The brutal assassination of NYPD officer Randolph Holder by a deranged, but not insane, gunman is a great tragedy and an atrocity against humanity. Many, myself included, are deeply saddened and outraged by his murder. There is absolutely no justification for nor rationale that explains or excuses the cowardly, senseless and heartless taking of Officer Holder’s life.

Randolph Holder’s death is not tragic simply because he was a NYPD officer whose life was snuffed out while he was performing his duty. The circumstances of Officer Holder’s death, at least for me, would be just as grievous if Randolph Holder had been an innocent bystander or a store clerk instead of a first responder.  Officer Holder’s death is tragic because his life was inherently meaningful since he was created by and in the image of God and his life should not have been viciously snatched away.

Unfortunately, some will use the killing of Officer Holder to advance their political agendas. For some, the homicide will fuel cries for stiffer gun laws. Others will highlight Officer Holder’s death as an example of why stop-and-frisk laws need reinstatement. Sadly, the perpetrator of Officer Holder’s death is a vicious killer who was determined to do evil. Neither stiffer gun legislation nor the stop-and-frisk law would have prevented him from doing his dastardly deed.

May God have mercy upon Officer Holder’s family, friends, and co-workers.  May the Spirit of the only true, wise, and living God comfort and console all those genuinely adversely affected by Randolph Holder’s sudden and immeasurable sad death.

(During a recent news conference, a wise police officer said he would not mention the name of the perpetrator of a horrific crime that was committed in the police officer’s jurisdiction. That perpetrator’s actions resulted in death and destruction. I am following that officer’s lead by not naming Officer Holder’s alleged killer.)

Almighty God unto whom all hearts and minds are open and from whom nothing is hidden, we humbly approach your throne of grace. First, we acknowledge you as Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer of all life. We thank and praise you for your grace, mercy and long-suffering toward us- your creation. Thank you for food and shelter and decent clothing. Thank you for waking us up with our minds upon you and for blessing us with the desire to pray and have fellowship with you.

Today we join people of faith throughout the world praying for homeless and hungry people; for those living in war-torn countries, and for all those suffering, directly or indirectly, from the ravaging results of war.  Lord, please help all refugees!

Grant us the privilege of participating in your resurrecting, reconciling, and restorative process. Let the good that we do glorify you and benefit others. In accordance with your Holy Word, let us do nothing out of selfish ambition. Create in each of us a clean heart and a right spirt so that we are able to worship you in spirit and in truth. Remove every trace of vainglory. Help us behave courageously by doing the right things for the right reasons. Remind us that we are stewards over the gifts and talents you have given us. Help us not to misuse, neglect or squander them.

In your mercy hear our prayer, please forgive our sins, deliver us from evil and accept our offering of thanksgiving. In Jesus’ name we pray. Amen!

“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Matthew 22.21b

The county clerk in Kentucky who refuses to issue marriage licenses to gay couples should resign.because the duties and responsibilities of her position conflict with her religious beliefs. It is unfair of her to expect others to accept and live by her religious ideology.

Thank God that America is not a theocracy!  Americans are free to engage in religious activities of their choosing provided those activities do not conflict with the laws of the land. Consequently, the state does not have the right to force religious institutions to incorporate secular laws into religious doctrine and  practices. Likewise neither religious institutions nor individuals have the legal, moral or religious right to impose their religious beliefs upon the larger society.

The Kentucky county clerk is a public employee whose personal views are interfering with her ability to perform her “secular” professional responsibilities. She is absolutely entitled to her beliefs and to practice those beliefs in her private life. However, she does not have the right to refuse to perform any aspect of the job she is paid by taxpayers to perform. .

1. God: adults::Santa: children

2. Faith: success::wealth: privilege

3. Church: family:: affirm: nurture

4. Religion: principle:: philosophy: rational

The recent murder of nine African-American Christians in their Charleston, South Carolina church by a lone gunman has rekindled the public debate about the need for stricter gun control legislation.  Most gun control advocates are earnestly looking for ways to save lives and to prevent or reduce gun related injuries.  They passionately argue that more gun control   laws are the solution to the problem.

Their objectives are laudable but their vision is nearsighted. Unless stricter gun control legislation is part of a larger strategy aimed at reducing all violence, gun control legislation will have limited real-life impact.  It is unrealistic and unreasonable to think laws will keep criminals from getting their hands on guns.  As long as handguns exist criminals will have access to them, even if the average law abiding citizen does not.[1]

Consider the following illegal activities that thrive among criminals. They cash other peoples’ checks. They steal other peoples’ identities and use those stolen identities to rack up debt in the names of innocent people. Criminals obtain illegal drivers’ licenses, fake birth certificates, diplomas, and degrees.  They even have a scam where they steal homes.

In light of the preceding examples of the myriad ways in which criminals skirt the law, what makes those calling for stiffer gun control laws think such laws, if adopted, will keep handguns out of the hands of those bent on using them to cause destruction?  Besides, national efforts should focus on reducing all forms of violence and not just focus on legislating stiffer gun laws.

In conclusion, the effectiveness of gun control legislation is dependent upon its inclusion in a multi-prong national strategy for reducing all violence.[2]

[1] Criminals and others with means (money, power, and positions of privilege) will have access to firearms regardless of legislation.

[2] The views expressed n this post and in other places on my blog and website reflect my personal perspectives. They are not intended to represent the theology, doctrines, or commitment to social justice of any religious or secular institution with which I am now or have ever associated.

As the following abbreviated list indicates, Dylann Roof is not the first hateful person to murder or attempt to murder innocent people in a house of worship.

• Sunday, September 15, 1963/ Birmingham, Alabama/ Four children were killed in the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church.
• Wednesday, June 17, 2015/Charleston, South Carolina/ Nine people were murdered, and one person was wounded, inside the Emmanuel African Methodist episcopal (AME) Church.
• Wednesday, January 11, 2012/Rutherford, New Jersey/ A Rabbi sustained serious burns as the result of the firebombing of a Jewish synagogue.
• Tuesday, December 9, 2014/Brooklyn, New York/A Jewish student died as the result of fatal stab wounds he received to the head while in a Brooklyn synagogue.
• August 5, 2012/ Oak Creek, Wisconsin / Six people were murdered inside a Sikh temple. [i]

Against the background of the preceding information, why is the nation so unnerved by the nine murders that took place in Emmanuel AME Church?  Perhaps it is the age of the shooter and the cold and calculated way he carried out his dastardly deed.   Dylann Roof entered the church for the sole purpose of committing murder. Our sensibilities are disturbed because we know that before carrying out his wicked plan, Roof pretended to engage in worship with the welcoming people he subsequently murdered.  Roofs actions are almost unfathomable.

Some are unnerved because there is no way for them to deny the fact that Roof murdered the churchgoers simply because of their race/ethnicity. He confessed that he wanted to kill black people. That confession takes away the opportunity to blame the victims for their own deaths. It also makes it difficult not to hold Roof responsible for his actions (although Rick Perry seems to have tried by describing the massacre as an accident).

Dylann Roof’s actions and motives speak to the larger issues of racism and the wide-spread use of violence that permeates every strata of society.  Therefore, efforts should focus on developing and implementing strategies that systematically address the major problems that lead to violent behavior.

Parents and religious leaders must do their part to curb violence by emphasizing the brotherhood of all humankind and the value of tolerance. Likewise, politicians should try inspiring unity instead of sowing seeds that grow hatred and distrust. Also, there needs to be a national movement that seeks to revive a sense of shared goals and a commitment to building a unified United States.

The Charleston, South Carolina mass killing of nine innocent people in a church prompts us to look for meaningful ways to reduce physical violence.

[i]

The preceding list does not include the documented lengthy attacks against African American Churches.   Fortunately, in most of those incidents lives were not taken, but the loss of property, the subject many contemporary cable news anchors seem to relish discussing rather than the tragic and violent loss of life that precipitated the destruction of property, was substantial.

After nearly every highly publicized mass shooting a national debate has ensued about whether there is need for stiffer gun legislation.  The discussion is needed; but, gun control should be thought of as only one aspect of a national campaign focused on promoting  peace and reducing all violence.

Neither gun control legislation nor arming more citizens will curb the violence that permeates society.  People who have the means and opportunity to acquire weapons will continue to possess, sell, and use them, even if they have to do so illegally.  Additionally, if every gun manufacturer in the United States was shut down and stiffer gun laws were adopted making it difficult for average Americans to get guns, criminals and mentally ill people could still have access to firearms and other weapons that they would us against others. [i]   A cursory study of the number of senseless deaths that occurred during the settling of the American West, where nearly every male owned a gun, proves that arming more citizens is not the answer to reducing violence.

Guns do not cause violence, people do. It is the lack of respect for life, objectification of others, glorified violence, divisive and hateful political rhetoric, absolution from personal accountability, and absence of a sense of community that contribute to the thinking that intentional  acts of violence are acceptable.   Moreover, if guns are not available those bent on hurting others will use  weapons such as knives and bombs to perpetrate their crimes.

For example, on April 19, 1995, disgruntled Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols reportedly killed 168 people by bombing the Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City. Similarly, on April 15, 2013, Dzhokhar  Tsarnaev and Tamerlane Tsarnaev killed three people and injured more than 260 by setting off two bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

The actions of McVeigh and Nichols and the Tsarnaev brothers, coupled with the recent highly publicized mass shootings, illustrate the fact that the nation needs to find ways to rekindle shared personal and cultural values that emphasize: the value of all people, the importance of unity, and that make it socially unacceptable to unjustly cause harm to others.

[i] I am not opposed to gun control, I just think it must be part of a comprehensive strategy for reducing violence. I do not support the National Rifle Association’s  (NRA) interpretation of the Second Amendment.

.