Dear Editor: It’s not surprising to find conventional liberal talking points in letters lamenting the Parkland tragedy that distort rather than provide a Christian perspective.
First, there is no such thing as an “assault rifle,” neither are they available for sale, nor have they ever been for sale, let alone have they ever been used in acts of wanton violence by the morally insane. The term does not even exist in the military. It was invented by political cynics to manipulate a social reaction. Automatic carbine rifles exist in the military, but not in the civilian world, and except when smuggled and used by jihadist terrorists, fully automatics have never been used in these tragedies.
Pretending there could be social engineering solutions to a moral crisis, like more ineffective anti-gun legislation, provides hysterical levels of emotional satisfaction to liberals, who not only do not understand moral solutions to problems but are continuously hostile to the concept of God-given moral truths, the honoring of which would run the risk of undermining and not requiring their preferred illusory role as society’s secular saviors.
The reality is that fatherless families have social consequences. A divorce culture has social consequences. Moral nihilism and an abortion culture have social consequences. Contemporary religious practices that exercise a cowardly refusal to mention the word sin anymore has social consequences. The stupidity of, I’m OK, You’re OK, pop psychology has social consequences. The endless irrational carping that it’s government’s job to fix all our problems has social consequences. A depraved entertainment culture and a refusal of Christians to condemn a depraved entertainment culture have social consequences. A lying news media, especially about Catholic matters, has social consequences. The refusal to monitor the indoctrination of young people to accept false ideas that don’t distinguish between autonomous self-respect and moral license in school guidance curriculums have social consequences.
Finally, the refusal of masses of Christians to respond thoughtfully like Christians rather than mimic anti-Christian liberals when confronting social problems has social consequences. All of which contributes to an ethos that further deteriorates tortured and broken souls.
Editor’s Note: Joseph Caputo is retired NYPD Lieutenant, who served in the 5th, Midtown North, 109th, and 107th Precincts.
Dear Editor: In reality, there is very little difference of opinion on the issue of gun violence but here is difference of opinion on who is presenting the message. There are political hijackers that immediately jumped on the opportunity to make this a political issue and I am disappointed at the schools that were duped into the “solidarity” displayed with the “bad actors.”
The shooting in Parkland was four weeks ago yet a shooting on Monday had gone off the airways.
Very shortly after the shooting in Parkland, a student spokesman appeared complete with microphones and sound systems. How did that even happen if not done by an organization?
Why would it be necessary to provide “safe spaces” in Catholic schools for students who choose not to participate?
All these things trouble me as I step back and observe the way we have responded.
Apparently the “Youth Wing” of the Women’s March was the sponsor of the national movement. That organization is funded by MoveOn.org, an organization that has never passed up an opportunity to take advantage of a tragedy for political reasons.
By choosing the day of the National “Walkout,” our schools have inadvertently aligned themselves with these “bad actors.”
Our reaction to these events in my opinion shouldn’t be Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, but it should be Catholic!
We Catholics need to be very careful in this hyper-political environment to not align ourselves with anybody but we should demonstrate what we believe, in such a way, that people choose to align with us!
No one should feel left out or in disagreement and we shouldn’t pick the political left or right in such an issue, but I’m afraid that’s exactly what happened here.
In the very heated immigration issue, Bishop DiMarzio never fails to consider the opinions of both sides. Pope Francis is criticized because he clearly doesn’t choose right or left, but does choose a Catholic opinion.
I think on this issue we were duped into the appearance of taking a side.