Lie First, Lie Always: Rev. Nancy Nord Bence, False Witness

To:  The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
From:  Mitch Berg, Presbyterian peasant
Re:  False Witness

Dear ELCA,

One of your reverends is lying through her impeccable teeth:

Your reverend keeps telling black people and Muslims that the HR288, the “Self Defense Reform Act”, is a special danger to them, because, she says, it’ll allow people to shoot people who “make them feel uncomfortable”.

It’s a lie.  Nothing more – and if you take your Ten Commandments seriously, nothing less.

The Reverend has had the truth about this matter explained to her, repeatedly.  “That hoodie / disdasha / person’s skin color made me scared” is not grounds to use lethal force in self defense1.


She is not “mistaken”, and she certainly isn’t telling the truth.  She is not only willfully misleading people – she’s using her clerical office to lend her lies credence.

Is this the example your clergy should be setting?

Please see to this

That is all.

[1] For those who’ve been under a rock – or, worse, listening to Reverend Nord Bence, the criteria to use lethal force are:

  1. You can’t be the aggressor
  2. You must be reasonably afraid of being killed or mained, now.  Not in an hour.
  3. You must use only enough force to end the threat.
  4. You must make every reasonable effort to avoid using force.  “Stand your Ground” laws modify this, and only this, crierion!

7 thoughts on “Lie First, Lie Always: Rev. Nancy Nord Bence, False Witness

  1. Mitch, you are wrong as usual. You see, if you wake up to a perp burgling your house and threatening your daughter and you take appropriate action according to “Stand Your Ground”, since the perp according to crime statistics is likely to be of the non-white persuasion, her eminence Rev Bench is absolutely correct in her pronouncement. You have to read between the lines for the insight into the libturd thinking ( shudder ).

  2. The only pontificating I want my clergyman to do is in interpreting the Holy Word. At the end of the sermon he/she and I can pick up the discussion over latte’s at the gun range.

  3. She uses her title to add solemnity and gravitas to her political points. She’s not just a shill, she’s a REVERAND shill.

    Half a dozen of us ought to get our internet ministerial credentials, file them with the local county vital statistics office, and insist that we, too, are ordained ministers duly registered with the State of Minnesota and therefore we, too, are entitled to be called Reverend. Every time someone uses her title, insist they use ours. Why not? Are they implying one religion is better than another? Are they violating the First Amendment as well as the Second?

    Reverend Joe Doakes.

  4. She might not be such an angry woman if we could find her neck and return it to her.

  5. Page 1 Article in the Red Star about expanded gun rights Capitol Firepower, where they quote more of her lies.

  6. I was reading a post about the kid who recently dispatched 3 B&Es with an AR-15. The grandfather came out saying it was unfair that his grandson was killed by an AR-15 because that was a completely unfair advantage. One person commented “In this case, the grandfather is completely correct. WHICH IS WHY I OWN ONE.”

  7. Pingback: Unwarranted Sanctimony | Shot in the Dark

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.