Even though they often go hand in hand, in America, the "Church of Guns" is more passionate and dangerous than Christianity

Contrary to what many secular Americans believe, the most dangerous religion in America is not Christianity. Instead, it is the Church of Guns. This may seem strange and counter to other opinions I have written, but America does have a bloody religion devoted to guns. Much like our acquainted religions, criticizing the Church of Guns draws many attacks in return.

Most of the articles I write do not necessarily concern gun issues in America. However, when ever I do write about gun control, the cultists of the Church of Guns come out in a great legion to disparage and discredit me in every way possible. The worst incident involved having my Twitter feed (which I barely use) bombarded by gun trolls who wasted their time firing their arsenals of insults.

Religion generally is dogmatic beliefs that can take many shapes. Much of the dogmatism surrounds a certain key principle or doctrine. This doctrine tends to be unchanging and not subject to question. Anyone who does challenge the doctrine is targeted for their criticism. This applies well to gun nuts in America.

Much like religious blocks, gun nuts tend to cast their voting interests around less restriction on their idols. Like evangelical “values voters,” gun cultists fight specifically for less regulation on guns and pressure their political allies to go after anyone who gets in their way. This includes concerned parents, being threatened with gun totting goons who try and give their best impression of American Sniper.

I haven’t experienced the worst of online gun trolls, but I have seen cases get heated to the point where threats of violence are implicated. I have never been threatened, but I know writers who have been, including Quiet Mike’s Chad R. MacDonald. Honestly, I applaud those who do take strong stances on gun control, because it is not an issue I would ever consider standing out in front of. The reason being, guns are a pseudo-religious sacred cow in this country.

To criticize the availability of guns in America and advocate any law stemming the flow (or even modest regulation) puts one as an automatic target. My experience is that it is easier to criticize Christianity in America then it is to criticize the Church of Guns. I have criticized institutional religion many times before, and I don’t recall getting nearly the same level of vitriol compared to when I raised questions about guns. I could write a piece with the title “Fuck Jesus” and I wouldn’t be attacked nearly as much.

All joking aside, this is a serious issue. Gun nuts have framed owning any and all types of firearms a sacred right, a right above all other rights. Guns today are on a sacred pillar that religion once widely rested on. Gun nuts are quick to attack and organize against anyone who criticizes them and their sacred right to arm themselves to the teeth, and allow anyone to do the same.

While it is mostly analogy, the way in which gun cultists behave is similar to radical adherents of religion. The very same “How dare you” attitude emerges, a scolding tone that is intended to make one feel like a dumb child.

The mindset is similar between gun nuts and religious fanatics. They share the same exclusiveness, the idea that their “right” can never be challenged. Of course, much like religious fanatics on issues like gay marriage, their idea of “rights” are severely distorted. Their right to own any gun they choose trumps other rights, in the same way that a Christian bigot’s right to discriminate trumps other rights.

Anytime someone publicly criticizes the rampant lack of gun control in the country, gun nuts say not to politicize tragedies. After every mass shooting that makes headlines, whether it be Sandy Hook, Aurora, or Charleston, gun nuts claim we should not use the tragedies to discuss the issue of guns. Every effort is made to either shift blame or avoid the discussion all together.

Bear in mind, I am not anti-gun (per-say). I believe Americans do have the right to own firearms. In fact, my stance has softened somewhat. I don’t even care anymore about assault rifles on the civilian market, though I do question the necessity of owning such a gun. Of course Americans have a right to a gun, the question has always been how far does that right extend?

The Church of Guns would have us believe that every American should have unlimited access to any firearm they choose. They also believe that gun sales should be unregulated, or regulated to an ineffective minimum. Despite the mass casualties the country faces every year, the gun cultists think that more access to guns is the answer. The Wild West solution, they like to call it.

The central problem here is that America has developed a religion devoted to guns. There has to be an honest and rational conversation we can have as a country about the sane regulation of guns. Tight background checks, state or national registries, mental-health evaluations. I would even go far enough to say you should apply for a license to own a gun, and these licenses must be treated like a driver’s license. Also, much like getting a car, one should pay insurance on their gun.

As much as this country needs to have this conversation, gun nuts still insist the problem is not guns. Much like a religious fanatic in denial, they plug their ears with bullets and spray fire from their teeth. No amount of death will be enough for America to realize the dangerous nature of its gun religion.

7 COMMENTS

  1. I think the biggest confusion comes from not understanding the difference between a right and a privilege. Rights are natural and endowed by being a human being. A Right is something that does not take effort or resources from other people to employ. You do not need to raise taxes or give anything to facilitate Freedom of Speech (The Right to express oneself) or the Right to bear arms ( The Right to Self Defense) Rights cannot be granted, revoked, regulated, or licensed by any body of people as they are inherent and natural.

    Privileges, such as health care and driving a Car can be Granted, Revoked, Regulated, and Licensed. And they often require allocation of funds and resources to implement.

    Progressives/Collectivists, IMO, seem to think that Rights and Privileges are the same thing, and that Government has supreme power over all to grant, regulate, revoke, and license.

    Bearing Arms is a privilege in other countries, but our founders believed that it is a fundamental human natural right in ours. This is why we get irked when you try to turn it into a privilege.

  2. Almost there Julian, it takes extraordinary courage to criticise gun junkies in an honest way. They will kill for their thrill just like herion junkies do. These religion, gun,dope,booze addicts aren’t just similar to each other. They all have the exact same moral atavism. The mindset of rationalising, justification and gratification. Exceptionality is at the heart of it, terrible things only happen to other people. Perhaps the parents of the boy in Montana who accidentally killed his friend rationalised ” My son can safely have a loaded gun because he’s mature and responsible, he would never kill someone accidentally. Only bad kids with bad parents can’t be trusted with loaded weapons. He hasn’t accidentally killed his best friend yet so that will never happen in the future. “This exceptional thinking is how addicts deny hypothetical or implied threat to themselves. The fear based meme ” castle doctrine”is self perpetuating. A gun makes me safe from being a victim of violence not a potential corpse. We now live with people that believe the activation of a fight or flight response justifies “castle doctrining” a teenage boy in the face.

    • I suspect your judgement to be clouded, as most firm second amendment supporters would be just as opposed to any of our other constitutional rights being routinely threatened in any significant way. It has nothing to do with a “cult of the gun,” and everything to do with the fact that we have politicians with absurd agendas trying to tell us what we can and cannot own, based on infantile arguments and pure lack of logic. For instance, in one year, only around 200 people were killed by semi-automatic sporting rifles. That’s a smaller number than the amount of people killed by hammers. Even so, you had politicians and activists springing up out of nowhere to attempt to ban what they called “assault rifles,” even though many of these individuals knew nothing about what they were trying to ban in the first place. Lawful gun owners were suddenly having their rights attacked, for absolutely no reason. Look at it this way: How many people do you think are killed per year as the result of verbal confrontations? As these verbal confrontations relate directly to the exercise of freedom of speech, how would it make you feel if every single person that attacked “assault rifles” suddenly started screaming that we need laws in place to limit free speech to only “polite conversation”? That’s about the same logic applied by the “ban ‘assault rifles’ crowd.”

      • Threatening moms with guns at a rally is not the equivalent of free speech. Also, I never made the point that assault weapons be banned. There are common sense ways of addressing rampat access to guns without banning anything. For example, someone should apply for a license to own a gun, like a car. Nothing has to be banned yet more onus should be on gun owners and sellers.

        Verbal confrontations mixed with guns is not a good combination. I’m all for gun ownership, but what we have now is open season.

        • I totally agree with you! My point was not to argue; it was to show the point that there are many, many people out there who attack gun rights in absolutely idiotic ways, and as such…it puts otherwise common-sense, laid back gun owners on the defensive. My example of all of the uproar about banning “assault rifles” was meant simply to illustrate the fact that such an absurd position does nothing to bring about common sense gun laws, and furthers the divide. The defensive reaction of gun owners results in what you view as a “religion of guns.” I feel that to be fair an to show both angles, that aspect needs addressed, as so much of the anti-gun rhetoric going around will just further the gap between those who are for responsible gun control, and those who are being turned away from that idea, to the concept of absolutely no gun control whatsoever. Heck- Sen. Feinstein could probably turn a typical gun owner into a diehard “the government’s coming for my guns” loonie in about five minutes with some of the senseless garbage she spews.

Leave a Comment