March 4th, 2013 by Editor

March 10, 2013 update: In response to a torrent of responses to Mr. Stein’s ridiculous opinion piece last week (and of course the publicity he and the Sun-Sentinel were looking for on the backs of “pit bulls” and their owners whom Stein had maligned, which serves to generate ad revenue), Mr. Stein unapologetically wrote another hit piece noting that the responses to his response used the f-word alot.  Funny, isn’t it, how people don’t like it when you try to push legislation that kills innocent animals?  Not only that, but Mr. Stein actually had the audacity in his latest diatribe to call out some letters to him that were racist when he used the “those people,” “in that neighborhood,” “with those kinds of dogs” language himself.  Yeah, we all know he’s racistly referring to black and Latino neighborhoods, his latest harangue even racistly opining against Cubans apparently, but then he cited Dogsbite.org as a source!  So Forrest Gump truly was right: Stupid is as stupid does.  And Mr. Stein is once again incorrect when he says that “Pit bull lovers don’t like that site, because it makes their dogs look bad.”  No, we don’t like that site because it’s junk science, with skewed and erroneous statistics that no proper media outlet in its right mind would ever cite as a credible source.  But then, the Sun-Sentinel‘s admission that it has used Dogsbite.org as a source calls the Sun-Sentinel itself into question as a credible source, as do Mr. Stein’s ridiculous prejudices about “pit bulls,” Latinos, and gun owners.  That’s also why, of the three reasons that I listed why Mr. Stein might push Hitlerian gun control and breed-specific laws, mentally challenged AND corrupt got my votes.  

***

Today, the utter foolishness of Broward County, Florida, editorialist Gary Stein, who wrote the hit piece, “Getting a bang out of pit bull spiels” for the Sun-Sentinel poking fun at “pit bull” advocates and pro-gun lobbyists, deserves the following well-reasoned and godly response.  Solomon, one of the wisest men who ever lived, wrote:

“Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
Or you will also be like him.
Answer a fool as his folly deserves,
That he not be wise in his own eyes.” (Proverbs 26:5)

So, via the following, I’m going to answer Mr. Stein as his folly deserves. 

Like his wiser forebear Solomon, Mr. Stein ought to know that we, as God’s creation, have a moral obligation to stand up for the weak, the poor, and the helpless.  But so often anti-gun lobbyists have appeared to overlook the glaring first amendment violation (specifically a violation of citizens’ freedom of religion) inherent in gun control/disarmament.  For the Christian and the Jew, Exodus 22:2 (i.e. the Pentateuch) very clearly states: “If the thief is caught while breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there will be no bloodguiltiness on his account.”  In other words, God clearly allows for protection to the death of one’s home, property, and the defenseless.

Similarly, when Cain killed his brother Abel using the jawbone of a donkey, God did not outlaw crude implements that could be used by wicked humans to take a human life; He cursed and banished the murderer (Genesis 4).  So there are very clear scriptural precepts that allow for humans to take another human life or hurt another in protection of one’s person, property, or in defense of another.  In other words, Jews and Christians have a moral obligation to defend themselves and others.  When the anti-gun lobby and the “representatives” they purchase reduce or eliminate citizens’ rights to protect themselves under the Constitution and under scriptural law, they are defying God’s authority and citizens’ moral obligation to defend their lives and the lives of others that are imperiled, which in turn is a 1st amendment freedom of religion violation.  If elected officials, and editorialists apparently, would read the scriptures more, they might not be so cavalier about pushing their own laws in clear violation of God’s.

To put the prior paragraph’s argument more succinctly: We have a right and a moral responsibility to defend ourselves, our own, and those who cannot defend themselves.  So when Mr. Stein does the bidding of his godless puppet masters and relates “pit bull” owners to 2nd amendment advocates, calling both “rabid,” his utter foolishness needs to be exposed. Read the rest of this entry »

June 22nd, 2010 by Editor

On June 2, 2010, the Center, Missouri City Council passed a vicious dog law which simultaneously banned “pit bulls” from the city limits.  “Pit bull” owners were given 30 days to remove their dogs with no grandfather clause (or what is often mistakenly called a grandfather clause).  While recognizing in their own ordinance that the slang term “pit bull” comprises many breeds of dog and their mixes, it seemed to escape city officials’ notice that statistics on “pit bulls” are therefore vastly skewed and meaningless.  Indeed, if you define “pit bull” as American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Staffordshire Bull Terriers, their mixes, and any dog resembling those breeds, which could be countless breeds, does it not follow that statistics on this “breed” “pit bull” might be incredibly inaccurate???  Even the article about Center’s breed-specific ordinance in the Quincy Herald Whig acknowledges that “Pit bulls do not constitute a single dog breed in themselves.”  Read the rest of this entry »