The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Americans do not have the right to carry concealed guns. Anti-gun lobbyists and gun control advocates will no doubt praise the decision. But here's the thing. This is the same court that ruled the will of the public no longer mattered regarding Prop 8. This is the same court that ruled the will of really important people should dictate all regarding the Pledge of Allegiance.
I know, I know. The minute you point out that Jack Chick is not the most reliable source for understanding Catholic Doctrine, pundits and Catholic Apologists will rush out and accuse you of party politics and bias and all that jazz because you're looking at the person rather than the truth of the statement.
And I know there's something to that. After all, if Stalin said Hitler was a bad guy, Stalin was right. Nonetheless, while conceding Stalin was right, I would consider the source, consider that when Stalin said Hitler was bad, he might not mean it in the same way I understand bad, or have the same reasons for thinking Hitler was bad. And I would probably look to better sources to buttress my opinion of Hitler when I consider Stalin's track record.
So when Secular, Socialist, post-Christian Europe abolishes the Death Penalty, or stands against war, or seems to reject torture, I make note. But I also compare it to other issues that the same Europe seems to crave, such as abortion, assisted suicide, unbridled sex and decadence, apathetic narcissism, and even euthanasia. So I note their opinions on issues like capital punishment or armed conflict, but conclude it might not have anything at all to do with the sanctity of life or good Christian values. In fact, those very stances may be based on other views and morals that are themselves anathema to a traditional Christian world view.
To me, considering the source is important. Just because it is convenient when this or that source says what I want doesn't mean I won't end up losing much more down the road from supporting them or just lining up behind them because I agree. So the 9th has said no to concealed guns. Just like it said no to public displays of religion or opposition to state supported gay marriage. To me, that's a trend worth noting. That doesn't mean that concealed guns are therefore a great thing because the super-duper bad 9th Circuit Court has said it is wrong. But I will stop and think twice before I sing praises to the glorious 9th, remembering that in so many other instances, its own biases and prejudices have found themselves arrayed strongly against me and my interests and well being.