How can they believe that? How can they say that?

The national gun debate has become more intense, if not strident.  Some proposals for gun reform, already passed in the House of Representatives, are soon to come before the Senate.  There is an array of potential provisions in the various drafts of the Bill:  red flag laws, limit on magazine capacities, restriction on manufacture and sale of assault style weapons, raising the minimum age of purchase.  Sorting through the details can leave people feeling dizzy.  One of the most recent sticking points is the getting agreement on what constitutes a boyfriend, which refers to men with violent pasts who have relationships with women who feel threatened and want their “boyfriend’s” guns be taken away.  How many dates constitutes a boyfriend?  Does he need to be a live in partner?

Almost every day I hear from either a friend or a national figure say “enough”.  There are common sense steps that can be taken to reduce gun violence, but there are forces and voices that refuse to budge on reforming or restricting the use of guns.  Enough already.  And the other thing I hear nearly every day from friends or national figures is — How can they believe that?  How can they say that?  How can they believe that an AR-15, which was used in the massacre in Uvalde — and which literally decapitated kids, is a needed and necessary weapon?

A few years ago I participated in a  debate on the second amendment sponsored by Braver Angels, a national movement organized after the 2016 election to depolarize America. The presenting question was: The second amendment should not be challenged or changed.  The format invited people in favor of the question to speak for four minutes, after which questions could be asked — but needed to be presented to the debate chair (this minimized “how can you believe that?” questions.) After the affirmative case was made, a negative presentation, which was allotted four minutes, was offered. Questions directed to the chair were invited after the presentation.  This rhythm went on for over an hour.  Initially, when I heard someone speaking in favor the the second amendment, I wasn’t really listening:  I was fashioning my response.  Not exactly “how can you believe that”? But pretty close.  I had data, and examples — and a moral argument.

But as the back and forth debate continued (which wasn’t exactly a debate, given that the process was designed to have opposing sides express their views), I began to have a change of heart.  Because I was listening.  To what was being said, without filtering it for a rebuttal. And as I was listening, I was learning — that the people on the pro second amendment side really believed what they were saying.  They really believed that more guns make people safer.   And from that realization I was able to regard people speaking on the other side not just as avatars of an ideology, but as people who had concern, hopes and fears.  And need to be dealt with accordingly.

Twenty years ago I was invited to participate in a day long discussion on homosexuality with a group of clergy who were divided on the issue.  A few hours in, after hearing a remark made by a colleague, who was a trusted friend, and who was resistant to gay marriage and ordaining gay clergy, I couldn’t contain myself.:  “I can’t believe the arrogance of what you say and how you say it.”  And he immediately responded,  “you have been arrogant since the moment you walked in.”

It was only when we could name — and each of us claim, our respective arrogance, that the conversation could move forward.  We moved beyond arguments, which were and are important, to connect on a deeper level.

For the past dozen years I have been actively engaged in the process to reduce gun violence.  After all the recent shootings, and the proposed Bills before the Senate, I am more committed to reducing gun violence than ever before.  But I m also aware — in myself, and in others — that saying “enough”,  and “I can’t believe they believe that” is an expression of arrogance, if not shaming.  And causes people on the other side to double down by buying more guns and being even more resistant to what they perceive as assaults on the second amendment.

Naming arrogance is hard.  Letting go of it is even harder.  It is a process, if not a discipline — to be committed to reducing gun violence and at the same time to hold people who disagree with methodology with respect and understanding.

Scams: Preying on Vulnerability and Violating Trust

I fell for a scam last week.  My computer froze, a pop up alarm appeared and said needed to call Microsoft immediately to protect all that was stored on my desktop, lest foreign hackers steal my data, documents and identity.  The Microsoft number was prominently...

Easter: Breaking Through a Contraining System

He broke out.  He got up.  In faith Christians proclaim that Jesus rose from the grave:  Alleluia!  Christ is Risen.  What follows are hymns of praise, expressions of joy, a profusion of flowers – all offered to gatherings that are double the size of a normal Sunday...

Ep 11 – “Passion and Patience” with The Rev. Dr. Amy Peeler

Amy shares about her journey of faith, path to ordination as an Episcopal priest, passion for and vocation of studying scripture, and the blessings and challenges she has experienced along the way.

Fake News, Misinformation, and Truth

When I arrived in Japan in late August, 1973, for a two year fellowship, the country was preparing to honor the 50th anniversary of the Tokyo earthquake, which upended the city for four minutes on September 1, 1923.  140,000 people were killed, many by the 7.9...

Reflections on Christian Nationalism

“The opposite of faith is not doubt”, a wise mentor once said to me, recalling a line from Christian writer Anne Lamott; “the opposite of faith is certainty.”  Religious claims of certainty have been surging on public platforms and in various political expressions. ...

Fighting Insults and Condemnation with the Power of Love

We were at the breakfast table.  My daughter, then about a year and a half, was in her highchair, scrambled eggs on the tray in front of her.  With an impish grin, she threw some of her meal on the floor.  “Don’t do that,” I said in a rather stern tone.  With an even...

Contrasting Interpretations of Discipline

“We will not allow for a policy of ‘anything goes’”.  So said the Chair of a plenary meeting of Anglican bishops in 2008.  There were about seven hundred bishops from around the world attending the once every decade gathering in Canterbury, England.  The plenary took...

Selling the Soul to the Ego

I don’t know people who have literally sold their soul, a metaphor that goes back centuries, but there are many of us who have abandoned, ignored, forgotten or dismissed the very concept of soul.  There are ancient and medieval legendary characters — Theophilus, a...

What Do The Risks of Aleksei Navalny and Jesus Say to Us?

When Aleksei Navalny returned to Russia from Germany in January 2021 after recovering from being poisoned, prison was certain and death was likely.   Navalny died on Friday, February 16 at the IK-3 Penal Colony, located 1200 miles northeast of Moscow in the arctic...

Aging, the Election and a Pathway Through the Chaos

Are Joe Biden and Donald Trump too old to be President?  This question is getting a lot of attention, with no end of commentary.  Assessments are being made as to each candidate’s physical stamina, mental acuity, and psychological health.  Recommendations have been...
Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join my mailing list to receive the latest blog updates.

You have Successfully Subscribed!