This article was printed from KeepAndBearArms.com.
For more gun- and freedom-related information, visit
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
An Open Letter to the Clergy and Members
of
the General Conference of the United Methodist Church
I write to you with greetings in Christ, but with deep concern for the
anti-gun (anti-self defense, anti-Constitution) bias announced at this year�s
conference. I am especially dismayed that such a public statement was made in
the name of United Methodism without a consultation with the members of the
local churches. Certainly no vote was taken among the members of my home
church to authorize the annual conference to support such a position, let alone
to author it! The topic of "gun control" is of great interest to me and my fellow
physicians. Public debate on the subject has been very one sided according to
the anti-gun rhetoric streaming out of several medical organizations lately. As
a man of science, I have begun to wonder what some of my fellow physicians have
done with their own scientific training. I have wondered why the large,
lobby-oriented, medical organizations have, like the UMC, made unilateral
decisions among the "leadership" (should that not be "servantship?")
to call for registration of firearms (and firearms owners) and the insistence
upon such "safety" devices as trigger locks, lock boxes, etc. that are
not at all proven to be of value, and that may have "unintended
consequences" the like of which have not been dispassionately considered
and which may be very destructive to life, limb, property, and sovereignty of
nation. Why we have not had energized public debate presenting both sides of the
argument for the right to keep and bear arms? Why do we not insist on
data-driven policy decisions? I have concluded that the reason for a lack of
public scrutiny and honest debate is the same for our professional medical
organizations as it is for the Church, our law enforcement agencies, and the
body politic: We are caught up in an era of political expediency driven by an
amazing lack of courage! In my view, "political expediency" is very much beneath the Body of
Christ. It has preceded some of the darkest moments in the history of the
Church. As for a "lack of courage," Rev. Smith, neither you nor I were
born again unto a spirit of Fear. Our decisions must never be dictated by such a
spirit that aggravates us but that has no authority over us. Let me offer some material (conveniently available on the world wide web)
for your perusal: A very concise review of several studies germane to the community and
individual safety of firearms is found in the March 1994 Journal of the
Medical Association of Georgia, Volume 83, beginning on page 133. "Guns
in the Medical Literature - a Failure of Peer Review" by Dr. Edgar Suter
explores the many distortions and outright fabrications that are accepted as
fact - not only by the public, but by many physicians and their lobbying
organizations. He illustrates how even research by non-gun-owners and liberal sociologists like Gary Kleck shows the clear danger to our communities posed by much of the feel-good gun control concepts
endorsed by medical lobbying groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics,
the American Medical Association, and others. Suter's thoroughly referenced
article can be found on the internet at: An even more detailed analysis appears in the Tennessee Law Review
Volume 62 (3) Spring 1995 issue by Kates et al. entitled "Guns and Public
Health: Epidemic of Violence, or Pandemic of Propaganda." The Law
Librarian, Micki Fox (at phone no. 615-974-4464) will, for 13 dollars, provide
copies of the entire 350-page issue. This well-referenced symposium of articles
demonstrates what the world of science really knows about gun laws and their
effects on community stability. The report clearly details to what extent the
so-called 'facts' which are used to justify proposed public policy on firearms
are distorted and fabricated, often at taxpayer's expense. Kates' article is also on the internet at: Anyone with a sincere interest in reducing gun violence needs to read both of
these articles. The especially sincere, and those who will engage in the public
debate, will want to research the many references offered in both articles. Every thinking person knows that guns are not in and of themselves a threat
to our safety. There are tens of thousands of lives saved each year by the
judicious, appropriate, and completely legal use of private firearms. There are
many physicians today ( NOT being heard in the news releases of their
organizations) who have studied the empirically valid data and who know that our
public safety is much more threatened by some of the proposed "gun control
legislation" than it is by the private ownership of firearms. Doctors for
Responsible Gun Ownership, a subsidiary of the Claremont Institute with a
website at: One of the very best information resources, and a web site of which I am a
member of the Board of Directors, is Keep and Bear Arms.com at http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
I suspect you might be particularly interested in our Media
Bias information showing clearly how the public opinion is being swayed by
use of less than honest tactics. Physicians, PhDs and other doctorate level professionals have been working
for weeks to open a page on KeepandBearArms.com that will allow people to ask
questions, make comments, and in general become more informed about the true
facts of so called "gun control." I'm at the helm of that project and
I would be delighted to discuss it further with you or any doctors that you
would refer to me at [email protected]. I think that we United Methodists, our pastors, and our Church leaders (read:
servants) need to be considerably more informed before we, the Ambassadors of
Christ, are lured once again into the clutches of those among us who would
enslave the rest with a grab for political power made, as it has been throughout
history, in the name of "security and safety." As for your current position, and
the direction of your pulpit, I can think of no better words than those given to
Sir Thomas Moore by the author Robert Bolt in his play "A Man for All
Seasons": "I beseech you in
Christ,
consider that you may be wrong." I am, Most sincerely, |
||||||||