It's not the differences, but the similarities that matter.

On July 7th, 2016 a lone gunman in Dallas Texas executed a well thought out attack on primarily Peace Officers. during a peaceful protest proclaiming “Black Lives Matter” after some horrible incidents in other parts of the country earlier that week. Some people call this black on white violence, but I beg to differ. It was hate of Law Enforcement, not race that drove this.
The shooter’s parents spoke to The Blaze and described how this patriotic American who joined the US Army to protect his country, came home a changed man. He went off to websites and became obsessed with “Racial-Justice” to the point he planned this attack. Was it the fault of sites like “Black Live Matter” that this person turned to violence? No. It was the act of what had become an unbalanced person ruled by emotions.
The very concept of hyphenating the word “Justice” is actually insane. Justice: “the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments” is by definition “Impartial.” This country was created because of the partiality of King George of Great Britton.
When America declared her independence from the Kingdom of Great Briton, the 13 Separate colonies declared as one country, The United States of America.
Why have we wondered from that model? Being only an American? - Class Politics
If you read the Declaration of Independence there are a few things to notice:

1. The purpose of the declaration: “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
   
   Separation from one authority, establishing their own united authority.
   
2. Why this authority is needed? – “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
   
   Rights not recognized by “Him” King George.
   
3. The result: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”<

The idea of “unity” is not based on recognizing what is different among people, but what is the same. By promoting a “Separate but equal” mentality, we promote strife and cause division. Like Orwell’s “Animal Farm” some people end up more equal than others. If we were to focus on individual rights, real rights that are granted by the very status of being alive, not conjured rights supplied by force, we can agree on certain things.

Everybody is created by God or by happenstance to be equal. There is no qualifier based on race, ability or gender.

Each of us has the right to live, and we have the right to have liberty. Liberty is a sticky term because people confuse it with the freedom that some think is “cost-free” but it is not. Liberty is simply unencumbered in this case by the government, while freedom is a state of being. Not a thing granted.
In 1835 Texas won its independence from Mexico, the people referred to themselves as Texans, there was unity in purpose. And in 1845 they choose to become Americans by joining the still fledgling United States of America. They unified behind the ideals enshrined in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Many Texans had been Americans that left because of perceived oppression by the newly formed nation. Yet for their own freedom from the tyranny of Mexico, they choose to join the American Republic.
Why the history lesson? To show how unity really occurs. Not by the celebration of differences but the recognition of commonality. Not that we ought not to allow, even embrace our differences’! On the contrary, America in the late 1800s was the most inventive period anywhere in the world. Where great inventors like George Washington-Carver (Born into slavery 1861 in Missouri), Thomas Edison (Father Canadian, Mother 1st Generation American), Nikola Tesla (Serbian Immigrant), literally changed the course of culture and laid the groundwork for everything we have today.
It is much easier to go in the same direction when you look at what is the same. But we never hear about that. We are preached to about "Racial Justice" or "Social Justice.' How about just simple justice under law. Under the rock-solid principles not left to individual interpretation? So many want justice for themselves and oppression to others. When is your desire an infringement of another's rights? Is it an infringement of your rights when somebody says no to you? If you think it is, you don't know what a right is.
I contend if we started to vote for the principals, instead of the empty and false promises from either side that is what could unify us again. We can all agree on so many things.
Though I am no advocate of violence, I’ve come to agree with Robert A Heinlein, a 20th century Science Fiction Author. In “Starship Troopers” (December 1959), Mister Heinlein described voting as a violent act: “When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.” Markedly similar to Mao Tse-Tung’s" Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” (Problems of War and Strategy, November 1938) But different in the idea that the violence of voting is not directly harmful. But it can be indirectly harmful.
If we as individuals considered voting to be violent, hence used the same consideration before voting as we would before defending ourselves, our world or at least our country would be a far better place.

Progressives make an effort to hide that they think voting is a violent act, they couch it in terms to sound better, “Social Justice,” “Economic In-Equality” and any number of cute phrases to hide the idea of theft from one person to give to another. These are all acts of violence. Solely because they are backed by the power of the government whose only recourse is violence!
What does this have to do with a lone gunman that shot 12 peace officers on July 7th? If equality under the law was our driving force, and not making somebody else more equal than others, this whole thing could be solved in short order.
I will not take sides with Black Lives Matter, the Law Enforcement Community or with a loan sniper who struck innocents on the July 7th event killing 5 and injuring so many others. I will applaud the police officers (regardless of genetics) that protected the protest participants (regardless of genetics) with their live because it was the officers chosen duty to do so.
I ask you to look to principles versus emotions. To unity of purpose versus diversity of condition. I am an American. I’m not a Nordic-American, a White-American, a Christian-American or an obese-American. Though these terms all describe me accurately, the truth is I am simply an American. Anybody who wishes to come here, and values the principals governing this land is welcome to be an American too.
The sooner we ca stop the sub-division of culture, allow people to celebrate their lives as each sees fit, yet promote that all people have the right to “life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The sooner that we can stop this insanity of a division.
In America, you are not the sum of your genetics, but the total of your potential that matters. And "potential' can be changed. Our Constitution was designed to allow you to fill that potential to the reaches of your imagination. Can we stop imagining making another pay for history? Can we picture a free country that made this country as vibrant as the roaring '20s, a product of deregulation and reduced taxes during a worse recession than 1929?
To steal a tag line from the SyFy Channel ® – Imagine Greater.
Gregor - Back from the brink! From there and back again. A spiritual Hobbits journey.

The truth is - It's not about guns - It's about control.

Our law makers are acting like little children, pretending to “Stand up” for civil rights by having a “Sit in” to take away those rights.  It is insane.  The “Gun control” issue is not about guns.  Those of you that think it is, are truly uninformed, no willfully ignorant is a better description. Because all you want is “common sense gun control.”  There are a few issues with the very concept of the “Leviathan” that is our government having common sense. 

The issue is simple, the progressive left does not want the responsibility of freedom, so they want to take it away from all of us.  That is really what is at issue here.  Our college kids scream for “Safe space” so they don’t have to hear offensive language. What they deem as offensive language.  That ladies and gentlemen is a direct attack on the first amendment.  Your speech can only be “free and unencumbered” as long as it falls in to what somebody else considers proper. 

That is not freedom that is tyranny.

The funny thing is, throughout history, constitutionalism has been the one protecting diversity and freedom.  The Progressives, since their very inception, has struggled to enforce control and homogeneity.  

If it were not for the Democratic Party, marriage licenses would not be needed for two persons to be married.  Originally it was instituted to keep Black Americans from marrying white people. Then it was used to keep homosexuals from entering in to a federal contract. Which we would not need it if were not for the progressive tax code.   In 2008, both then candidate Obama and Hillary Clinton thought that “traditional marriage was sacred, “but they changed their minds later.  Why?  No one cares.  

As a Christian man, in America, I may not agree with whatever gender fluid state people claim.  I also know it is not my job to police that.  Here is the real rub.  If the federal government forces various religions to act in support of something the church theology thinks is incorrect, the government has suddenly crossed in to dictating religious activities.  The mythical separation of Church and State the progressives scream about is suddenly gone.  Not because Christians forced their will upon the masses, but because pro-claimed atheists wanted it. 

That means if the masses change their minds, at some point, the government can be changed in the other direction.  At some point 30 years in the future, a radical Islam or Radical Christian group may come to power, using the same thought process that the Progressive want now, to change this county in to their definition of “righteous.” 

That is why the founding fathers made a document to restrict not the people, but the government. That is what makes our system so much better than everybody else’s, if we would actually follow it. By protecting the individual from the government, everybody gets protected.

Just like Spider Man, “With great power comes great responsibility.” (Actually derived from Luke 12:48 according to a speech by Stan Lee, creator of Spider man). Individual freedom is dependent on individual responsibility. If you make freedoms ‘collective’ that means the group can change them. 

So trying to take away firearms actually has nothing to do with guns.  Removing guns does not make you safer (More Guns Less Crime ).  Just last week Jo Cox was shot and killed in a country (Great Briton) that does not allow handguns to be sold.  Yet an insane man got one and killed her. (Jo Cox Killed. June 16th 2016}. 

Removing guns from the populace makes the populace easier to control.  Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Lennon, all gun grabbers, all genocidal maniacs.  

You see a law abiding citizen with a firearm is no danger.  Yet that same law abiding armed citizen could be your savior.

It takes intellectual dishonesty to want to “restrict freedoms” for the safety of others.  It has never worked in the long run.  It always ends badly.  In genocide. 

If you want freedom, real freedom.  You have to be able to tell the idiots that are verbally abusing you to go away.  You have to be responsible for your own safety. The police are not according to  the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS: Warren v District of Columbia). And then don’t associate with them.  You have that right.  But if you ask the government to protect you from the idiots, at some point you become the idiot that the rest of use needs protection from.  You become the oppressed.  Any government, not matter how noble, can only oppress.  It has no choice that is the only way it can influence “We the people.” 

Allowing a baker to choose not to serve somebody for any reason what so ever, guarantees you have the right to associate and do what you want.  If you force that baker to serve those they do not want, at some point, you will also be forced to do things you don’t agree with.  It’s the way of government, it is “Leviathan.”

NOTE: The Book “Leviathan” was written in 1660, by Thomas Hobbs.  And was a treatise on the idea of “Common Wealth’s,” If you read Thomas Hobbs’ own words at the end of the book, he concludes that no 'sovereign' could actually handle the responsibilities of the office of Sovereign.  So though a nice work of fiction looking for a perfect society, the author acknowledges it is not possible with a central government, even though he proposes that at the beginning of the book.  The idea that “absolute power corrupts absolutely” has been demonstrated since the beginning of history.  The best answer is for there to be no absolute power, just finite power given by the consent of the governed.  Then individual freedom can exist.  

Gregor - Back from the brink! From there and back again. A spiritual Hobbits journey.