

Now, I'm far from believing that America is ruined. I see more improvement by far. Especially how fathers are engaged more with their children. However, it is obvious that in certain segments of society, fathers are markedly absent. Most of all in the African American community. That being said, there certainly are many good fathers there as well.

(142:2.2) As time passes, fathers and their children will love each other more, and thus will be brought about a better understanding of the love of the Father in heaven for his children on earth."

(195:6.4) the day of a better understanding is already beginning to dawn.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
The 2nd Amendment to The US Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights that are essential to the social contract of citizenship. TUB says this:


70:9.1 Nature confers no rights on man, only life and a world in which to live it. Nature does not even confer the right to live, as might be deduced by considering what would likely happen if an unarmed man met a hungry tiger face to face in the primitive forest. Society's prime gift to man is security.

70:9.2 Gradually society asserted its rights and, at the present time, they are:

1. Assurance of food supply.
2. Military defense—security through preparedness.
3. Internal peace preservation—prevention of personal violence and social disorder.
4. Sex control—marriage, the family institution.
5. Property—the right to own.
6. Fostering of individual and group competition.
7. Provision for educating and training youth.
8. Promotion of trade and commerce—industrial development.
9. Improvement of labor conditions and rewards.
10. The guarantee of the freedom of religious practices to the end that all of these other social activities may be exalted by becoming spiritually motivated.

70:9.13 When rights are old beyond knowledge of origin, they are often called natural rights. But human rights are not really natural; they are entirely social. They are relative and ever changing, being no more than the rules of the game—recognized adjustments of relations governing the ever-changing phenomena of human competition.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
70:9.16 The weak and the inferior have always contended for equal rights; they have always insisted that the state compel the strong and superior to supply their wants and otherwise make good those deficiencies which all too often are the natural result of their own indifference and indolence.


It has always been so baffling to me that those that clamor most for equal rights are the same that fight so vociferously for gun control. Personal gun ownership IS the great equalizer. There must be some other agenda, not so transparent, at work here. I wonder what it is.

The battle cry for the ills of society is always; "through no fault of their own".


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 922
The Probationary Nursery is filled to overflowing with the innocent infants and young children who have been killed, either by accident or by intentional act of others (very often their own parents) who are eager to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights in the name of perceived 'security'. Such needless and senseless premature termination of what could have been the brilliant lives of millions of agondonters like ourselves ....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
Yes Agon, there can't be anything more horrible than losing a child, let alone by one's own hand.

(89:6.3) There is no more tragic and pathetic experience on record, illustrative of the heart-tearing contentions between ancient and time-honored religious customs and the contrary demands of advancing civilization, than the Hebrew narrative of Jephthah and his only daughter. As was common custom, this well-meaning man had made a foolish vow, had bargained with the "god of battles," agreeing to pay a certain price for victory over his enemies. And this price was to make a sacrifice of that which first came out of his house to meet him when he returned to his home. Jephthah thought that one of his trusty slaves would thus be on hand to greet him, but it turned out that his daughter and only child came out to welcome him home. And so, even at that late date and among a supposedly civilized people, this beautiful maiden, after two months to mourn her fate, was actually offered as a human sacrifice by her father, and with the approval of his fellow tribesmen. And all this was done in the face of Moses' stringent rulings against the offering of human sacrifice.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3675
Thank you Agon D. Onter!!

I'm pretty sure that as the Most Highs and Seraphim charged with Urantia's destiny look down upon us, the last thing they might be saying is: "That Urantia...you know what they need? More guns and more people with more guns!! They just need more violence to solve their problems. You know, if Mother Theresa, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Mandela, and those other saints of peace had only been locked and loaded and shot some people (in self defense of course), we wouldn't have this mess!"

:roll: :roll: :wink: :? :( 8)

182:3.11 (1970.1) Before Judas and the soldiers arrived, the Master had fully regained his customary poise; the spirit had triumphed over the flesh; faith had asserted itself over all human tendencies to fear or entertain doubt. The supreme test of the full realization of the human nature had been met and acceptably passed. Once more the Son of Man was prepared to face his enemies with equanimity and in the full assurance of his invincibility as a mortal man unreservedly dedicated to the doing of his Father’s will.

183:3.7 (1974.5) Jesus was ready to go back to Jerusalem with the guards, and the captain of the soldiers was altogether willing to allow the three apostles and their associates to go their way in peace. But before they were able to get started, as Jesus stood there awaiting the captain’s orders, one Malchus, the Syrian bodyguard of the high priest, stepped up to Jesus and made ready to bind his hands behind his back, although the Roman captain had not directed that Jesus should be thus bound. When Peter and his associates saw their Master being subjected to this indignity, they were no longer able to restrain themselves. Peter drew his sword and with the others rushed forward to smite Malchus. But before the soldiers could come to the defense of the high priest’s servant, Jesus raised a forbidding hand to Peter and, speaking sternly, said: “Peter, put up your sword. They who take the sword shall perish by the sword. Do you not understand that it is the Father’s will that I drink this cup? And do you not further know that I could even now command more than twelve legions of angels and their associates, who would deliver me from the hands of these few men?”


Last edited by fanofVan on Mon Jul 11, 2016 2:06 pm +0000, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3675
So nod....we're importing "Chinese" police officers are we? Are they cheaper or something? :biggrin: :wink: 8)

Quoted from above: "It has always been so baffling to me that those that clamor most for equal rights are the same that fight so vociferously for gun control. Personal gun ownership IS the great equalizer."

And those who "clamor" for equal rights (one must presume the author above means that whites or the "majority" of Americans have no interest in nor should they have any interest in "equal rights" - absurd on its very premise - I'm pretty sure both the Constitution and the Supreme Court are also interested in equal rights!) are those who suffer most by a lack of equal protection under the law (including over half the population when women's rights are included...not to mention them as victims of violence most often) and which so called "minorities" are also the most victimized by gun violence....those crazy "minorities" (a rather US centric and myopic perspective on a much larger and far more complicated issue - who's a minority globally?), what ARE they thinking??!!

So, according to the reasoning of the statement above, those who fight FOR gun rights are AGAINST equal rights? Or those who fight for equal rights are against gun ownership?

The buzzer please!!!! Drumroll...... NO, both answers are equally FALSE!

Or is it that the statement above means that equal rights are bad while gun ownership is good? If we only had fewer civil rights and more guns, our problems would be over??!! The "equalizer" is more guns and not more rights? REALLY!!??

Of course upon looking into the most recent shootings: the two "minority" individuals shot by police last week were both packing guns, at least one and perhaps both, legally carrying and for their own self defense (the great "equalizer" mentioned above), and both killed, to some degree at least, BECAUSE they were packing said equalizers. So were they part of the "clamor" for equal rights or so are "vociferously" for gun control? Hmmmm....... And the shooter in Dallas, regardless of motive, shot and killed whites and Hispanics and women and AfricanAmerican bystanders as well as his proclaimed victims - was he part of the clamoring minority against gun control? Nope, not him either. Then there's the cat in my town who, a few years back, shot 6 people at the Jewish Community Center, killing 3...all Christians ironically enough....to protect the "majority" from the dangerous (and in this case unarmed) "minority"....them dang Christ killers! Take that!! Ooops.

This topic is political, it is nationalistically USA, narrow in scope, and inherently flawed "reasoning" based on fear. Do Americans still need to be armed with military grade assault weapons to defend ourselves from the tyranny of our own government? Or the likely invasion of those pesky and dangerous Canadians? Gun nuts!! A solution that is its own problem....which studies show creates far more problems than it solves. Good grief. Perhaps the real issues are fear and hate and ignorance and stupidity with unfettered "rights" and access to combat weapons in the hands of morons, haters, and killers?

As for totalitarianism and gun control...you mean like the Brits, and Dutch, and French, and Danes? It's kind of ironic that the Brits are the reason for the US Second Amendment but they abolished slavery before us and have so much less one on one violence than us. As do the Canadians but they have more guns than us....but not assault grade, high capacity, crowd killing weapons...like we protect here so diligently!

Speaking of being duped by the free press, for those who dig deeper, there is significant empirical evidence that demonstrates the reality that in the USA and globally, there has been a steady decline in violent deaths by all sources over the past 6 decades. Wouldn't think so by the fear mongers who slant the "news" and those who repeat the falsehoods perpetuated there. Fear sells....guns. Let us be very, very afraid. And assuage our fear with guns. Which most often kills either the owner or a family member, often the children in "gun houses". Yes, quite the solution.

Perhaps what we need is more educated, employed, and civilized citizens, all of whom enjoy equal protection under the law - regardless of race, creed, religion, dress, diet, etc.?!

What a brain trust on display. God save us from such thinking, especially here of all places!! Talk about a lack of real thinking.

:roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:00 pm +0000
Posts: 691
Location: Savannah GA
GOOD AFTERNOON:
Fascinating topic. When I think of the gun issue in the United States, I think of the passage where the Authors state that civilization is based on everyone giving up some of their rights, so all others may have equal rights. I think those on the far Right side of this issue are pursuing their individual rights, almost completely at the expense of rights of others. Still, their outlook can be at least partially validated when you look at the scary amount of crime going down these days. Those on the far Left of the issue reach almost to the same level of unreality, demanding a level of fairness and equality which, to be honest is both unworkable and unreasonable, given the level of degenerate strains of racial degradation which pollute our society. Both see a clear-cut goal, and by focusing only on their goal, miss the entire point of the argument.

I am a gun owner. However, I have no qualms about registering my firearms, in fact I would welcome this as a small sign of progression towards that far off goal of Light and Life. That being said, I am not holding my breath, and quietly watch as evolution takes its messy time bringing this eventual state to fact.

Wishing for total equality now seems to me to be living in a fantasy world where there is no crime and no over-controlling State. Wishing for the status quo means living in an equal fantastic world, where racial minorities are not oppressed by the very structure of society and there are and no rogue police. If one chooses to live at the edge, one must pick their poison.

Evolution is not pretty, but it is terribly effective.

Al


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
fanofVan wrote:
“Peter, put up your sword. They who take the sword shall perish by the sword. Do you not understand that it is the Father’s will that I drink this cup?


Bradly, it seems that you do not understand the context of the sword here, or maybe you do. The police officers killed in Dallas lived by theirs guns and they died. Perhaps you are correct in your assessment. All officers should put up their guns, sheath their swords. I suggest they start in your neighborhood. Perhaps you could organize a community watch that can study the problem of crime and devise a suitable weapon. This will take a great deal of research, of course. Since you are a teacher and a scholar, perhaps a defense mounted by 2000 paper cuts.


fanofVan wrote:
And those who "clamor" for equal rights (one must presume the author above means that whites or the "majority" of Americans have no interest in nor should they have any interest in "equal rights" - absurd on its very premise - I'm pretty sure both the Constitution and the Supreme Court are also interested in equal rights!) are those who suffer most by a lack of equal protection under the law (including over half the population when women's rights are included...not to mention them as victims of violence most often) and which so called "minorities" are also the most victimized by gun violence....those crazy "minorities" (a rather US centric and myopic perspective on a much larger and far more complicated issue - who's a minority globally?), what ARE they thinking??!!


I happen to be one of those "crazy minorities", Bradly, and you are white as the driven snow. What does that matter? I am nobodies victim. Gun violence needs no qualifier. Violence is violence. If words could kill, where would I be now? I am not a native of this country but I have no problem with being US centric. I live in the US and my view is from here. It is the hypocrite that claims a view not their own.


fanofVan wrote:
So, according to the reasoning of the statement above, those who fight FOR gun rights are AGAINST equal rights? Or those who fight for equal rights are against gun ownership?


What do you fight for Bradly, and what do you fight with? Do you fight windmills? You have no effective weapon, then, unless you can calm the winds.


fanofVan wrote:
Or is it that the statement above means that equal rights are bad while gun ownership is good? If we only had fewer civil rights and more guns, our problems would be over??!! The "equalizer" is more guns and not more rights? REALLY!!??


How hypocritical! You want civil rights but you are against the right to bear arms, is that it? Where do you stand on the right to free speech? Can anybody speak and have an opinion, or only some? Can anyone own a gun, or only some? Are some more equal than others. I am a minority, so maybe I should be able to yell louder and and carry bigger guns.


fanofVan wrote:
This topic is political, it is nationalistically USA, narrow in scope, and inherently flawed "reasoning" based on fear. Do Americans still need to be armed with military grade assault weapons to defend ourselves from the tyranny of our own government?


I do believe we should be free to buy what ever arms, we as individuals, feel we need to protect ourselves. Address my father and grandfather, Cuban freedom fighters and anti-revolutionaries, who needed arms of military grade to defend against the tyranny of their own government. You may not speak to them now for they have passed, but perhaps you can imagine a military prison where torture made death welcomed. But you, as a narrow minded, self-hating American, cannot see beyond your safe shores and can avoid the very unpleasant world while you study it from your Ivory Tower.


fanofVan wrote:
As for totalitarianism and gun control...you mean like the Brits, and Dutch, and French, and Danes? It's kind of ironic that the Brits are the reason for the US Second Amendment but they abolished slavery before us and have so much less one on one violence than us. As do the Canadians but they have more guns than us....but not assault grade, high capacity, crowd killing weapons...like we protect here so diligently!


I mean the Castro brothers, who confiscated the guns from the populace and now control the people of that island through malnutrition, mind control and fear. The Brits have less violence, but they also enjoy less freedom. North Korea has even less crime. Perhaps their model should be followed. Perhaps you could research that system, study it well, and report back to us.


fanofVan wrote:
Speaking of being duped by the free press, for those who dig deeper, there is significant empirical evidence that demonstrates the reality that in the USA and globally, there has been a steady decline in violent deaths by all sources over the past 6 decades.


Yes, this is true. This steady decline, at least in this country, mirrors that steady increase in gun ownership by law abiding citizens. Criminals hate it when the innocent shoot back. They tend to think twice.


fanofVan wrote:
Let us be very, very afraid. And assuage our fear with guns. Which most often kills either the owner or a family member, often the children in "gun houses". Yes, quite the solution.


I do not fear guns, it is the evil mind that finds ways to be violent. I do not fear the sword nor the knife, nor the fist, nor the assault weapon. I find that the mind that is unholy is naturally violent and animalistic.

alwilliams767 wrote:
Evolution is not pretty, but it is terribly effective.


Not to mention, evolution is part of a divine plan.


fanofVan wrote:
Perhaps what we need is more educated, employed, and civilized citizens, all of whom enjoy equal protection under the law - regardless of race, creed, religion, dress, diet, etc.?!


I gather that you want all of this now, right now. Perhaps you can organize a protest if you don't get what you want, right NOW!

That would certainly be Bradly's plan. But would it be a divine plan? You do not want evolution, Bradly, you want revolution. I have seen what this kind of thinking can do to people and countries.


fanofVan wrote:
What a brain trust on display. God save us from such thinking, especially here of all places!! Talk about a lack of real thinking.


Are you looking in the mirror again, Bradly? Remember, vanity is the devil's favorite sin.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group