Hi Cosmos,
You asked why religion and guns are of interest to FSP members. Both are important to liberty. The opposite of liberty is coercion. The two groups who act coercively are criminals and government. Of the two, government is the most pervasive; it takes 50% of our stuff, while crime's take is much smaller. On the other hand crime is much harsher, sometimes violating our persons and our lives.
Both religion and gun ownership can play a role in reducing criminal and government activity and thus increasing liberty. Clearly our founders understood this since they made these issues #1 and #2 in the bill of rights. Let's start with philosophy and religion.
It's easy to see how religion can reduce crime by teaching morality. Religion also tells us that our human rights, i.e. restrictions on government, are not granted to us by government, but by God (or nature if you prefer). That is why there are certain liberties the majority cannot properly revoke. Unfortunately as a pratical matter, when government does trample on our rights God does not take action to prevent it. Only enough people with enough understanding of the issue can make a difference.
You say that you "don't like religious zealots becoming involved in personal affairs of the individual". Is this really a significant problem? Are Muslims preventing your butcher from selling pork chops? Do Jews keep you from driving on Saturday? Exactly how do religious people exercise control over your life? The only way would be by getting government to do the dirty work for them. I submit that a much more serious problem is the non-religious zealots who get government to control what kind of house you can live in, who is allowed to cut your hair, how many taxis are available to pick you up at the airport, who can help deliver your child, what medicines you are allowed to use, how much food is grown, etc, etc, etc.
Regarding the specific issue of abortion, the entire argument is over whether it is murder or simply a surgical procedure like removing a tumor. No matter how you stand on the issue, it clearly is a matter for each individual state to decide; murder is not a federal crime. I personally do think that abortion should be illegal because I can't see how an act that would be murder on Wednesday is only surgery on Tuesday. I doubt if the majority of FSP members would agree.
On to guns. You seem to take it as a given that private ownership of guns causes violent crime. Both facts and logic are against you. Places that have the most restrictive gun control laws, such as Washington DC, also have the highest murder rate. In places without gun restrictions violent crime is less as criminals turn more to property crime. Even a small number of armed citizens can go a long way. How long is someone going to last in the robbery business if he is going to get shot by one out of ten or even one out of twenty of his victims? If you are squeamish, it is enough for you to oppose gun control laws and to encourage your neighbors to arm themselves.
Can gun ownership restrict government? The examples that come to mind are not promising. Guns didn’t prevent the Japanese from being sent to internment camps, they didn’t help the Branch Davidians, they didn’t keep Elian in the US, etc. Only if we could somehow disarm the BATF, the T-men, the G-men, the X-men, ... and require the government to rely on local police for law enforcement would there be some possibility that armed resistance would be effective. It seems a better bet that armed citizens will get a psychological boost; feeling more self-reliant they would be more likely to oppose government in the ballot box and the jury box.
I must also comment on your statement that “survival is in cooperation not individualism and bigotryâ€. This seems confused to me. Liberty is cooperation and individualism as opposed to coercion and collectivism. Also bigotry is primarily a problem when practiced by government as with affirmative action. Social pressure can deal with individual bigots. For example, if my bus company wants to exclude filthy Vermonters, that is only a problem if the government has granted me the exclusive right to provide bus service in Nashua. Otherwise, the way to deal with me is to ride with the competition and put me out of business.
Take care,
Dan
