Bylaws of a shooting club.

It is up to the majority of members of a private club what form of club it should be (although there may be some state laws that also come into play).

Personally, I wouldn't have any problems belonging to a Christian-only shooting club, but I am a Christian. I see nothing that renders shooting incompatible with the Christian faith, nor are being a good shot and a good Christian mutually exclusive.

People can always vote with their feet by leaving the club if it changes into something they do not want to be a part of.

mbogo
P.S. They do realize that Jesus Christ himself would be excluded from membership in their club, don't they? He was a Jew

Maybe just wait and see where it goes. It may just go away. I'd still be looking just in case though.

Personally, the "pledge" has always been an annoyance to me. Why should you have to swear alligence to anyone or anything? Seems kind of odd too, since "we" are (or are supposed to be) the entity we are swearing to. Never made much sense to me. Not at all anti US or anything, just anti being "told" I should follow without question and do as I'm told, becasuse someone thinks its what I should do.

The second part, one religion is as scary as another to someone who knows why they exist.

It is a private club, and can pretty much do as they wish.

But, I wouldn't be giving them any money in any way. I wouldn't want to be part of a club that excludes members based on religion - especially a shooting club.

1.5 cents worth

I see from your signature line that you are a Christian. That makes me all the more respect your stance on the situation. No, I don't think religeous beliefs should have anything to do with membersip in a shooting club either.

That being said, I respect the right of any private organization to establish whatever membership rules they want. I may well chose to not be a member, or even stand on the sidelines and call them out for the racist/sexist/X-"religeonist" that they show themselves to be though. Augusta National (golf course) has had a tough and public time with this, as have the Boy Scouts of America.

It will likely be tough for you to stand up for your beliefs within your (likely) small shooting community, but I applaud your thought and hopefully your speaking up on the issue.

I'm fine with a private club creating exclusionary policies, up to the point where they are invalidating the membership of persons who do not meet the exclusionary criteria, yet have substantive material investment in the club through membership fees already paid.

Say, for example, that a Muslim member of a shooting club will have her membership revoked as a result of not being an Xtian. Say she's paid hundreds of dollars per year in membership fees for several years that have been invested into the club's property.

While there's no legal recourse for said Muslim club member, barring some specific contractual violation in the change of bylaws, the club is morally in the wrong, as far as I am concerned.

That said, I question whether it is in the long term interest of shooting clubs and the RKBA movement, in general, to engage in exclusionary policies that have nothing to do with advancing the RKBA or the encouragement of the ownership and responsible usage of firearms. We need more people in the movement, not fewer.

I don't believe that religion should be a part of the shooting club. What are your thoughts.

Click to expand...

I suppose it all depends on how you look at it. Provided that they do not, and I will liberally use this word, "steal" money from members that have already paid and stand to lose something, it's fair game.

It'd be legal, but entirely wise in the business sense. There's no reason that Christians shouldn't be allowed to have clubs anymore than anyone else, and that's really what this boils down to. The only real difference is that they adopted these laws after they started operations and not before. If a church group decided to do this and never let anybody else join you'd never hear a word about it.

On the other hand, I always thought that Christians welcomed sinners so that they could spread the Gospel? I have always thought things that were strange.

If the goal is to get more people involved with RKBA it's a bad move. If the goal is to get more people involved with Christ, that's a bad move too.

Both subjects are under heavy fire. Both are rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. They basically have the same enemy. Personally, I would be opposed to it, even as a Christian, but not because they don't belong to together, because neither deserve to die.

As a Christian, I have a problem with "Christian-only" anything. The social atmosphere of a shooting club is a perfect place to display Christian ethics, practices, and beliefs with out being an obnoxious turn-off. Christian only stuff is a lost opportunity, IMO.

I say, "Don't hide your light under a bushell."

If my rifle association adopted a "Christians Only" membership requirement I'd resign.
And I'm a Christian.

Tinpig

It would be an aspect to be voted not but I think discounting those that don't follow that particular faith is sort of going against all that's taught in the Bible. What about the whole "love they neighbor", ""forgiveness" and the words all preach, "do unto others..." Dis-allowing other based solely on their religous views just makes hypocrites out of everyone then - going completely against what they're supposed to be like.

Retroactively changing the membership criteria to Christians only leads one to ask just who would define Christianity for the group. For Example: Many self described Christians do not believe that our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters are really Christians. The same has been said recently regarding Episcopalians.

It is one thing to start an organization from scratch defining what constitutes eligibility for membership. It is quite another to change the rules and purge those existing members, otherwise in good standing, because of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Perhaps by closing the doors to non-Christians the cart would be put before the horse....

Meaning that your club membership ought to hold a discussion about what the club's overall aims are. Once these are pegged down and prioritized, then discuss how best to achieve these aims. Then structure yourselves and adopt bylaws and membership rules accordingly.

If a club has a mid to long-term project around which the membership and local community can rally -no matter their religion or political beliefs- all the better.

I've found the energy in clubs comes and goes over time, as does the quality of a club's membership. Poor leadership often leads to lower membership numbers and a less effective organization. Dispirited core members -the ones with skill and motivation- may migrate to where their energies can be put to positive uses.

I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.
Mohandas Gandhi

Click to expand...

The right of a private organization, however, it seems in these days when shooters are fewer and fewer, you would think any club would welcome every person interested in joining

Refer to the constitution! Christian values but except everyone!

LemmyCaution said:

Say, for example, that a Muslim member of a shooting club will have her membership revoked as a result of not being an Xtian. Say she's paid hundreds of dollars per year in membership fees for several years that have been invested into the club's property.

While there's no legal recourse for said Muslim club member, barring some specific contractual violation in the change of bylaws, the club is morally in the wrong, as far as I am concerned.

Click to expand...

It is possible there may be recourse for existing club members who would be excluded by this, especially if they are long term members. Look into implied contract and grandfathering laws. Of course, this would rely on the excluded person pressing charges, but if they did it would at the least look *VERY* bad for the club - regardless of the outcome.

"Local shooting club changes by-laws to force out religious minorities!"

What is the motivation of the people who want to do this? IMO, they are not being very good ambassadors for their faith...

Under different circumstances, the headline could also read:

"Local shooting club fights off Al-Qaida takeover bid".

Or:

"Godless Communists expelled by Christian shooting club"



It'd be great media coverage.
Just kidding.

ms6852 said:

The issue was brought up immediately after the proposal. The fact that it is still being considered was what angered me. The club has always been fine until recently that newer members began to show up. There are a couple of native americans and asians that do not practice Christianity as well as others who are don't practice any religion at all. What angers me more is the hypocrisy by this so called christians that are mere cowards that hide their racism and sexism under the veil of religion. This is not the place for religion. It is a place to mingle with other fellow shooters, learn from them, teach young shooters and just have a good time on a sport that we all cherish and love, and that a mix of people have in common.

Click to expand...

Pretty well summed it up yourself.

The 1A separation of church and state basically says government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion.

If you substitute "government" for "goverance", its still a good idea IMO.

Discrimination under the cloak of religion IMO.

If the shooting club started as a Christian shooting club... possibly spawned from a church outing.... thats one thing.

To change it now is questionable

I should think that existing members should be extended the courtesy of being grandfathered in since there was formerly no discrimination based on religion. Attendees should be granted the option of standing (respectfully) silent while the "majority" recites the PoA before each meeting if that is their wont. I guess a club can do whatever it wants within its by rules. Any changes thereto should be put before the membership for a vote at least.
Ultimately, unless otherwise restrained, the club officers could decide to exclude all the other members and assume ownership of the club for themselves?
Nice.

I don't think that this topic has anything to do with guns and everything to do with introducing politics or religion into a club environment. As such, I'm straining to see how this has relevance to THR.

rbernie said:

I don't think that this topic has anything to do with guns and everything to do with introducing politics or religion into a club environment. As such, I'm straining to see how this has relevance to THR.

Click to expand...

RKBA issue? I know, no one is saying they can't own firearms, but if an organization, say the brady bunch, was attempting to close a range to non-LEOs, the thread would run multi pages. What does it matter if the group is religious, political or transgender?

I would not join a shooting club that limits it's members to Christians only. Seems to me that being a certain religion is not a pre-requisite to the 2nd Amendment.

My priority at a shooting club is shooting, not discriminating against religions.

If a club cannot focus on shooting, I'm not interested.

On the other hand, if the Church allowed target practice during Sunday services, I'm all in.

As a Christian gun owner, I would be offended if someone decided to make my club Christian only. Very few of my friends could come and shoot. Sounds like someone needs to revisit their duty to be a witness. There is always someone who wants to over step their bounds. Have these folks ever read, "Twelve Ordinary Men?" These guys were fishermen, tent makers, a tax collector and Paul was a murderer. Not exactly the highlife of society. In fact I would bet they were pretty rough characters. These would all be the guys they would want to keep out? Seek other shooting avenues if it goes through.