• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

In case you run across the first half of the cartoon, here is your answer

 
 
 
Maybe God was in the school, but helpless to intervene?

And the LORD was with Judah, the principal, and he took possession of the campus, but he could not drive out the gunman of the plain because he had a trench coat.
 
Everything that happens is good because it's part of The Plan. Unless it's not good. Then it's humanity's fault--or Satan's. But ultimately humanity's because it isn't resisting Satan.

I imagine that if an all-everything entity wanted to be in a certain place at a certain time it wouldn't be restricted by the concept of the separation of church and state. Or is God pouting like a 6 year old. "Fine then, I won't eat any birthday cake." Or something.
 
The Sage of Main Street said:
AthenaAwakened said:
View attachment 4369
Click to expand...
Why didn't the blowhard concealed-carry cowards intervene. The Second Amendment's "security of a free state" obligates those who bear arms to intervene in a violent attack on society.
Click to expand...
With rights come responsibility, but contrary to popular opinion, I do not believe we have an obligation to vote but rather a choice to vote; after all, it's not compulsory, but should we decide to exercise our right, let us do so responsibly. I have a right to bear arms, just as I have a right to vote, but neither am I required to vote or bear arms, but if I choose to do either, I should do so responsibly.

Jury duty, on the other hand, I am obliged to serve when called upon, and though I don't have the right to wrongly evade such duty, I should fulfill my duty responsibly.

On what grounds do you defend this assertion of yours that we are encumbered with this obligation to which you speak?
 
ideologyhunter said:
So would Jesus go concealed-and-carry? Would he take care of the bad guys? I'd like to see that.
Click to expand...

Concealed? I don't think so!

picture_10_a_l_0.jpg
 
fast said:
With rights come responsibility, but contrary to popular opinion, I do not believe we have an obligation to vote but rather a choice to vote; after all, it's not compulsory, but should we decide to exercise our right, let us do so responsibly. I have a right to bear arms, just as I have a right to vote, but neither am I required to vote or bear arms, but if I choose to do either, I should do so responsibly.

Jury duty, on the other hand, I am obliged to serve when called upon, and though I don't have the right to wrongly evade such duty, I should fulfill my duty responsibly.

On what grounds do you defend this assertion of yours that we are encumbered with this obligation to which you speak?
Click to expand...

Really, what grounds, really? Since the perp had a gun you died about three sentences ago.
 
fromderinside said:
fast said:
With rights come responsibility, but contrary to popular opinion, I do not believe we have an obligation to vote but rather a choice to vote; after all, it's not compulsory, but should we decide to exercise our right, let us do so responsibly. I have a right to bear arms, just as I have a right to vote, but neither am I required to vote or bear arms, but if I choose to do either, I should do so responsibly.

Jury duty, on the other hand, I am obliged to serve when called upon, and though I don't have the right to wrongly evade such duty, I should fulfill my duty responsibly.

On what grounds do you defend this assertion of yours that we are encumbered with this obligation to which you speak?
Click to expand...

Really, what grounds, really? Since the perp had a gun you died about three sentences ago.
Click to expand...
Not every instance of being able to act is an instance of having an obligation to do so. He's making the blanket assertion that because one has the right to carry, then anyone exercising that right carries with them the civic duty to intervene. Some cases, perhaps, but from what part of the ass do we grab this notion that I am under a moral obligation to step-in? I thought you guys were terrified of that thing called risk, especially when hurled in the direction of others.
 
If having a gun carries an obligation to stop illegal shooters with that gun, does that not mean the gunman has an obligation to shoot himself?

But what if he's Navy trained and a theist?
We were trained that the use of a gun is deadly force, so even if our movie heroes were shooting to disarm and shooting to wound, we considered any use of a gun to be attempting to take a life. Thus the qualifiers before we could apply deadly force. And many religions frown on suicide. They also frown on murder, usually, but just about every religion makes exceptions for those people who just gotta die.

So shooting himself would be a suicide attempt, by his training and theology.

Can our 1st and 2nd Amendment obligate someone into the sin of suicide?
 
Actually, God is allowed in school. It will be discussed in history class, English lit., any religious classes, social studies, geography and just about any other class...except science and biology. Because, if the answer is "God did it" everyone would get an "A".
 
Good point. "God's not allowed in school" is the mantra. The truth is that the administration and teachers of public schools are (rightly) no longer allowed to use their positions as bully pulpits to enforce their religious beliefs on the children. And of course fairy tales are no longer substitutes for science.
 
And as the bumper sticker says, as long as they give tests in math classes, there will be prayer in school.
 
So, if I take my kids to school in iron chariots, they should be very well protected from the Christian god. ;)
 
Maybe we could sell Iron Chariot keychains? Engraved with the verse number, selling point being that even if 'god is with the teacher/lawyer/congressperson,' they'll be unable to defeat you, because you've got an Iron Chariot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom