Thursday, October 05, 2006

School Shootings, A Different Perspective

The 06-07 school year is hardly begun, and already the news is full of school shootings around the country. There are also numerous more reports of lesser, though none-the-less frightening, incidents of non-lethal violence. As always, people are asking what can be done. Is the answer more police on campus, more metal detectors, more conflict resolution training? And Why, oh why, are our kids so violent? Is it too many violent video games, songs, movies, television shows? These are questions and cries being heard around the nation.

Here is one possible answer:


On April 20, 1999, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, two students in Columbine High School in Greater Denver, shot and killed 12 other students and one faculty member. The two boys then committed suicide. Two years later, similiar crimes had occurred in a number of other public high schools. The nation and its media keep asking, "How can this happen?"

The real question is, "Why is this a surprise?" Two years after the Planned Parenthood v Casey rationale for killing unborn babies, Mother Teresa of Calcutta addressed the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C. She asked, "If we accept that the mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

This is a very real question. If the highest court in the wealthiest nation on the planet tells mothers they can kill their own babies based on a radical subjectivism of freedom from any external restraints, how does that nation - with any authority - tell its teenagers that it is morally wrong for them to kill one another?

The answer is clear. The nation cannot and it does not teach young people that it is morally wrong to kill unborn babies or each other. It does not teach that it is morally wrong to kill oneself. The Supreme Court has forbidden the teaching of religion-based morality. Public school teachers can only appeal to a secular sense of decency that has not yet been totally erased, but such efforts are relatively fruitless in the face of severe temptation. We all need moral absolutes both for our own good and for the good of society, but the philosophy of total subjectivism grips America and its public education system.

The various connections between contraception and abortion have contributed to a radical subjectivism that was enshrined in the Supreme Court's "mystery clause" defense of abortion. The fruit of such wanton abandonment of respect for God's order of creation is clearly demonstrated in Columbine and its subsequent copycat killings.


Excerpted from From Contraception to Abortion...to Columbine by John Kippley, (if you would like a copy of this pamphlet mailed to you, free of charge, send an email to: objectivemama@yahoo.com be sure to include the address to which you would like it mailed)

John Kippley says it nicely. I'll say it plainly. If we as a society continue to ignore the slaughter of a generation of children, then DON'T BE SURPRISED that they are turning on us and on each other.

We have ignored the 48,000,000 killed since 1973. We are ignoring the 4000 that were murdered TODAY. And we will ignore the 4000 that will be slaughtered TOMORROW AND EVERYDAY, until we end it.

Why shouldn't they be violent and angry?

We are merely reaping what we have sown.

3 Comments:

Blogger caterina maria said...

I see the shootings, usually by young angry males, as an awful but natural outgrowth of the denigration of masculinity by our feminized culture. These boys see women advanced, girls praised for their good behavior, and manly behavior insulted. Then when they get bullied, the humiliation overwhelms them, and inarticulate as men can be, they lash out. This of course doesn't make it less a crime. But I think women need to back off, quit trying to usurp roles that men have been given by God, and start to look at some of the negative consequences of an overly feminine society. The flight of fathers from families, the readiness of women to throw Dad away when he interferes with their "growth" only leaves boys without a health male example to learn from. I see the gun-crazy boys as a product of absent men and domineering women.

11:46 AM  
Blogger Aurora Dies Incommodum said...

I think that there is probably something to what you are saying, as well. In many ways, I think that it's all related in what might be broadly classified as "the bizarre modern tendancy for modern man to hate him/herself".

Men are emasculated by a culture that says they are stupid and useless, except when they are acting like dogs in heat.

Women are being defeminized (note how few wear skirts or dresses anymore) and attempting to act "independant" and "self sufficient", except when they are trouncing around like street walkers in tops that show cleavage which shouldn't have seen the light of day since the Nixon administration.

And children are seen as little more than very expensive pets, to be gotten when they will add the right touch to the decor of your life. Of course, like all good pet owners these days, we have to hire someone else to do all the actual care for the pet-child.

Naturally, however, if we wind up with an accidental litter, we can have it "taken care of" and get ourselves "fixed" to see that it doesn't happen again.

What am I saying? It's a bad analogy. It would only work if we treated people as well as we treat our pets.

3:08 PM  
Blogger caterina maria said...

I started wearing only dresses and skirts a year and a half ago. Now it's not a big deal, though after years in britches it felt at first as if I needed some reason to "dress up". I discovered skirts are more comfortable than pants, that you can do anything in a skirt that you can in pants, and sometimes more, and it made me aware of the monotony of women's clothing these days. I mean, there are million kinds of skirt, but how many kind of jean?
I used to think clothing were a trivial affair but having made the change back to more feminine dress has made me realize how much male territory my pants had encouraged me to arrogate to myself. Not to knock women who wear pants, I don't want to do that, but if they tried skirts they would be pleasantly surprised how much better they'd feel. You don't have to spend a fortune either. Jeans can be more expensive than the skirts now out there.
Just a thought.

3:22 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home