Rev. Creech to the NRA: Uphold NC Sunday Hunting Ban

Reverend Mark Creech (courtesy truthwinsout.org)

Dear National Rifle Association,

I want to begin this correspondence by saying that I believe very much in what you’ve stood for over the years. Your organization has worked tirelessly to defend our nation’s Second Amendment. Although I never took the time to join the NRA, I am a fan and believe the nation is indebted to your great work. As you know, there is currently legislation under consideration in the North Carolina General Assembly that would repeal North Carolina’s 145 year-old Sunday hunting ban . . .


The NRA supports this legislation and is actively lobbying the state’s lawmakers for its passage. Although the Christian Action League is opposed to lifting the ban and has fended off assaults for several years, we respect your right to push for its abolishment.

What concerns me, however, is a recent NRA-ILA alert that was sent to your members in North Carolina that I believe smears people of faith, like me, who oppose Sunday hunting.

Your alert encourages members to take action, saying their voices need to be heard. “House Bill 640, an NRA-backed bill that seeks to expand Sunday hunting opportunities and protect our hunting heritage for future generations, is facing strong opposition from a small, yet vocal group,” the alert reads. But a line that follows is disconcerting and asserts, “In essence, restrictions on Sunday hunting tacitly endorse the view of animal ‘rights’ extremists that there is something wrong with hunting.”

Excuse me? You’ll forgive the pun, but what an incredibly cheap shot. My position on Sunday hunting and the stand of the Christian Action League through the years, has absolutely nothing to do with the endorsement of the view of “animal ‘rights’ extremists,” nor does it assert there is something “wrong with hunting.”

There is simply no evidence to convict of such an alleged association. In fact, there is plenty of proof to the contrary.

About a year ago, the Raleigh News and Observer, in “Morning Memo: What Would Jesus Do with the Bonner Bridge?”, sited my objections to the views of extreme environmentalists and animal rights groups in an article I wrote, titled, “Environmentalists, a NC Bridge, and What the Bible Says About Managing the Earth”.

At the time, the Bonner Bridge was being shut down at great costs to residents of the Outer Banks. Building a new bridge had been held up for years because of legal wrangling with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC). They were contending the new bridge proposal would threaten coastal wildlife.

In my article I stated:
    “The Book of Genesis teaches that mankind is to “[b]e fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion…over every living thing that moves on the earth. Jesus taught that human beings, made in the image of God, are of much more value than animals. On one occasion the Savior said, ‘Look at the birds of the air…Are you not of more value than they?'”

In the same piece, I concluded:

    “Contrast the Christian worldview with the viewpoint of militant environmentalists and you’ll see there is a divide wider than the Bonner Bridge. Many believe in ‘untouched nature’ as their ideal. Thus they subvert building projects via lawsuits to protect some species of animal, bird, and even insect life. Some go so far as to argue the human population should be drastically scaled back to save the earth.”

Do these words sound like someone who is giving a “tacit endorsement of the view of ‘animal rights’ extremists”? If there should be any question, you should read what leftists nature fanatics said about my remarks. They considered them an attack.

Let me also say without equivocation, I strongly support hunting. I started hunting when my Dad gave me a single shot 410 gauge shotgun at the tender age of nine. Since then I’ve owned and used guns my whole life – shotguns, rifles, and pistols. When I was younger and had a keener eye and a steadier hand, I could outshoot most of my peers. Moreover, not long ago I passed a “concealed carry” class and currently await the arrival of my permit.

Does this sound like a man who believes there is something bad about guns or “wrong with hunting”? No, of course not! And there are tens of thousands of people in the Tar Heel state who live and believe as I do who still don’t want to see Sunday hunting with firearms made legal.

I’ve been in politics long enough to know that sometimes in order to win a political debate or a legislative objective, one strategy is to make your opponent into a villain. This way you rouse your constituents and move them to action. It’s quiet obvious that was the purpose of your alert. Still, some of the people you presumably seek to vilify with one broad sweeping statement of erroneous association are actually, very much like me, friends of most your other causes.

The Christian Action League opposes HB 640 because (1) the legislation as currently written pits rural North Carolina against urban North Carolina, (2) it forces Sunday hunting on many counties across the state that don’t want it, (3) it will likely strain existing state resources to enforce the new regulations, and, (4) it still poses a threat to the safety that rural churches in the state have enjoyed for decades.

But the primary point of resistance to the appeal is admittedly and unashamedly religious.

I wrote about the religious aspect in a recent editorial in the Raleigh News and Observer, titled, “How Sunday Hunting Would Weaken Value of ‘Lord’s Day.

A few days ago, a North Carolina state Senator, who is a strong proponent of legalized Sunday hunting, graciously urged me to abandon the fight. He argued that with so many other activities already allowed on the day, it was senseless to refuse to give in.

I shared an analogy with him that I now share with you, as well as anyone else interested. I think the “Lord’s Day” is a like a big conference room meant for holding meetings, but the room is full of all sorts of stuff – old tables – furniture – filing cabinets – boxes – old magazines – second hand clothing, and other clutter unrelated to the room’s actual purpose. Now, unfortunately, there is little space left to get the real benefit of the room. I suggest that through the years we’ve treated the “Lord’s Day” in similar fashion, filling it with so many distractions that take away from what the day is supposed to be, at this point, we’ve almost completely diminished the sacred institution’s value to the culture.

Some lawmakers, the NRA, as well as other groups may argue its time to make Sunday hunting a reality in North Carolina. But as for me, and the supporters of the Christian Action League, we don’t believe even one more thing ought to go in that room.

We are your brothers and sisters. We believe in the right to bear arms. We believe in hunting. We believe animals are a part of God’s creation, but not equal to man with similar rights.

Yet we differ from you on Sunday hunting.

We don’t believe supporters of the legalization of Sunday hunting “tacitly endorse the view of godless extremists that there is something wrong with going to church.” Neither should you say that those who oppose Sunday hunting somehow “tacitly endorse the view of animal ‘rights’ extremists that there is something wrong with hunting.”

Allow me to suggest that while you aim at your political objective, you don’t carelessly fire in a wide and general direction as you did in your last alert. You might just end up hitting a friend.

Besides, Moses, who handed down the 4th Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy,” was once the president of your fine organization. Right? Just kidding.

God Bless,

Dr. Mark Creech
Executive Director
Christian Action League of North Carolina, Inc.

comments

  1. avatar SteveInCO says:

    And next up, refusing to so much as press an elevator button because it’s the wrong day of the week.

    His Moses example was incorrect, incidentally, as the date he referenced was Saturday. Yes, Christians have dropped keeping the original Sabbath in favor of commemorating the Resurrection.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Too late to edit, but my second paragraph would be better had I written it thus:

      His Moses example was incorrect, incidentally, as the date Moses referenced was Saturday. Yes, (most) Christians do not follow or even give a verbal nod to the fourth commandment (Seventh Day Adventists being one exception to this), rather, they choose to use as their holy day the Resurrection.

    2. avatar Hank says:

      Yep. And Sunday, referred to in the New Testament as “the Lord’s Day” was, ironically enough, a working day in 1st century Palestine/Israel/the Roman Empire. Nothing in scripture condemns hunting on Sunday.

      (I’m a Christian minister myself, and have enjoyed hunting with my family Sunday afternoons/evenings, which is a blessing, not a wrong. It’s part of how God has provided for our dinner table.)

    3. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

      I’m a believer. I love God and try to be a decent person. And I respect others faith. That said I am 100% against laws that enforce religious norms. I keep Shabbat on Friday night and Saturday norning. I know others do. Are we not supposed to hunt at all on weekends? I know some others who keep Shabbat on varying days according g to the lunar calendar. I do not agree this is proper Shabbat BUT that is between them and God. Judging it is above my pay grade.
      If somebody has a rigid value that does not allow hunting on Sunday, or Saturday. Or at all, they will keep it. If they do t they are accountable to their God and the leaders of their religion will help them and guide them as best they can. It is the highest degree of statism to have te state intervene in religion

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Contrary to the assertions of those who think atheists are totally intolerant of the religious (boy I love being told just what it is I think), I suspect I’d find you to be a decent neighbor.

      2. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

        Indeed the trouble with government rules/laws enforcing religious edicts is that you’re never sure when the edict will be from someone else’s religion with which you disagree.
        If a landowner wants to prohibit hunting on his land on Sunday (or Saturday, or any day) that’s ok by me. But the state mandating that restriction based solely on a religious tradition, that’s problematic.

        1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

          Coincidentally (and I may be wrong here,) the current law in NC only prohibits Sunday hunting on public lands. If I choose to rid my property of cloven-footed rats (see also; deer) on a Sunday I am legally permitted to do so provided I have paid the king’s ransom and purchased the proper tags.

    4. avatar Joe says:

      “And next up, refusing to so much as press an elevator button because it’s the wrong day of the week.”

      Kiss my @ss, you Jew-hating b@stard.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Say whatever you want – just don’t try and make it law please.

  2. avatar brentondadams says:

    He make a sincere point anyway. That is, I take him at his word.

    I respect his position, but the state should not be deciding this matter.

    I also respect his right to absolutely not hunt on a Sunday. I’d take my chances and repeal bad law.

    1. avatar B says:

      I’m vehemently against legislating morality. Its not the state’s place to put laws like this in place. People can just choose not to hunt on Sunday if its against their beliefs, not force everyone else to comply with it.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      This is not even about morality, legislative or otherwise, it is plain and simple a “…make no law regarding the establishment of religion…”

      If this gentleman does not feel it is proper to hunt on Sunday then he is within his rights to not hunt on Sunday and to make every effort to convince his parishioners and anybody else willing to listen that they should not hunt on Sunday. He has NO RIGHT to pass legislation preventing every citizen, especially those who do not share his religious convictions that they may not hunt on any day of the week they so choose.

      You cannot force Sharia law on the people, why should he be able to force his version of Christianity on anyone?

    3. I allowed the unthinkable to happen. I ran out of beer before Memorial Day weekend was even half way through. No problem. GA repealed the no alcohol on Sunday law so I asked my wife to pick up a case while she was at the grocery store. One problem. The store said that they couldn’t sell it until 12:30. What kind of shit is that? Makes you wonder if there is a difference between a Christian and a Statist.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “I allowed the unthinkable to happen. I ran out of beer before Memorial Day weekend was even half way through.”

        Poor drunken planning bit you in the ass…

        “No problem. GA repealed the no alcohol on Sunday law so I asked my wife to pick up a case while she was at the grocery store. One problem. The store said that they couldn’t sell it until 12:30. What kind of shit is that?”

        The moronic point of that law is to ‘keep the flock’ in church.

        “Makes you wonder if there is a difference between a Christian and a Statist.”

        Different flavors of the same Kool-Aid…

  3. OK, I admit right off the bat I’m a Catholic, but I really did enjoy the
    whole article, especially the conclusion:

    >> Allow me to suggest that while you aim at your political objective,
    >> you don’t carelessly fire in a wide and general direction as you
    >> did in your last alert. You might just end up hitting a friend.

    AMEN!

    >> Moses, who handed down the 3th Commandment, “Remember the
    >> Sabbath Day, to keep it holy,” was once the president of your fine
    >> organization. Right? Just kidding.

    AMEN! (and funny!)

    Go Dr. Mark Creech!

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      The only problem is the fourth (not third, leastwise not in my NRSV, Exodus 20–and the Reverend did say fourth) commandment is about the Sabbath (Saturday) rather than Sunday. So it was a good natured poke at Mr. Heston, but a logic fail.

    2. avatar Steve says:

      If I needed the opinion of a Catholic, I’d call the Pope.

      You know what the difference between a muslim and a catholic is?

      Muslims rape little GIRLS.

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        What are you, 12 years old?

        1. avatar jonwaynetaylor says:

          And as a point all of the pedophilia I knew of living with a primarily Muslim population was man on boy. Never saw them touch a girl like that, just boys.

        2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          Yep, look up bacha bazi (dancing boys).

      2. avatar Joe says:

        You know what the difference between you and an anus is?

        NOTHING.

        1. You can clean your anus.

    3. avatar JohnF says:

      I’m a practicing Catholic also, but I disagree. We have separation of church and state in this country. That has some unfortunate consequences, but seeing all the evils that theocracy can bring, overall it’s a good thing. Hunting policy should have nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Would we want faiths that honor Saturday as the Sabbath to ban hunting on Saturday? Would we want hunting banned during every religion’s religious holidays? If Christian churches don’t want their flocks hunting on Sunday, they should make that rule for their churches. But it should not be public policy.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        We have separation of church and state in this country.

        We absolutely do not. The .gov cannot mandate a state religion, but religious people can guide state policy at will. Did you even go to school?

  4. avatar Shwiggie says:

    Sunday != Sabbath. Bad doctrine, bad law.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      He was making a joke. Grow up. The point of the article is to call out the NRA for putting their foot in their mouth and making a false claim about them, that “a small, yet vocal group’s” position on “restrictions on Sunday hunting tacitly endorse the view of animal ‘rights’ extremists that there is something wrong with hunting.” That is clearly not the case at all.

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        If the NRA had said “inadvertently” instead of “tacitly”, however, they’d be right on the mark.

        And in any case does it make sense for a pastor to mangle his theology for the sake of a joke?

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          No, and as a Christian I don’t agree with the pastor’s position, either.

      2. avatar Steve says:

        The NRA wasn’t even talking about this douchebag. I’m guessing they were ignoring him altogether. Maybe if he were a member they’d bother listening.
        But because the NRA points out that a bunch of “animal-rights extremists” are against the bill, this thundercunt suddenly thinks that they MUST be talking about him, because, of course, when God made the Earth and the Heavens, He placed this assclown smack dab in the middle of them all.
        Fuck him.

      3. avatar Shwiggie says:

        It has nothing to do with the joke. Blue laws are based on the conflation of Sabbath and Sunday. If this pastor is actually for for continuing this regulation, not only is he pushing his religion view onto people who don’t share it…it’s a nonbiblical view, to boot. I realize the reverend is addressing a perceived slight, but in doing so he defends the regulation based on a doctrinal error.

        So why be snarky towards me? Are you not my brother in Christ?

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          in doing so he defends the regulation based on a doctrinal error.

          I don’t disagree.

          So why be snarky towards me? Are you not my brother in Christ?

          If you are a Christian, then yes, I am. My reply to you was one of the first that I posted as you were an early responder. Had you replied later I probably wouldn’t have as I eventually became worn down by all the strawman arguments many here made, which were silly because I believe his position could be argued against on the merits (God’s law, America’s law) instead of making stuff up about his statements and motives that weren’t accurate. But sometimes people on the right aren’t critical thinkers, too.

          Nevertheless, he was making a joke about Moses / Charleton Heston. If you want to get into the Saturday vs. Sunday argument, he discusses that in his editorial as well as his reasoning for disallowing hunting on Sunday. And as I’ve said, I think his position is wrong, although as an American he’s free to lobby our congresscritters just like we are.

  5. avatar Mk10108 says:

    If one wants to hunt on Sunday…so shall it be, so shall it be done. Another group infringing on personal liberty in the quest of backstrap.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      I tip my hat to your Ten Commandments reference!

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      He said he supports the second amendment and the right to own firearms, not the first amendment and the right to choose one’s religious associations, or lack thereof. So everybody must comply with the limits of his religious beliefs.

  6. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Change the lord’s day to Wednesday. There are only 2 days a week for a lot of people to be able to hunt, and for a lot of people, hunting is far more important than listening to you read from a 4000 year old work of fiction.

    1. avatar Red In Texas says:

      ^^THIS^^

  7. avatar Shire-man says:

    Sometimes I forget churchy people exist. Thanks for reminding me what annoying self-righteous yet hypocritical busybodies they are.
    If churchy wants to keep sunday “holy” (whatever that means at any given moment) then let him. If churchy wants to force everybody else to keep it “holy” then damn his tyrant ass to hades.

    You’d think these people would want the state out of holy laws. That way they can bolster their churchy sheep by preaching the damnation of all us Soddomites for not keeping it holy.

    1. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

      Religion: silly people believing in silly things. I honestly don’t mind, unless they start to impose their beliefs on other people. If you don’t want to / can’t hunt on Saturday or Sunday because of your faith, then don’t. Don’t make it illegal for others.

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        And I agree with your final point. It is a shame that you were unable to make it without the ad hominem premise. I honestly don’t mind, except that logical fallacy is divisive, and therefore self-defeating.

        1. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

          Right, of course. I ask for (empirical) proof (of an extraordinary claim) and I’m the a$$hole. Typical response.

        2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          I’m not hear to entreat you regarding religious beliefs. You’re the one injecting that non sequitur into this discussion. Again: logical fallacy does not help your position.

        3. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

          Chip, please, go pester somebody else. I’m sure your arguments regarding superstitions about imaginary friends for adults are very logical.

        4. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          And, back to ad hominem.

          Logical? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      2. avatar Joe says:

        Believe in nothing, FALL FOR ANYTHING.

        Bet you voted for Obama (or Paul, which was as good as for Obama).

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      “One man’s religion is another man’s belly laugh.” – Robert A. Heinlein

    3. avatar int19h says:

      This isn’t “churchy”. Guys who meticulously attend their church and conform to their religious laws don’t bother me, so long as they don’t try to force me to conform as well. The guys who are trying to do the latter are called Dominionists, and their ultimate goal is an Iran-style democratic theocracy (i.e. a democracy where all matters of faith, and everything stemming from them, are the supreme law of the land, not subject to the democratic process).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology

  8. avatar Nick says:

    As an atheist, I don’t want the recreational activities of my day off to be tainted by your superstitious nonsense.

    1. avatar Averhoeven says:

      Agreed. While his point about the NRA-ILA brief painting a picture may or may not be misrepresentative (I have not seen the brief nor have I seen the positions of groups opposing abandonment of the ban), the point here is that he is trying to shove the beliefs of one special interest group down the throats of all others. I am an atheist (I prefer the term humanist because of all the ridiculous and inaccurate connotation and baggage that has been lumped on the term atheist over the years), my activities during my weekends should not be restricted solely because some other group of people believe that day means something totally different.
      If you’re worried that making hunting legal on that day would somehow prevent people from participating in the activities you deem worthy of the day, perhaps your activities don’t hold the value and worth with others that you think they do since they flee at the first opportunity.
      Separation of church and state please. Let his people believe what they want and show up to church when they want. Don’t tell me I can’t do something because I don’t hold your beliefs…

  9. avatar pwrserge says:

    Let’s keep it simple. If a Christian want’s to go to church on Sunday that’s his right. He has no right to prevent others from doing something else.

    1. avatar John L. says:

      Well put, and that is the crux of the matter.

      To go back to the original complaint, the NRA as described probably painted with too broad a brush when they described the bill’s opponents. That said, I think the NRA would rather have done that than directly called out a Christian organization for repressively supporting blue laws. Eco-freaks are safer targets for them.

      1. avatar Stinkeye says:

        I think you hit the nail on the head with your last two lines. The NRA knows full well who wants to keep the ban in place. They also know that they can’t call out a Christian organization directly without pissing off a bunch of the NRA’s own supporters. So they take a swipe at the animal rights people, but use careless wording and cause some collateral damage with the religious folks anyway.

    2. avatar Ross says:

      This Christian will go to church Sunday and go hunting after should he choose to do so.

  10. avatar Bill Kohnke says:

    NRA-ILA should apologize for its original statement and issue a clarification.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Why? Regardless of why a person would oppose this bill, they are WRONG.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        Why? If you happened to be against greed, corruption, and the undue influence on government from the financial services sector, would you like to be associated with Occupy Wallstreet if you weren’t? If I searched your posts and found any against open carry, would you like to be associated with Moms Demand Action? It’s just disingenuous to mischaracterize someone else. Argue your position on its own merits. Don’t lie about your opponent.

  11. avatar Jon says:

    How hard is it to understand a very simple concept like, “If you don’t want to hunt on Sunday, fine – don’t hunt on Sunday. But you don’t get to dictate to other people if they do or don’t.”

    1. avatar Ross says:

      Sadly some followers of Christ forget the great commission “Go into all the world and proclaim the good news” and spend their lives trying to live others lives for them.

  12. avatar Wiregrass says:

    You don’t want to hunt on Sunday, then don’t. That should solve your moral problems, I’ll worry about mine.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      If a busybody can’t busy, how will he stay busy? Or employed?

  13. avatar Ken says:

    Isn’t his argument similar to the arguments used when they were striking down blue laws that forbid the selling of certain items on Sunday?

  14. avatar Sheepdog6 says:

    I remember someone making this argument before…let me find it…

    Oh yeah, it was the Pharisees when Jesus was healing people on the Sabbath.

    Methinks the good Pastor needs to take an afternoon siesta and read the Gospels one more time.

    Shire-Boy, your intolerance for people who are different than you is showing again. Refreshing to see the language you use to describe people who vastly out spend every other group of people on the face of the earth when it comes to giving to charities hasn’t changed at all since the death of Jesus. Not original, but still desperately hateful.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Nonetheless his point stands. What business of this man is it, whether one chooses to hunt on Sunday or not?

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Just like it isn’t the business of posters to a gun blog to demean, ridicule, broad-brush, and debase those who hold religious beliefs (or those who don’t). Right?

        1. avatar Kevin C says:

          Good comment, Hank! I’m rather disappointed in the immaturity of many of the commenters on this thread.

  15. avatar Stinkeye says:

    I respect his choice to not go hunting on his religion’s day of observance, but how is someone else (who doesn’t subscribe to the same doctrines) doing so any of his concern? More importantly, how is it the state’s job to enforce his religion’s rules?

    “it forces Sunday hunting on many counties across the state that don’t want it”

    If everybody in the county really doesn’t want it, won’t they just not go hunting on Sunday?

    Sunday hunting bans are dumb. Just more arbitrary and unnecessary rules to follow.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      That’s no different than dry counties, or laws which prohibit alcohol sales before noon on Sunday, or any other number of prohibitions that the public wants. If the public doesn’t want them, the laws will go away. If they do want them, the laws will be enacted. He’s stating his opinion. Others state theirs, and that’s okay. The reverend even states that he supports the NRA’s right to lobby for the opposite position.

      The problem is the NRA equating the Christian Action League with animal rights extremists.

      1. avatar Jim March says:

        What the “Christian Action League” is doing is pushing their religion at gunpoint. That is far, FAR worse than anything the “Earth First” types have ever done.

      2. avatar Stinkeye says:

        If “the public” truly wants a prohibition, wouldn’t it be unnecessary? If nobody wanted to smoke pot or drink booze or hunt on Sunday or own an “assault weapon”, then why would the government need to outlaw it?

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          We’re not talking about ANYBODY, we’re talking about a MAJORITY. I bet you knew that.

        2. avatar Stinkeye says:

          I did know that. And “majority rules” isn’t a good enough reason to restrict the rights of a free people. Unless my activity is directly harming another person, the majority shouldn’t have anything to say about it. If I want to take drugs or be a drunk on Sunday or buy a full-auto Uzi at Wal-Mart, 99.99999% of the country could say that they don’t want me to do that, but unless I’m hurting someone else, they shouldn’t get to dictate what I do.

      3. avatar Roymond says:

        “The problem is the NRA equating the Christian Action League with animal rights extremists.”

        That’s because the NRA is run by the PR firm Wayne LaPierre hauled in. It deliberately chooses inflammatory language to try to get dollars, which are what matter to Wayne and his $million+ compensation.

      4. avatar int19h says:

        >> That’s no different than dry counties, or laws which prohibit alcohol sales before noon on Sunday, or any other number of prohibitions that the public wants.

        Yes, and all of them are equally asinine; and arguably, if their sole motivation is religious, also unconstitutional. This country has been specifically set up to avoid tyranny of the majority.

        >> The problem is the NRA equating the Christian Action League with animal rights extremists.

        Well, both do want to push their morality onto others by force of law…

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          Many of our laws force some type of morality on people. Things that are deemed “bad for society” like drugs, for example, are prohibited. The question is, how do we get people to see that and become more, for lack of a better word, libertarian in their views? Few people oppose seat belt laws or bogus “you were weaving / can I search your car / my dog alerted” stops because it doesn’t affect them (until it does).

          I have (or rather had) an acquaintance who is homosexual and who argued that boys giving men a certain type of sex (I won’t get too graphic here) is normal in some societies, and that Western society prohibiting that is some false social construct that we invented.

          I guess the point is that everyone has their own definition of what is moral and what isn’t.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          >> Many of our laws force some type of morality on people.

          Yes, and they are bad laws.

          >> Things that are deemed “bad for society” like drugs, for example, are prohibited.

          A very good example of a very bad law.

          Unfortunately, Constitution doesn’t prohibit legislation based purely on morality. It does, however, specifically prohibit legislation based purely on religion, which is a subset that is applicable in this particular case. The pastor is actually sinking the legislation by arguing for the religious basis of the law, because now that he has established such a basis, should someone sue against the state on the grounds of 1A violation, the state will have to prove that the law has some rational basis aside from the Bible. Which would be very tricky to do.

          >> I have (or rather had) an acquaintance who is homosexual and who argued that boys giving men a certain type of sex (I won’t get too graphic here) is normal in some societies, and that Western society prohibiting that is some false social construct that we invented.

          Most people do indeed support these laws based on the ick-factor, but if viewed impartially, they can still be legitimate based strictly on the grounds of measurable harm. It’s a very complicated territory because it hinges on the definition of consent, and on who can legitimately give one, but it’s not just a moral issue.

          OTOH, laws prohibiting certain kinds of consensual sex where consent is not in doubt (e.g. most of sodomy laws that existed in US – to remind, they often criminalized not just homosexual acts, but also “unnatural” acts for straight pairs, even married ones – such as anal and oral sex), are clearly based solely on morality.

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          Talking about morality and measurable harm, what about this practice?

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/masturbating-men-will-find-hands-pregnant_n_7442436.html

          By the way, int19h, are you looking forward to the new season of Halt and Catch Fire? Even though it is laughably bad in some respects (if you understand the territory), I find myself compelled to watch it.

        4. avatar int19h says:

          I’m not sure what the question is. Are you asking whether there’s measurable harm in male masturbation, or in silly fatwas?

          (Though my answer would be “no” in either case – seems obvious.)

          I haven’t heard about HCF (the TV show, that is) before.

        5. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          My apologies. With a forum name like int19h I thought you’d be all over it.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Not to be exceptionally facetious on a subject that many take extremely seriously, but if in fact God, who appears to be the aggrieved party in this debate, truly objected to hunting on Sundays (or on the Sabbath), I should think He has the power to stop the activity. Lightning strikes come to mind, among other remedies.

      Furthermore, the good reverend’s efforts should be strictly limited to convincing his parishioners not to hunt on Sundays and to pray with all their might that God will prevent others from doing so. They have no justification under any legal or political concept to force their religious beliefs on any person who is not a member of their church/religion.

      And can we please not get into the “free will” argument that supposedly nullifies God’s ability to affect activities of humans in a universe He created, including the “free will” argument? Does anybody really believe that the Supreme Being capable of creating a universe can/would create a rule in that universe that He cold not change at his own free will?

      1. avatar GreatPlainsSower says:

        Cliffh-“I should think He has the power to stop the activity. Lightning strikes come to mind, among other remedies.” Good Christians have the game shot and hanging in the garage before service even starts.

        Lord, WE will be nice to them but WE are keeping our guns in case they are not nice to us.

        Thank you for the laugh on this thread filled of hatred towards others who maybe different than you, which reinforces freedom of association. Ask yourself who would you rather have around you in a disaster Christian Americans or Blacklivesmatter protestors.

        The separation of church and state has to be taken in historical context and that the Church was like our Federal Government, if it was tyrannical. Laws and Taxes to provide the Church control, which was operated by the elite nobles, and their decrees were enforced by brutal thugs in chainmail uniforms. Hunting on Sundays should not be banned as it is wrong to force our beliefs on none believers, as Christianity is the religion of choice not submission. It is also wrong for others to force their beliefs upon us by using the government. Real Christians are not Hypocrites like this preacher is being, and hopefully he sees his hubris.

        Free will applies to WE humans who were kicked out of Eden for making the wrong choice. Life is about good and evil and it matters which one you feed. God is letting WE humans play chicken with our nature is all.

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          “who would you rather have around you in a disaster Christian Americans or Blacklivesmatter protestors.”

          Is there a third option?

  16. avatar Laughingdog says:

    I am a Christian. I’d never hunt on a Sunday simply because there’s no way I could both make it to church and hunt on a Sunday because I live too far from hunting locations. But there’s no reason my religious priorities should force others to not hunt on Sunday either.

    Why just Sunday. Why doesn’t he restrict Saturday hunting as well to pay respect to synagogues as well….or does he hate Jews?

    1. avatar PeterZ in West Tennessee says:

      And then there is the issue of the observant Jew who chooses not to hunt on Saturday. If hunting on Sunday is against the law, and if (s)he works Monday – Friday, (s)he is just SOL.

    2. avatar Vhyrus says:

      Technically Shabbat starts on Friday night and ends after sunset on Saturday.

    3. avatar Grindstone says:

      Yes, this. Thank you.

  17. avatar Dave says:

    Keep your B.S. Mythological ideals out of politics Mr. Creech. Some people have to work for their money, they don’t have the convenience of being to dip into the collection plate. For those people having only two days per week to hunt is very important to work for their money, they don’t have the convenience of being to dip into the collection plate. For those people, having the possibility of having two days per week to hunt is very important, especially considering they currently only have one . Thankfully I live in a state where no such mythological religious law was ever established in the first place,but I did live in one for a few years and hated sitting Sunday out because someone’s mythological God has followers messing with the law books.
    KEEP THE FICTION OUT OF LEGISLATION!!! Separation of church and state is not for amusement.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      Thankfully I live in a state where no such mythological religious law was ever established in the first place

      You can buy whiskey 24/7/365?

      1. avatar Red In Texas says:

        You can in FL.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          I was asking Dave. He says he lives in a state where there are no religion-influenced laws.

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “You can in FL”

          Wrong, Red.

          Miami-Dade only is 24-7.

          State law prohibits selling of alcohol between 3 a.m. and 7 a.m., unless the county chooses to change the operating hours later; such as for Sunday morning; Ormond Beach stays open until 7pm on Sundays. Miami-Dade County liquor stores may operate 24 hours a day.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_laws_of_the_United_States

        3. avatar Red In Texas says:

          Thanks Geoff, I assumed it was statewide.

          Seems I only got one half of the old saying right. 😀

    2. avatar Grindstone says:

      My state still restricts beer for fvcks sake. At least it gives me an excuse to drink more import beer, anyway.

    3. avatar hking says:

      Hell yeah man! Im am thankful that I am not forced to adhere to someones made up idols imaginary rules. I can hunt on Sunday, I can go buy whatever booze I want anytime of the day/week, I can eat what I want, I can wear what I want.

      Sometimes I think religious politicians like these guys don’t realize they are just trying to push something very close to shaira law. They want to tell you what you can and cant do during the day, what you can and cant eat or drink, what you can and cant wear, who you can and cant talk to or like. Its bogus!!!

  18. avatar Jim March says:

    This guy wants to push his religion at gunpoint – a filthy and unChristian abomination.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      Gunpoint? Really?

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Yep. See what happens if you refuse to not hunt on his favorite day of the week in North Carolina.

        Law is about force. It should only be brought to bear against those who violate the rights of others–by themselves using force or fraud. So blue laws, dry counties and the like, that you cite above, should not exist as those laws do not prevent a rights violation. The “community” doesn’t have the right to decide “you may not buy liquor on a Sunday,” the community has no rights, only individuals have rights.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          SteveInCO, I’m not disagreeing with you. Although if America operated that way, many of our current laws wouldn’t exist. As far as hunting, probably most of the hunting laws would go away as well (seasons, time of day, etc.)

        2. avatar Vhyrus says:

          Hunting seasons exist to prevent depletion of game stock and allow animals to achieve maturity and reproduce. Time of day restrictions are a matter of safety primarily. Neither one is primarily religious.

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          When I brought up game laws I wasn’t referring to religion, but to the point another made about how laws should only be created to stop abuse of another person or fraud.

        4. avatar achmed says:

          to Danny – right, and if many of our current laws didn’t exist, we’d probably be better off.

        5. avatar Grindstone says:

          Although if America operated that way, many of our current laws wouldn’t exist.

          What the problem is?

    2. avatar Jim March says:

      So go hunt on a Sunday there… get arrested, resist, you’d find out real quick “really”.

      Even if it’s just a ticket, if you fail to pay or appear you will eventually learn to your uneducated dismay that all laws are enforced at gunpoint.

      All of them, without exception.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        Ah, I see what you mean. Although maybe if all the hunters civilly disobeyed the law it wouldn’t be enforced, like the prohibition on high-capacity magazines in Colorado. Gun stores are selling them out in the open in violation of the law and no one is arresting them.

    3. avatar John L. says:

      Yep. Historically, Christians have used swords, pikes, and the odd battleaxe.

  19. avatar Averhoeven says:

    While his point about the NRA-ILA brief painting a picture may or may not be misrepresentative (I have not seen the brief nor have I seen the positions of groups opposing abandonment of the ban), the point here is that he is trying to shove the beliefs of one special interest group down the throats of all others. I am an atheist (I prefer the term humanist because of all the ridiculous and inaccurate connotation and baggage that has been lumped on the term atheist over the years), my activities during my weekends should not be restricted solely because some other group of people believe that day means something totally different.
    If you’re worried that making hunting legal on that day would somehow prevent people from participating in the activities you deem worthy of the day, perhaps your activities don’t hold the value and worth with others that you think they do since they flee at the first opportunity.
    Separation of church and state please. Let his people believe what they want and show up to church when they want. Don’t tell me I can’t do something because I don’t hold your beliefs…

  20. avatar KCK says:

    Muslims-no hunting on Friday (unless you are hunting infidels)
    Jews – no hunting on Saturdays
    Christians-no hunting on Sunday’s
    Or an easier rule
    No laws based on religion! I read that somewhere.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      No laws based on religion! I read that somewhere.

      No you didn’t. We’ve got lots of laws based on religion.

      1. avatar Jim March says:

        The existence of one or more other abominations does not justify the creation or maintenance of any abomination.

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, nor preventing the free exercise thereof…”

        Not a “law” per se, but having the effect of law, and can/should trump any state or local legislation on the matter.

      3. avatar Grindstone says:

        We also have lots of laws restricting firearms. Guess anything goes now, right?

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          +1 godzillion.

          Letting a violation of 1A stand because it’s long standing, means the same argument could be used to uphold any gun ban that’s out there.

  21. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    I appreciate his effort to correct a shameful mischaracterization of his position by NRA-ILA. But while I agree with him that NRA was wrong to take such a specious cheap shot at him and his position, I disagree with he position.

    My Bible reads that God made the Sabbath for man, not man for the Sabbath. Some Christians may observe their Sabbath (regular rest from work) on other days, or in other ways. Some Christians may find hunting itself to be a form of Sabbath. Other Christians may forsake the Sabbath altogether, with a clean conscience. And then, of course, there are the many people who do not hold to Judeo-Christian beliefs regarding the Sabbath.

    It is not for the State to decide. A Sunday ban on hunting is a violation of the Establishment clause, in that it forces people to follow a tenet of a particular belief system. (The same is true of Indiana’s ban on Sunday alcohol sales.)

  22. avatar the ruester says:

    The statement really IS a tacit endorsement of EPA lunacy. The hippies just love it when they can point to a church and say “see? If you were really God fearing you would oppose this like they do!” The pastor here even goes even further toward helping them here, by invoking the absurd notion that “rural churches” enjoy this “special protection” from armed (read; dangerous) heathens who I guess would be using the steeple for target practice otherwise.

  23. avatar Some Dude says:

    This is what happens when you believe in magic, jinn’s, zombies, golems and weird interpretations of bronze age superstitions. You start thinking there’s a day that shouldn’t be used for hunting and then build straw-man rationalizations to support your nonsensical assertion so you can inflict it on other people.

  24. avatar Esemwy says:

    When the Pharisees complained about the disciples gathering food on the Sabbath, Jesus’ response was:
    “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” — Matthew 2:27

    We can argue Sabbath vs. Lord’s Day worship, but either way, I think he has it wrong.

  25. avatar Matt says:

    People don’t seem to understand that having a law that allows hunting on Sunday doesn’t force you to hunt on Sunday.

  26. avatar Ralph says:

    If churches really need the force of law behind them to assure an audience, perhaps church leaders should be advised to figure out why, and then to determine what they can do to compete for the available time of the people they wish to attract.

    All Blue Laws must go.

    1. avatar Red In Texas says:

      Hell no!! The owner of the business I work for, would have us open 7 days a week, if that were to happen.

      1. avatar Stinkeye says:

        So find another job that suits your preferred work schedule better.

        1. avatar Red In Texas says:

          Sure, and POTG in CA, NJ, NY, IL, HI, MD, and D.C. should just pack their s**t, and move to free states. Not being able to buy a car on Sunday, isn’t a big deal to most people.

        2. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Not being able to buy a 16 round magazine isn’t a big deal to most people either.

          (Mind you, not to most POTG, just to most people in general).

        3. avatar int19h says:

          >> The problem is the NRA equating the Christian Action League with animal rights extremists.

          Then why would the business owner want to remain open on Sunday?

          The question isn’t what is or is not a “big deal” to other people (and how do you know? perhaps someone does in fact desperately need to buy a car on Sunday?). The question, rather, is whether private businesses should be free to decide their schedule. Your 2A analogy is invalid, because gun control is enacted by the government, not by private entities. An apt comparison is that a private business can ban their employees from carrying firearms, 2A notwithstanding, and if you have a problem with that, you can always go seek a different employer. Which is exactly how it works in practice, even in the most gun-friendly states.

        4. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Red, government infringement on natural rights is a completely different matter than a private business setting its own operating hours. You see the difference, right?

          “Blue” laws are just more arbitrary government rules that extend government influence and power beyond what is necessary. If the government can tell you what hours it’s okay to operate your business, then why not also allow them to tell you what prices you can charge, or what amount of profit is acceptable?

        5. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          They already do, for the most part in some industries (utilities, fuel, probably a few other things. Some state governments regulate the price of alcohol). There are also minimum wage laws and other things of a similar nature.

        6. avatar Stinkeye says:

          I know they do those things. And it’s just as much an abuse of the power we’ve entrusted to the state. That’s why I laugh whenever anyone uses the words “free market” to describe our economy. With all the government subsidies and price controls and other manipulations, our economic system is a hollow shell of what a true free market should be.

      2. avatar Grindstone says:

        If you’re a DOD civilian employee, you get paid more for working on Sundays.

  27. avatar BigBoy says:

    It is free will that makes humans different. Take that away and we are just hairless bipods. But the essence of “free” will is choice — for good or for bad. Take away choice, as the Reverand and every organized religion wants to do, and you eliminate choice. The church member becomes just a bull in a chute. He can’t choose to follow his Creator (however defined), he must obey the Reversnd’s command as enforced by the power of the state. Talk about establishment of religion. When choice is removed from thr equation, the individual CANNOT choose salvation. The Creator doesn’t care what a human is forced to do but looks to what a human CHOOSES to do or not do. Eliminate choice and you eliminate salvation. Salvation comes from choosing the Creator’s path , not from obeying some reversnd’s command. Forced obediance has no salvation value but. It sure does empower the reversnds of this temporary existence.

    A reverand who can’t get his flock to freely choose church over sport, should consider a new career field.

  28. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Government shouldn’t be telling folks when they can hunt. But the NRA-ILA really ought to be more careful in how they characterize their opponents. There are enough Christians among the NRA membership to generate some backlash here.

    1. avatar James St. John says:

      Christians need to learn that they can’t legislate their religious beliefs onto others.

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        They haven’t learned a damn thing since the 1860s and 1960s, it seems.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          If they haven’t learned anything since the 1860’s, saying “and since the 1960’s” is kind of superfluous, isn’t it?

  29. avatar Wiregrass says:

    We have this same law against Sunday hunting in Pennsylvania (for some reason, we also can’t buy automobiles), but the soundest arguments for the ban are based more on public use of lands than on a religious observation, although I am sure that was the original justification and still lingering in the background. Surprisingly, the main body opposing Sunday hunting are the Farm Bureau. Everytime it comes up, some farmers threaten to post their land, which doesn’t make sense because they could do that anyway if they don’t want Sunday hunting on their property. They claim they need a break during the season. This only becomes an issue during the two week rifle season for whitetail in December so what we are really talking about ONE Sunday. I can see arguments for it on state park and state forest land but not on state game lands (reserved specifically for hunting) or on private land except that it is very political.

  30. avatar James St. John says:

    They do so many Christian think they have a right to legislate their religious beliefs into others? Blatantly unamerican.

    1. avatar Kyle in CT says:

      Why are so many atheists so hostile to religion and those that hold religious views? Both questions have the same answer ….

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        I certainly can’t speak for all atheists, but personally, I’d have no problem with the religious if there weren’t so many practitioners who believed their religion entitled them to control the lives of others. And in many cases they can point to doctrine and/or scripture to justify their attitude.

        I don’t care if you believe in god. I care greatly if you believe god wants you to dictate how I live my life even while I do nothing to harm others, and you insist on acting on that belief. This pastor is a perfect example, and he can get bent. Other pastors, I’d have no problem with.

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        “Why are so many atheists so hostile to religion and those that hold religious views? Both questions have the same answer ….”

        “…so many Christian think they have a right to legislate their religious beliefs into others…”

        Question posed, question answered.

      3. avatar Grindstone says:

        Are you serious? Did you not read the article above? The Good Reverend want’s law to restrict ALL people on a certain day based only on his religious preferences. That is call “Religious Tyranny”. THAT is what pisses us off.

      4. avatar displacer says:

        Yeah! Why are those crazy atheists upset with practitioners of religion just because they use the force of law to ensure that everyone must conform to their highly subjective and completely unproven religious beliefs, or else?

        … you know like the guy in the article above who wants the government to use armed men to keep everyone from hunting on _his_ holy day, regardless if your sabbath is on another day or you don’t subscribe to any religious belief system at all??

      5. avatar int19h says:

        Some of us may be hostile to religion, but that hostility is purely an expression of opinion. We’re not trying to enact laws to ban churches or prohibit prayer.

        1. avatar Grindstone says:

          Just wait for the persecution complex to kick in…

    2. avatar Grindstone says:

      Yet it runs deep in the veins of America.

    3. avatar Roymond says:

      It stems from an ancient heresy called Caesaropapism, the fiction that Caesar willed the Empire to the Pope, and that the Pope could extend that rule wherever Christians were. The Calvinist side of the Reformation happily adopted it for themselves, fine with it so ling as they had the power instead of the Pope.

      Theologically, when you get down to it, only Lutherans and a few minor groups actually believe Jesus was serious when He drew a line between government and church, Caesar and God. The Calvinist and Zwinglian branches of the Reformation have always been enthusiastic theocrats, Rome never actually gave up the notion, and the East has always been ambiguous.

      As Luther wrote, Jesus gave the power of the Word — nothing else. That means share the message, and it excludes trying to get even the least detail of the message into Caesar’s law — because that both distorts the message and damages the law.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        >> the East has always been ambiguous.

        The East has never been particularly ambiguous on this. Byzantium was very much a theocratic state, with enforcement of religious laws by the secular authority. The difference is that in the Eastern Church, patriarchs were subservient to the emperors, and not the other way around (and, strictly speaking, “caesaropapism” actually refers to that arrangement, and not to the attempts of the Pope to acquire political power). In Russia, this reached its peak when Peter the Great dissolved the Patriarchate and declared himself the head of the Church, with all the following emperors maintaining that arrangement all the way until the establishment of the republic in 1917.

        Orthodox themselves don’t use that term and consider it inappropriate, speaking instead of the “symphony of powers”. But the practical implementation is effectively the same.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphonia_(theology)

  31. avatar Buster says:

    Col. 2:16 – Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

    Not being familiar with NC law two questions come to my mind:

    1. Can you fish on Sunday in NC? If so, the only difference between fishing and hunting are the tools used.

    2. Can you punch holes in paper on Sunday in NC? If so, the only difference in target shooting and hunting is the target.

    1. avatar Roymond says:

      Bravo!!!

  32. avatar BigBoy says:

    Christianity has nothing to do with empowering some other human who calls him or herself ‘Reverand” to make your own free choices. It is the sum of the millions of choices we make each day that determines our fate. Obedience to the reversnd enshrine s his choices, not your exercise of free will.

  33. avatar paulWTAMU says:

    Dude, don’t tell me I can’t hunt on Sunday because it offends your faith. I’m not even a hunter and that annoys me. My religious beliefs and yours don’t mesh and you don’t get to sit there and tell me yours win via legislative fiat.

  34. avatar Kyle in CT says:

    It never ceases to amaze me when people proclaim they are pro-freedom, pro-2A, pro-Constitution, then proceed to shout down someone with an opinion that differs from their own.

    1. avatar vv ind says:

      Serious.
      Robert you did this as a test? If so the pass-fail ratio is sickening

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Actually I find the ratio rather heartening. Many people here, and many of that many are Christians, don’t think it’s any business of the state of North Carolina to enforce a no hunting ban on Sunday simply because (some) churches don’t want you hunting that day. This is a good thing.

    2. avatar SteveInCO says:

      He can believe anything he wants. Honestly, I don’t care.

      It’s his attempt to impose his beliefs on others that’s actually anti freedom, and it’s perfectly permissible to complain about that. In other words, we’ll stop trying to “shout him down” when he quits trying to enforce his arbitrary dictates via proxy at gunpoint.

    3. avatar int19h says:

      “Shouting down” (i.e. pointing out that some opinion or belief is wrong, stupid or tyrannical) is perfectly legitimate in a free society. Freedom includes freedom of expressing opinions, including opinions on other people’s opinions. It’s when you want to prevent people holding opinions you don’t like from acting upon them that you enter the anti-freedom territory.

    4. avatar Grindstone says:

      Put your big-boy pants on. Pointing out how legislated religious morality is antithetical to a free society is not “shouting down”. If your feelings are hurt, you can go somewhere else.

  35. avatar vv ind says:

    There’s more anti-religion, hypocritical, tolerant-only-to-your-face hoplo’s hating here than there are anti gunners at an aveeage MDA rally

    1. avatar DaveL says:

      Being tolerant of other religions does not entail tolerating their usurpation of government power.

    2. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Hoplo? Really? “I don’t think hunting should be banned on Sunday” makes me a hoplophobe?

      Logic fail.

    3. avatar Aerindel says:

      You’ve made the classic mistake of assuming gun owners are all god pounding conservatives when really we lean more libertarian than anything else.

      1. avatar vv ind says:

        I’d just like to see a little more thought, self control and respect before the hateful respond. Whats the point of the below the belt hits? I don’t think hunting should be banned on Sunday either. I’m sure not weighting in on the credibility or character of those who are religious.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          Can you give an example of a “below the belt hit” in the comments?

        2. avatar Grindstone says:

          Probably anything that is remotely critical of his religion.

        3. avatar vv ind says:

          I’m a proud 2Aer, I’m not proud to be in that category with a few here.

        4. avatar Grindstone says:

          Believe me, the feeling is mutual.

        5. avatar SteveInCO says:

          @vv ind

          I’m a proud 2Aer

          No one disputes that, though you seem to enjoy calling a lot of other people here hoplophobes because we disagree with you on other issues.

          The question was, whether you could produce an example of a “below the belt” hit. Since you blew that off, I’ll assume you were just ranting out of butthurt.

  36. avatar JT says:

    “it still poses a threat to the safety that rural churches in the state have enjoyed for decades.”

    The only way Sunday hunting could pose a risk to rural churches is if their version of a church service is to dress up as animals and wander around in the woods.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      Furries?

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        Be nice, Danny.

        More than a few furries hang out in TTAG.

        1. avatar jonwaynetaylor says:

          Had to look that one up. More power to you folks.

  37. avatar ELOT says:

    Let me join the majority of the group to say that the government has no business telling people what they can or cannot do on certain days. This is whether or not church is involved. If the government has the ability to say you can’t hunt on Sunday because of church it also has the ability to say you can’t go to church on a Wednesday because it’s a school PTA day. People should be careful about what they allow the government to legislate because it may not always be your friends in power.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      People should be careful about what they allow the government to legislate because it may not always be your friends in power.

      I agree with this. Unfortunately many people in the US apparently don’t, so we have all sorts of onerous laws that we shouldn’t have. We currently allow the .gov to legislate all sorts of stuff and it is both maddening and disheartening. But I really don’t think the majority of US citizens are very smart, or at least know history and care about our founding documents. We’ve got judges legislating from the bench and political parties trying to stack the courts. If we went by our laws, and if we wrote good laws, not ambiguous ones or unconstitutional ones, in theory it almost wouldn’t matter who the judge was, but in practice it does.

  38. avatar Anon in CT says:

    I doubt there are many observent Jewish hunters in NC, but if there are, they would be cut off from weekend hunting by a ban on Sunday hunting. That doesn’t really seem fair.

  39. avatar DaveL says:

    Shorter Rev. Creech:

    “No, no, you’ve got us all wrong. We’re not against the Second Amendment. We’re against the First!”

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      Exactly! His argument frames this as a First Amendment issue. The people opposing Sunday hunting in Pennsylvania have been careful to avoid doing this openly because they know it would be easily struck down on 1A grounds.

  40. His argument was thoughtful and kind. Kinda surprising to me how much people are trying to shoot down his statements when he clearly states he doesn’t mind the NRA pushing against the Sunday ban, but just doesn’t feel like they need to paint all opposition in with such a broad brush in this case. If I was invested in this argument, I’d say, “Hmm, alright. Point taken, moving on.” It’s a fair comment imo, wether or not you agree with his stance on the repeal.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      I’ve no problem agreeing with his complaint that the NRA read him wrong. That’s so uncontroversial I haven’t bothered to comment on it.

      I will disagree with his stance. I will disagree much more with him trying to impose his stance on others.

    2. avatar Aerindel says:

      I don’t care how thoughtful and kind an oppressor is, they are still an oppressor.

    3. avatar Jake says:

      You are correct. What most upset the reverend was that folks might infer that he cares about the environment.

    4. avatar Wiregrass says:

      If this were a one time event, I could see an apology for a cheap shot being justified, but this guy appears to have a history of sticking his nose into politics. That’s no place for the thin skinned.

  41. avatar Rich Langseth says:

    I stopped reading this as soon I as realized the guy wasn’t smart enough to know the difference between sited and cited.

  42. avatar LJM says:

    I’m sure the clergy opposition to the ban on hunting is in part faith and part economic. If parishoners have the option to go hunting instead of going to a church, then the clergy might see an impact to their “non-profit” donations to sustain their buildings of faith.

    I’m opposed to banning hunting on Sundays. Some of my most memorable hunts were on Sunday mornings. My Dad, Uncle and Grandpa would duck hunt every Saturday AND Sunday during the season as that was the only two days we could all hunt together (ya know, school and work). And our Sunday hunts would always end before the Bears would kick off.

    AND… all of us went to church every weekend… on SATURDAY night. We called it the Duck hunters mass. We would all gather outside before mass, discuss that days hunt, and watch the flocks fly over the Church on their way back from the afternoon feed.

    Deal with it Reverend, you can keep the Sabath holy from the Duck blind as much as from the pew.

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      Maybe. But I don’t think most Christians giving is based on whether they show up on any given Sunday. Infact, I don’t even bother with the plate, and give to my church online.

  43. avatar Grindstone says:

    Keep your holy day holy and leave the rest of us alone. This is just a small sample of Christian Supremacy.
    I do, in fact, roll on Shabbos.

    1. avatar BDub says:

      Don’t forget which bag is the ringer.

  44. avatar BlueBronco says:

    I don’t think anyone is going to make Preacher Creech or any of his Flock hunt on Sunday against their will.

  45. avatar Skyler says:

    Just another christian bigot who thinks everyone should worship his god (not that all christians are bigots). Only slightly better than ISIS in that they haven’t started killing anyone, but to enforce hunting bans necessarily implies the use of force and that often leads to killing.

  46. avatar ugene says:

    You can hunt with a bow or crossbow on Sunday in N.C. now on private land.

  47. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    The good Rev needs to mind his own business and quit enlisting the power of the State to squelch competing Sunday activities. It’s neither his nor the government’s responsibility to guide whether, when, where or how people practice their faith or experience God revealing himself.

  48. avatar Roymond says:

    Oh, Reverend!

    Jesus picked grain and ate it on the Sabbath, in violation of more than one of the old laws.

    The principle is that Jesus gathered food on “the Lord’s Day”, which is what then fell on the Sabbath.

    Hunting is a matter of gathering food on “the Lord’s Day, which today is celebrated a day later, for good cause.

    Thus, Jesus already answered this question: it is just fine to gather food on the Lord’s Day.

    Q.E.D.

  49. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Christian here…this is legalism pure & simple. Like Chariots of Fire when the runner wouldn’t run on the sabbath-except we are not Jews who follow the law of Moses. Would they FIGHT for England if the battle was on a Sunday??? Blue laws need to go-they have NO basis in the new testament. Whatever-I don’t hunt but if Sunday is your only day do it. IN my very large Baptist church the leadership understands having to work on Sunday.

    1. avatar James R says:

      Even if they did have a basis in the new testament they still need to go because they are a law based on religious beliefs.

  50. avatar James R says:

    So we should have this law because it is in accordance with your religion?

    Please See: First Amendment

  51. avatar SCW says:

    The good minister needs to prove that there is a god. When he does that, then we can talk about why he doesn’t want anyone to hunt on Sunday.

  52. avatar AMJr says:

    put best by Jesse Ventura
    “Organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers. It tells people to go out and stick their noses in other people’s business. I live by the golden rule: Treat others as you’d want them to treat you. The religious right wants to tell people how to live.”

  53. avatar BDub says:

    Evangelical solipsism. He opposes this legislation so when the NRA-ILA mentions an a group opposing hunting he assumes that its all about him. It inconceivable to him that there might be other, perhaps more vocal, groups that may in fact be associated with animal rights activism.

    He is being doubly solipsitic in his assumption that only people of his faith hunt. All the while treating the supposed faithful like children incapable of choosing to worship on Sunday rather than hunt – rather insulting to the flock, that.

    He spends too much time polishing his 2ndA Bona Fides, while wiping his ass with the 1stA.

    The tangents nicely with one of my main beefs with the religious in this country – that so many of them feel the need to enforce their edicts on people through laws. Ignoring entirely that not everyone covered by such laws subscribes to their beliefs.

  54. avatar PW in KY says:

    Dr. Creech,
    I don’t live in NC so I’m not your target audience, but your 4 points are garbage. As a full time Christian minister I see no reason why a state should impose a hunting ban on any day of the week, including Sunday. Your points are awful and a terrible argument against anything.

    1) How does this law pit anyone rural against urban, or the reverse? In what manner? There isn’t urban hunting, practically, so what difference does it make? This point is nonsense and I don’t understand how it shouldn’t be ridiculed.

    2) The law, as is, is already forcing NO hunting on EVERYONE across the whole state. Shouldn’t people be free to choose??? You prefer government imposition over freedom in this matter.

    3) How on earth will it strain resources to remove a ban. Right now, it requires resources to enforce the ban. With the ban lifted those resources will not be required. This is an absurd point.

    4) Are the rural churches in the state riddled with bullet holes from the Monday-Saturday hunting? No? Why could that be? You know, people also live in those rural areas. Are their homes unsafe as well? If points 1 and 3 hand’t been so silly then this could have easily been the most dim witted of your points.

    If those are the 4 points that your argument rests upon then you can guarantee your side will lose in a resounding fashion. Stop making Christians look backwards and out of touch and instead focus your efforts on bringing people to Christ.

  55. avatar Kevin C says:

    This is a great post for scoping out rude, illogical commenters.

    1. avatar SCW says:

      You mean christians?

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        You mean christians?

        Feel free to start naming names of rude and illogical Christians posting to this thread.

        If you can’t, how about if Farago bans you for life? Deal?

        1. avatar vv ind says:

          Noticed it too? The general attitudes and respect of responses from the obviously ” non religious” and that of the obviously “religious”.
          How are they all representing the 2A cause?

  56. avatar jonwaynetaylor says:

    Wait a minute, doesn’t the bible tell us to “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holey”?

    1. avatar jonwaynetaylor says:

      Dang…tough crowd.

      1. avatar vv ind says:

        Hole-y, I got it. Nice

    2. avatar Kevin C says:

      Punishment?

    3. avatar Former Water Walker says:

      The WORD is HOLY slick….and some of us are Christians first and gun owners second. Or 3rd or 4th…

  57. avatar gjohn says:

    What a bunch of crap..People should have the right to hunt on any day they choose,period.

  58. avatar Sgt. Adams says:

    Sorry, Padre.

    If you want hunting outlawed on Sunday how about we also outlaw church on Sundays?

    You leave my rights alone and I won’t move against your superstitions.

  59. avatar gsnyder says:

    Can’t hunt on Sunday? Really? What else can’t you do? Insane.

  60. avatar Preston B. says:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”

    Unconstitutional.

    It forces people to live by a tenet of a religious group. Majority or not, it’s still illegal. The United States of America is a constitutional democratic republic, not a democracy that allows mob rule.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      There could be many reasons for not hunting on Sunday. The farmers lobbying against it is one, and that may be stronger than the Christian lobbying machine (whatever that is). Still, one is not forced to worship a certain God. If you’ve elected a congresscritter that puts his or her finger to the wind rather than respect our founding documents, then you’ve elected the wrong congresscritter.

      Can we blame this on you, then?

    2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      The United States of America is a constitutional democratic republic, not a democracy that allows mob rule.

      So what do you do, Preston, to ensure that it stays that way? Anything? Do you drive 85 MPH in a ridiculous 55 MPH Jimmy Carter zone? Do you own an unregistered full-auto firearm? Do you participate in even the slightest civil disobedience such as refusing to wear seatbelts? Or are you just another toothless keyboard commando?

  61. avatar Tomyironmane says:

    I believe that forcing your morality on someone else at gunpoint is the last thing any Christian should do. Make no mistake, when you legally ban hunting on Sunday you are authorizing armed agents of the state to apprehend and penalize your fellow citizens, and “because they believe differently from me” is an insufficient and unconstitutional reason. “Protecting churches” doesn’t seem to me to be a reasonable excuse, since shooting in the direction of any sort of crowded building is already illegal under multiple laws.

    I love Jesus for all he has done for me, and with his help, I hope to better love God, but I utterly reject the concept that I ought to demand others do the same at the point of a gun, especially one that I haven’t got the god-given decency to bear myself.

  62. avatar Anonymous says:

    Although I never took the time to join the NRA, I am a fan and believe the nation is indebted to your great work.

    Your a fan – but you didn’t want to be a member for $25.00. Hmm. Ok. I guess they could somehow be mutually exclusive. Wouldn’t have guessed though.

    As you know, there is currently legislation under consideration in the North Carolina General Assembly that would repeal North Carolina’s 145 year-old Sunday hunting ban . . .

    Great. Repeals. Less laws are better I think. Especially if there are no victims… at all.

    The Christian Action League opposes HB 640 because (1) the legislation as currently written pits rural North Carolina against urban North Carolina, (2) it forces Sunday hunting on many counties across the state that don’t want it, (3) it will likely strain existing state resources to enforce the new regulations, and, (4) it still poses a threat to the safety that rural churches in the state have enjoyed for decades.

    1) Urban centers like to control rural people’s lives… such is democracy.
    2) People are not counties. Should be an individual’s decision – not a counties decision yea? So what if the majority of a county doesn’t like it. Why are they forcing their opinion on others? Why make laws with no victims on the basis of opinion?
    3) enforce what new regulations? They are removing regulations right? Sounds like it should “free up” existing resources to do something more meaningful/useful.
    4) Poses a threat to churches? You should have elaborated on this – doesn’t make any sense. The hunter doesn’t hunt inside the church reverend.

    But the primary point of resistance to the appeal is admittedly and unashamedly religious.

    I wrote about the religious aspect in a recent editorial in the Raleigh News and Observer, titled, “How Sunday Hunting Would Weaken Value of ‘Lord’s Day.‘

    OK! here it is… finally cut through the filler material to the bread and butter argument. Ok reverend. We understand you don’t like “godless extremists” and all, but freedom of religion means exactly that. It’s about freedom. Some people would like to be free to do what they like … religiously. That means instead of going to your church and hearing your sermon – they could go hunting if they so wanted. No hunting on sunday violates the 1st amendment. It’s conception was relgious in nature. If you don’t want to hunt on sunday – that is your prerogative, but please don’t force it on us.

  63. avatar David says:

    The law should place no emphasis on anything for religious reasons. The fact that hunting on Sunday may result in less value placed on “The Lord’s Day” is entirely irrelevant.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email