Check and see if he is still wearing his armadillo helmet first though.
We could always go down the road the Brits have taken, take away guns and put video cameras on every street corner. Or break out Tom Cruise and have him stop terrorism before it happens. Also by the way have you guys ever read the responses on prison planet? And you thought i trolled hard......
Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns. By definition, outlaws or criminals do not obey the law.
criminals dont have gun licenses!?!?!?!
I know, shocking isn't it?
Of course they didn't have gun licenses. There criminals after all.
This probably helps you feel a bit better I guess.
No phazers on stun though ...
Outlawing guns is against the 2nd amendment (although outlawing them is great idea and an amendment that should be repealed since it's not helpful). But what's really wrong is saying that some guns should be outlawed simply because they're effective at killing people.
Has anyone actually read the 2nd amendment? The whole point is for people to have guns and organize to go kill people! The only guns that should be legal are the ones exclusively designed for effective people killing. So yeah...the whole gun license/control thing is ridiculous. Either say guns are for killing people and tell people to use them to stand up against the government or say that American's aren't that into revolting against the government with guns and give them up.
More back to the topic of the original post...the government's really got to get off this terrorist swing--it's really ridiculous at this point when the U.S. actually gets hit with less terrorist attacks than lots of other Western nations.
I don't know if you are kidding. I ain't american and I know enough to know that that is a very odd take on your own history.
Indeed, seeing as who you refer to as God(silly as you don't mention which god) came from the middle east, wouldn't the constitution more accurately reflect the kind of society over there?
You are aware that words are written by men and it not matter who writes them, they are just words right?
I have a feeling you would describe yourself as a christain and yet you are suggesting that your own constitution is putting words in "gods" mouth which he would be mightily pissed off at. I believe the bible(whichever version you prefer) and only the bible can be taken as the word(s) of god, yes?
So surely you cannot stand by such a thing if they are doing such a heinous act?
So why all that crap about natural laws?
No god has made any laws nor are there any natural ones as that is entirely on the species you are talking about(other animals do not follow the rules our species does) and also the culture that that section of our species originates from.
The way your post sounded, it was as if you actually did indeed believe in a god who created the world and the rules by which to live in.
Personally you sound like a bit of a red neck lunatic that seem to frequent internet forums.
Sorry, a hill billy lunatic.
The problem with labelling something as God, is that it is never the same one as everyone else is talking about.
I think you know what I mean when I insult you as such. Anyone who would claim that other people are controlled by imaginary beings that they do not believe in deserves to be insulted.
Wow, that back and forth literally went nowhere. I think what oldmangamer is trying to is that eh constitution is a layout of "fundamental" rights that all people have (Life, Liberty, High speed access to porno, etc). Not that God literally said "Write this *** down word for word or no heaven for you". But that these are inalienable rights and as so apply to all of gods creatures. They believe that the right to arm yourself and form a militia is fundamental right that all people should have. So let get away from God as an actual person and shift that to a bit more of an abstract idea about compassion ( And because i don't want to have to talk about the big bang and sublimation of planets...)
There are no such things as rights, nothing written or unwritten.
That is only done out of necessity that personal gain can come easier out of group gain.
Not quite what I believe in but a fact that it is only because we stand to gain by doing something that humans do, nothing selfless.
If people who claimed humans have rights would apply that belief then it might have credibility but rarely do we do that.
God has no part in anything humans do, even if they use it as a cover.
"There are no such things as rights, nothing written or unwritten. " - Well with the advent of society this Kafkaesque notion of the individual in a sea of chaos doesn't really apply in today's structure (unless your a hermit, or the Batman)
"That is only done out of necessity that personal gain can come easier out of group gain. Not quite what I believe in but a fact that it is only because we stand to gain by doing something that humans do, nothing selfless. " - Now you do raise an interesting point here, is goodwill in our nature or is goodwill necessary for the good of the group? Or has social evolution moved to the point where we are no longer driven by the need to dominate and survive (Personally i think that when you become self aware you can more easily reciprocate with the well being of others.
"If people who claimed humans have rights would apply that belief then it might have credibility but rarely do we do that. God has no part in anything humans do, even if they use it as a cover. " - No problems here this makes sense.
English is not your native tongue is it?
Yes, it is. Why would you not think so?
Also, rights are an illusion. We only have them when others allow it, they do not actually exist. There is nothing that states what they are and they can easily be taken away as they are given unless you have force.
A lot of people forget that humans are just animals, we create great myths about how advanced we are but really we ain't. It does not take much to remove the mask we put on each day.
The reason I posted following what oldmangamer wrote was that it is complete and utter rubbish even if he was just trying to explain how he understands it was created.
It was almost like he was stating facts when clearly he was not.
You mean an imaginary being that you can claim about whatever you want, yeah, that makes complete sense that does.
Christ, you are one step away from being a damn voodoo worshipper like the catholics. Before you know it you are part of a zombie cult.
yet that is who you claim the writers of the american consitution were doing, following the word of the god who is the head of a voodoo cult.
God and Neitsche asked me to close this ...
When a debate can't be resolved without insults then it is no longer healthy, or a debate per se.