Rev. Franklin Graham Writes Open Letter to Obama Slamming Gun Restrictions: 'Our Government Has Taken God Out of Society'


#1

**Rev. Franklin Graham Writes Open Letter to Obama Slamming Gun Restrictions: ‘Our Government Has Taken God Out of Society’ **

The Rev. Franklin Graham has written an open letter to Barack Obama charging that the President’s recent moves to tighten gun controls “will do nothing to change this horrific problem,” as the true issue in this country is sin.

“Mr. President, you’re looking at the wrong place when it comes to the root cause of gun violence,” Graham, head of both the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and the Samaritan’s Purse global charity, said in a Facebook post shared Wednesday. "You can take all the guns in America and put them in a pile on the Mall in Washington D.C. - and those guns will stay there and will eventually rust and decay.

“Not one gun will crawl out of that pile and shoot or harm anyone,” the 64-year-old evangelist continued. “It takes a human being, and a human heart bent on evil, to pick up a gun, load it, and pull the trigger. The problem we have in this country is sin.”

On Tuesday, the president announced measures to tighten federal background checks for gun sales, require gun sellers to be licensed or face criminal prosecution, and to expand mental health treatment. During his announcement, Obama said that, in order to protect innocent people, some “constraints on freedom” are acceptable.

In continuing his comments, Graham argued that the real problem in America is that “we have a government that has taken God out of society. Our Founding Fathers certainly did not intend this to happen.”

He added that sadly, Hollywood continues to glamorize gun violence in films and television – and Obama’s proposals will “do nothing to stop this.”

“Every night, the networks, movie channels, and theaters are filled with programming that glamorizes gun violence - guns are used to shoot, to kill, and to splatter human blood all over screens across America,” he writes.

The evangelist called for legislation to reduce such media violence, proposing "a heavy tax on the manufacturers of any film or game that graphically depicts violence.

"If violent films and games were taken off the shelves, I believe we would see a dramatic drop in gun violence over the next few years.

“As a nation, we have turned our back on God and this kind of violence and bloodshed is a result,” Graham said, quoting Jeremiah 17:9, which reads, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”

He concluded: “The only cure? Jesus Christ. That’s what will make a difference in our nation.”

:sad_yes:

Yes, Mr. Graham says the truth, as long as the nation turns away from God, we will be on this downward slope.

Maybe they have but I’d like to hear the leaders of other Churches including our own to voice these sentiments.


#2

:rolleyes: Maybe it’s just me but as I read the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I see Him speaking far more about the poor and the sick, and love and peace and our neighbor. He even goes as far as to say that those who are for the poor and the sick and for the prisoner, serve and are with Him, and He speaks of the righteous and eternal life.

What I definitely don’t see is Christ slamming gun control and making it more important that people have the right to stock up on all kinds of weapons than it is, for instance, for everyone from birth to death to have universal healthcare.

So I question the priorities of conservatives such as Graham and others. But then this is probably one reason why I do not follow them.


#3

I think the problem with people like Franklin is that they seem to think that if they have an opinion that the rest of us are interested in it.


#4

One can say that about anyone.

And in this case, I think he is correct, the good of this nation starts with good morals.

One can put up all of the gun controls in the world, look at the areas hardest hit with gun violence.

One can also say that Graham represents millions of persons.


#5

I am not in favor of gun control myself, but I fail to see the linkage between the morality of society and gun violence. For example, were we more or less moral when Lincoln was shot?


#6

No, we were not more moral in 1865 I gather or when Garfield and others were shot.

I won’t make a long statement on this, but perhaps one can say there has been a decline in morals in some ways.

I personally believe that politicians that legislate immorally have limited moral authority.

I don’t mean to go fully fundamental on this forum, however, I believe in what Matthew 7 says.

You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

I take all of the quotes and nothing out of context but just post a little.


#7

I’d our country had higher moral standards back then. Abortion was illegal, Sodomy was illegal, people dressed modestly, we didn’t have birth control pills, the public school system wasn’t teaching radicular secular globalism, we didn’t have much in the way of militant atheism, large areas of our cities weren’t dangerous, etc.


#8

This is true what Seamus L says but whenever these statements are listed, I am also reminded that we also had a huge civil rights struggle in the 1950s, 1960s and so on. We also had a president slain which reminds a big question in many people’s minds.

So, to me, there is good and bad.

And despite mass shootings, I think the murder rate has been coming down, on the other hand, abortion and other “non-negotiables” are evils of our time.

The SCOTUS certainly did enter a great decline with taking God out of the schools and so on. Thus I agree with Franklin Graham that the nation and society has likewise declined greatly.


#9

It seems to me that moral decline is more a person’s point of view and how they view the present relative to their past. I will bet you lots of good money we are not anywhere near the worst humanity has ever gotten and will not get so in our lifetime baring a string of unforeseen cataclysmic events.


#10

Yes I think Matt 7 is good too. The question is not Matt 7 but how the beginning of the chapter is interpreted and what good fruits are.


#11

So the Second Amendment is completely absolute and inviolate, no matter what. But the First Amendment can be tossed out with the trash? Seems an odd stance to take.


#12

Who suggested tossing out the 1st Amendment ?


#13

Did you read the article? The thrust of Graham’s argument is that instead of even modest gun regulations, the government should instead closely regulate the entertainment industry to keep violent and morally questionable content away from the public. That is pretty squarely against the 1st Amendment.


#14

To a free speech absolutist. First Amendment or not, free speech cannot be used as a defense for inciting public harm (crying fire in a crowded theater) or for instance to libel people. There are limits.

I don’t personally understand the fascination of some people with guns. That’s just me.


#15

I am neither a free speech absolutist, or gun rights absolutist. Both should be subject to reasonable regulation. My point is that it seems odd to be a gun rights absolutist, and a free speech minimalist. What coherent political theory lands one at that place?


#16

We used to have what would now be considered strict standards regarding what could be shown in theatres, and it wasn’t considered a violation of the 1st Amendment.


#17

I agree with Franklin Graham. Sin is rampant. We live in a culture of drugs, sex and violence and it is all glamorized on the big screen. Children being raised in homes with one parent and children able to turn on the television when Mom and Dad aren’t home and watch pornography or play video games killing and blowing people up. Very graphic violence. How do the gang members and criminals manage to get guns? The violent people who want to kill will find a way to accomplish their means. The problem is bigger than the gun itself. I think they need to put more money for mental illness as well as many of these shooters seems to have mental health issues.


#18

This discussion takes me back decades to my freshman year in college and Into to Ethics. It was the first time that I had ever studied a course in which there was no right answer to test questions, but rather the instructor wanted an informed defense of one system of ethics over others. I was drawn to both the ethics of utilitarianism (based on the greatest good for the greatest number) and the ethics of Kant’s categorical imperative (based on the basic stable datum that good actions were the result of the good will - the intention to do good).

I decided that both systems had problems. For me the problem with utilitarianism was that the ethical action could not be determined with any certainty until after the fact - once it had been ascertained that the greatest good for the greatest number was the actual result of the action - as well as the subjectivity in weighting the costs and benefits that make up a determination of greatest good. The problem, for me, with a categorical imperative was that good intentions are fine, but hurtful outcomes could clearly be anticipated as a result of actions determined categorically.

Ultimately, as I pondered these matters, I recalled Matthew 7 and decided that these two ethical systems are not mutually exclusive when it occurred to me that typically fruit trees do not bear fruit for years. I decided that my categorical imperatives would be to trust in God; to relate with love to my neighbors; and to understand that my actions guided by these two imperatives would bear good fruit eventually. Even though the trees that we plant are actions based on our submission to God’s Will and guided by love for our neighbor, the good that our actions bear may not come to fruition in our lifetime. But, eventually, these good trees will bear good fruit.

To all you philosophy professors: Please take pity on me. I have not studied philosophy in many decades.


#19

=Sy Noe;13562693]:rolleyes: Maybe it’s just me but as I read the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I see Him speaking far more about the poor and the sick, and love and peace and our neighbor. He even goes as far as to say that those who are for the poor and the sick and for the prisoner, serve and are with Him, and He speaks of the righteous and eternal life.

Helping the poor is important. But when last I looked, conservatives were giving far more than liberals were.

What I definitely don’t see is Christ slamming gun control and making it more important that people have the right to stock up on all kinds of weapons than it is, for instance, for everyone from birth to death to have universal healthcare.

Gun control and universal healthcare as provided by government do not work very well at all. Often, the opposite intended effect occurs.

So I question the priorities of conservatives such as Graham and others. But then this is probably one reason why I do not follow them.

The priorities of everyone should be the five non-negotiables.

Conservative policies help the poor more in the long run.


#20

Speak for yourself,I for one am interested .


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.