If You Believe in the Sanctity of Human Life, Then...

...you must believe in restricting access to guns and especially in taking measures to protect schools. 

...you must be an advocate for universal vaccination of all people against COVID-I9.  

You can say you believe whatever you want, but it's meaningless if your actions don't support your words. 

I must admit, the news about the school shooting in Oxford, Michigan slipped by without much notice until I'd heard it two or three times.  I try not to take this kind of news casually, I want to react and it motivates me to do whatever I can to prevent another one, whether it's to fire off another email to my state and federal representatives or send money to a victim's fund.  It is a complicated issue, to try and figure out why this keeps happening, other than the obvious combination of lots of anger and the easy availability of guns, along with the refusal of a segment of our government that has decided to pay for their political benefits with the lives of school-aged children.  

Belief in the "Sanctity of Life" Requires Action on School Shootings

Senator Chris Murphy's "Sanctity of Life" Message

Opposition to abortion rights is only one aspect of the "sanctity of human life" argument.  And I'm with Senator Murphy on this one.  Don't claim to be pro-life if you're not willing to put a stop to the prolific spread of firearms designed to murder people and the private ownership of which has no basis in the right to bear arms.  Look how easy this one was.  The shooter's Dad bought him the gun on Friday.  And I'm already hearing all of the "can't prevent this kind of thing" arguments, but I'm not buying any of them.  The constitution does not give anyone the "right" to own a semi-automatic pistol that is manufactured exclusively for the purpose of murdering people.  The constitutional right to bear arms is connected to a "well regulated militia."  That doesn't mean a militia that anyone puts together because the don't like some things the government has done.  That means organized protection.  

The single most telling fact about attitudes in this country when it comes to the availability of guns and ammunition is the fact that we have had multiple schools get shot up, and hundreds of students murdered, and while that does move a lot of people in the direction of placing some kinds of limits on gun ownership and gun rights, it's not a high enough priority to hold politicians accountable for not doing anything about it.  Since the same politicians who claim "sanctity of life" advocacy for their stance on abortion are the ones who continue to block efforts to keep nut jobs from getting guns and murdering students at school, their claim is nullified. 

The idea that life begins at conception is a point of Christian theology.  But it doesn't end at birth.  However, filtered through the lens of the secular, right wing politics in which white Evangelicals have embedded themselves, there is complete silence when it comes to protecting the lives of students gathered together in schools, where they are relatively easy targets.  Preventing potential shooters from getting their hands on a weapon, well, that's completely off the table.  Oh, they'll get charged if they actually shoot up a school and kill students.  But laws that would be completely consistent with the constitutional right to bear arms as it should be interpreted, and which would prevent guns from getting into the hands of potential shooters, well, no.  We're not going to do that.  And if you're not willing to do that, then you do not believe in the sanctity of human life. 

Charging the Parents With a Crime in This Case is a Step in the Right Direction

The fearmongering political right is always claiming that those on the left are coming after their guns.  All the conspiracy theories and rumors have yet to come to pass.  But the motivation to make money is always more powerful than the protection of individual rights in this country.  Gun rights advocates are always claiming that most gun owners are responsible.  If that were the case, then we would not be having school shootings and gun violence to the extent that we have it.  But holding Ethan Crumbley's parents, who were not showing responsible gun ownership, accountable in this case is exactly the right thing to do.  

If all guns must be registered in their owner's name, that's not a step toward taking them away, as some claim.  It's a step toward responsible gun ownership that no responsible gun owner should object to.  A responsible gun owner makes sure his guns can't get into someone elses hands who should not have one.  And if a gun owner doesn't keep track of his inventory, and one of their guns is used in committing a crime, and they're held partly accountable, that's good, responsible gun ownership. 

The red flags in this case were everywhere, and this very preventable incident would never have happened if the shooter's parents had been responsible gun owners.  Yes, facts are sometimes hard to accept but that's the way it is.  

And I'm personally in favor of much tighter control and greater restrictions on gun ownership which will also prevent these shootings.  The right to bear arms is directly tied to a well-regulated militia which we have in the form of police, sheriff departments, constables, the national guard and the military.  If private citizens want to own a gun for their own protection and safety, with proper training, I'm fine with that, but I would like to see concealed carry repealed and the penalties and punishments increases for those who carry guns into a school.  That should instantly result in a charge of terrorism if it turns out to be true.  If every gun requires a permit then if the gun is used in the commission of  acrime, it is the owner's responsibility.  

At Least, If You Believe in the Sanctity of Human Life, There's Child Care, Health Care and Anti-Poverty Legislation on the Table

I'm not expecting any Republicans to support anything having to do with tax credits or child care or anything that will actually deal with some of the root problems which push the abortion numbers upward.  There's a commonly held belief among Republicans that benefitting people economically is not the role of government.  If lowering the abortion total is truly the goal, there are numerous proposals in the Build Back Better bill that will do exactly that, so a pro-lifer should be very willing to support it, unless, of course, their political stance means more to them than the people they are supposedly elected to serve. 

I find it ironic that those who sound off the loudesst about the Sanctity of Human Life turn out to be the ones who put up obstacles to actually doing anything about the problem.  So that makes them hypocrites.

Our children are our future.  Let's take this seriously.