Because I'm a baby boomer, I was among the first generation exposed, en masse, to the learning of situational ethics--the idea that something may not be entirely right nor entirely wrong. My early training has stayed with me.
In fact, it has teased and taunted me quite a bit this last week. The issue is gun control. I'm reluctant to admit that I don't know where I stand on this issue.
I used to be adamantly for it, and I couldn't imagine thinking any other way. I had young children, and I worried about them. What if they found a gun at a friend's house, as other children had?
My children are older now. I don't know if that's why my opinion is changing. But it is. I still don't own a gun--my youngest is 11, and I'm not comfortable have a weapon within easy reach because I know kids sometimes do really stupid thing (even my kids!). I can understand, though, the argument.
I remember hearing of terrible stories during the Bosnian war. Serbs would enter a Bosnian home, detain or kill the husband, and rape the wife. When I read of these atrocities, I wondered if the household had a gun. Did the woman have a chance to defend herself?
I don't want to see a revival of the wild west, but I'm wondering if being armed isn't such a bad thing. We take precautions in other aspects of our lives. What about this?
Yes, I still believe very strongly in peace. The problem is, most of the world doesn't. Should pacifists be prepared to defend ourselves (as in Billy Jack) or should we simply turn the other cheek?
There are no easy answers to this question.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment