|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 25, 2016 18:28:32 GMT -5
I see the self preservation aspect of your humanity is not strong...mine is... Oooops, there goes another Christlike quality. C'mon Bob, give Wally a break. He only says he is a christian cos he couldn't spell atheist!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Feb 25, 2016 18:31:26 GMT -5
And for the theist, how can a person determine if their life is more important than the attacker? Deciding who lives and who dies sounds sort of like god's job description. Depending on the 'the' in 'theist' answer might be found in the word 'attacker' if the attacked is someone else but for the christian the principles aren't about defending ones self but in laying down ones life for others and turning the other cheek when struck. I suppose this is a matter that can be discussed between the two of them before they decide who should do what to the other.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Feb 25, 2016 18:38:31 GMT -5
Oooops, there goes another Christlike quality. C'mon Bob, give Wally a break. He only says he is a christian cos he couldn't spell atheist! But it's confusing. Who knows the difference between "atheist" and "a theist"?
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Feb 25, 2016 18:38:33 GMT -5
Attackers don't discuss in my experience and attackers with guns are going to get the guy with a gun before he knows what hit him - even in those places with stupid laws that allow murdering an unarmed person just because someone 'feels' threatened.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 25, 2016 21:15:06 GMT -5
Why would someone who is living for the next life even want to defend themselves with a weapon of violence? Just adds to my anecdotal archiving ( related to experience in healthcare) of the number of christian and other religious people who accept excessive means to defer death despite claiming they are looking forward to being with their god. These anecdotes (shared by other observers) include observing that it is the religious who tend to be more afraid of, and to fight death. This seems entirely logical as if the religious feel they have fallen short of attaining the standards imposed upon them by their chosen religious text and they risk eternal punishment: death would be rather off-putting (or an experience to put-off). Death is merely a long sleep; to be interrupted by some incompetent supernatural deity who made a mess of his first project, would be more than a little annoying
And the Peace aspect adds to the puzzle. In the case of chrisitanity: Jesus was referred to as the Prince of Peace. Do you think a gun comprises part of the Christian Peace Profile @wally ? Such a tragic image matisse Yes. I hadn't thought of this before, but how could one be sure that the same incompetent supernatural deity "who made a mess of his first project" might make just as much of a mess OR even worse the second time even though HE promises us such a wonderful life after death?
|
|
|
Firearms
Feb 25, 2016 22:18:54 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by ellie on Feb 25, 2016 22:18:54 GMT -5
Self defense is an issue tho going to the point of killing another for the sake of some stupid piece of inanimate property or money or just feeling threatened doesn't seem christ-like in any way. Rising to the defense of others is a less selfish thing but even then someone might choose to take a bullet for another instead of killing. Beyond personal killing governments do 'bear the sword' like Roman 13:4 says so a nation and police keeping order and protecting even with deadly force is something that god allows - there are people and nations out there who don't hesitate to kill and use violence to get their ways and thats where anarchists would have us all go - every person being a law and god unto him or her self is an ideal world for them. And for the theist, how can a person determine if their life is more important than the attacker? Deciding who lives and who dies sounds sort of like god's job description. If in doubt apply deuteronomy. It's unlikely that both theist and attacker would worship the exact same God on all points.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 26, 2016 9:28:47 GMT -5
And for the theist, how can a person determine if their life is more important than the attacker? Deciding who lives and who dies sounds sort of like god's job description. Depending on the 'the' in 'theist' answer might be found in the word 'attacker' if the attacked is someone else but for the christian the principles aren't about defending ones self but in laying down ones life for others and turning the other cheek when struck. The attacker could very well be the person rushing in to free the damsel in distress from the cult leader, you know, the 'good guy'. The white knight!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 26, 2016 9:30:01 GMT -5
C'mon Bob, give Wally a break. He only says he is a christian cos he couldn't spell atheist! But it's confusing. Who knows the difference between "atheist" and "a theist"? maryhig does.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 26, 2016 9:34:25 GMT -5
And for the theist, how can a person determine if their life is more important than the attacker? Deciding who lives and who dies sounds sort of like god's job description. If in doubt apply deuteronomy. It's unlikely that both theist and attacker would worship the exact same God on all points. The theist may well be the attacker! From what I have read from people who post here, claiming to be theists, the probability that any of them are worshiping an identical god seems startlingly close to 0. Those with the most "I don't know/understand" answers seem to be the closest!
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 28, 2016 19:17:03 GMT -5
Attackers don't discuss in my experience and attackers with guns are going to get the guy with a gun before he knows what hit him - even in those places with stupid laws that allow murdering an unarmed person just because someone 'feels' threatened. You mean like this: A woman is raped and as a result, arms herself with a shotgun. The rapist returns in the middle of the night a week later on Halloween and breaks her door down. She shoots the man ending his career as a sex offender. The fact that he was a registered sex offender provided no protection for this poor woman, until he was finally registered in the sights of her shotgun.You believe that is murder?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 29, 2016 15:51:11 GMT -5
A woman is raped and as a result, arms herself with a shotgun. The rapist returns in the middle of the night a week later on Halloween and breaks her door down. She shoots the man ending his career as a sex offender. The fact that he was a registered sex offender provided no protection for this poor woman, until he was finally registered in the sights of her shotgun.You believe that is murder? Sounds like an order of protection would have been in order along with the registered sex offended status. The fact that the door was broken down seems to be the only salient fact. Whether it is murder or justifiable homicide depends on where you are located (at least in the US).
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Feb 29, 2016 16:00:25 GMT -5
Jesus told Peter to sheath his "sword" .Matthew 26,v,52 & John 18,v,11.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 29, 2016 18:08:51 GMT -5
Jesus told Peter to sheath his "sword" .Matthew 26,v,52 & John 18,v,11. That almost sounds like an euphemism, especially with the word 'sword' in quotes...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2016 18:15:40 GMT -5
Jesus told Peter to sheath his "sword" .Matthew 26,v,52 & John 18,v,11. however he didn't tell him to get rid of it either....
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 29, 2016 18:20:15 GMT -5
Jesus told Peter to sheath his "sword" .Matthew 26,v,52 & John 18,v,11. That almost sounds like an euphemism, especially with the word 'sword' in quotes... And then there was that eunech!
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2016 22:55:15 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2016 23:18:06 GMT -5
piers morgan complained about this on his show...
I would agree that they shouldn't except for that its sets the precedent that a class of people(through no fault of their own)shouldn't own firearms...and before you say it I think murders should be given the death penalty so there is no chance of recidivism hence there would be no class of people on the street trying to own firearms that shouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 1, 2016 0:31:24 GMT -5
piers morgan complained about this on his show...
I would agree that they shouldn't except for that its sets the precedent that a class of people(through no fault of their own)shouldn't own firearms...and before you say it I think murders should be given the death penalty so there is no chance of recidivism hence there would be no class of people on the street trying to own firearms that shouldn't.
I can think of several medical conditions that would be a just cause to restrict the ownership of weapons.
|
|
|
Post by blacksheep on Mar 7, 2016 10:13:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by observing on Mar 7, 2016 13:11:04 GMT -5
Recently read (and confirmed) that in reviewing the political leanings of those misusing weapons, the vast majority have been discovered to hold extreme liberal beliefs, with very rare exception. Do your own homework.
Hmmmmm... Seems to me a simple solution would be to take guns away from all democrats....heh heh.
This home has a short doubled barrel shotgun, loaded, with a load of rock salt in the second position, blank in first. It would be first used like a naval shot across the bow, but to order the offender off the property, the second to disable if not kill (and yes, a load of rock salt can easily enn human life if fired at point blank range.)
It is also easy for a woman to load and shoot, and I have been trained upon its use. Wally, nor those like him, have absolutely no need to fear it ever being used upon them, and I am a believer in God, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
There is a vast difference in offensive and defensive use of either weapons or the martial arts.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 7, 2016 21:11:31 GMT -5
Recently read (and confirmed) that in reviewing the political leanings of those misusing weapons, the vast majority have been discovered to hold extreme liberal beliefs, with very rare exception. Do your own homework. Interesting when the states with the highest homicide rates are Louisiana, Alaska, Alabama, Arizona, Mississippi, South Carolina, New Mexico, Missouri, Arkansas, and Georgia, not the home of extreme liberals. On the other hand, the states with the lowest number of homicides are Nebraska, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Iowa, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Hawaii. (data source)Care to share your data? But not, it seems, of the second commandment mentioned by Jesus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2016 21:16:41 GMT -5
if you'll dig a little deeper you'll see that in those red states with high homicide rates its the urban/metro areas that bring up the total whereas out in the rural areas with higher gun owner percentages the murder rate is low...
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 7, 2016 21:34:30 GMT -5
if you'll dig a little deeper you'll see that in those red states with high homicide rates its the urban/metro areas that bring up the total whereas out in the rural areas with higher gun owner percentages the murder rate is low... If I am not mistaken there are some high population areas in the blue states as well - perhaps even more. All things being equal wouldn't it balance out? It will be interesting to see the data supporting the original claim.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 8, 2016 0:14:24 GMT -5
And for the theist, how can a person determine if their life is more important than the attacker? Deciding who lives and who dies sounds sort of like god's job description. If in doubt apply deuteronomy. It's unlikely that both theist and attacker would worship the exact same God on all points. If you apply Deuteronomy you might end up being the attacker.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 8, 2016 0:22:03 GMT -5
Attackers don't discuss in my experience and attackers with guns are going to get the guy with a gun before he knows what hit him - even in those places with stupid laws that allow murdering an unarmed person just because someone 'feels' threatened. You mean like this: A woman is raped and as a result, arms herself with a shotgun. The rapist returns in the middle of the night a week later on Halloween and breaks her door down. She shoots the man ending his career as a sex offender. The fact that he was a registered sex offender provided no protection for this poor woman, until he was finally registered in the sights of her shotgun.You believe that is murder? Thought-provoking scenario, but: Unfortunately, rapists aren't normally desperate enough to have to break down a door.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 8, 2016 0:24:16 GMT -5
That almost sounds like an euphemism, especially with the word 'sword' in quotes... And then there was that eunech! He obviously missed his "sheath".
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 8, 2016 0:29:59 GMT -5
piers morgan complained about this on his show...
I would agree that they shouldn't except for that its sets the precedent that a class of people(through no fault of their own)shouldn't own firearms...and before you say it I think murders should be given the death penalty so there is no chance of recidivism hence there would be no class of people on the street trying to own firearms that shouldn't.
A condition "through no fault of his own" is not a sane defense. Insanity is also "through no fault of their own".
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 8, 2016 0:37:41 GMT -5
Recently read (and confirmed) that in reviewing the political leanings of those misusing weapons, the vast majority have been discovered to hold extreme liberal beliefs, with very rare exception. Do your own homework. Hmmmmm... Seems to me a simple solution would be to take guns away from all democrats....heh heh. This home has a short doubled barrel shotgun, loaded, with a load of rock salt in the second position, blank in first. It would be first used like a naval shot across the bow, but to order the offender off the property, the second to disable if not kill (and yes, a load of rock salt can easily enn human life if fired at point blank range.) It is also easy for a woman to load and shoot, and I have been trained upon its use. Wally, nor those like him, have absolutely no need to fear it ever being used upon them, and I am a believer in God, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. There is a vast difference in offensive and defensive use of either weapons or the martial arts. Wow. Sounds like an after-meeting conversation in the boon-docks.
|
|