Why are there so many threads about rape on dakka?
It seems all of our culture is collectively obsessed with sexual violence lately. I was with my friend (or rather, "friend") on the weekend, we were making jokes about rape all the time...and then it'd be on tv, rape this and rape that.
There was even a rape reference in Madagascar 3 that made us both piss outselves.
Testify wrote: Why are there so many threads about rape on dakka?
It seems all of our culture is collectively obsessed with sexual violence lately. I was with my friend (or rather, "friend") on the weekend, we were making jokes about rape all the time...and then it'd be on tv, rape this and rape that.
There was even a rape reference in Madagascar 3 that made us both piss ourselves.
To be fair, I just think its because its almost election time in the States, and they have Republicans.
Exactly. Why did they let Jesus hijack the party? Most people are socially moderate, most people are fiscally conservative. I'm conservative here, but in America I'd vote democrat because it's those guys or nuts about Jesus conservatives.
You need some nice normal conservatives, maybe you can steal Boris Johnson he was born in America!
Jesus Christ.
who aside from being a social radical, wasn't very fiscally conservative either. No wonder it doesn't fit well into the Republican platform and just makes them look like gakkers.
If you think that God has planned out everything in your life, isn't that just a recipe for misery? I mean, something happens every single day that sucks right? Even if its trivial.
Completely pissed away what could have been a slam-dunk, own the House and Senate and White House because these candidates keep pandering to the far right AND saying stupid gak that the rest of us don't believe or want. Why are you talking about abortion and rape? Pound home jobs and economy. It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, the current President get's hammered if the unemployment is high and the people will eat it up.
Obviously you missed what he meant. Not that I blame anyone for missing it. Its rather badly explained.
He means that if someone concieves from rape, God has a plan and purpose of some sort. "all things work together for the good of those that serve him" God will use this horrific thing for good.
Even the Holocaust had a purpose. It paved the way for the refounding of Israel as a political state.
That said, this was a very bad thing to say from a political stand point. They should have just stayed quiet.
He means that if someone concieves from rape, God has a plan and purpose of some sort. "all things work together for the good of those that serve him" God will use this horrific thing for good.
Even the Holocaust had a purpose. It paved the way for the refounding of Israel as a political state.
That said, this was a very bad thing to say from a political stand point. They should have just stayed quiet.
This is also coming from the same source that promised the end to wicked people...
Phototoxin wrote: It's clear that he means God creates life and can bring good out of an evil situation.
Man the obsession with bashing republicans, abortion and rape on wargaming fora is scary!
It just shows how people will take any chance they can to take something out of context. And people need to be VERY careful with what they say to avoid this thing.
Like Mitt Rommny being accused of being sexist or something after his reply to the question about equal rights for women. IIRC, he said he had an employee who was married and he offered to let her leave work early so she could get home and cook for her family. Man did people run with that.
If you think that God has planned out everything in your life, isn't that just a recipe for misery? I mean, something happens every single day that sucks right? Even if its trivial.
Missed bus? Gods plan.
Lost wallet? Gods plan.
Gang raped by pirates? Uh-oh..
Im pretty sure he didn't mean God wants you to be raped, I think he just thinks life is a divine gift. Not exactly a view Christians hold a monopoly on, it's still a dumbgak( Edit whoops) thing to say.
kronk wrote:
Why are you talking about abortion and rape? Pound home jobs and economy.
Republicans fer Jebus, which is most of the party now, allow themselves to be goaded into those issues and beaten up. Even a vicious pro-lifer like Paul Ryan has basically called for the party to drop it.
Remember the good old days when Jimmy Carter was the face of American Jesus freaks? Where did that go?
The point abvout Jesus being a radical is not a valid one I'm sorry to say.
Radical either eventually become mainstream or remains radical and dies out.
Christianity became mainstream, and as such is the conservative viewpoint.
Its natural cycle really. Today's radical is tomorrow's conservative.
Thats why older people tend to become conservative. They may have been radical when they were young, but getting older tempers your viewpoint and/or your radical causes are now codified as the new norm.
AustonT wrote: Republicans fer Jebus, which is most of the party now, allow themselves to be goaded into those issues and beaten up. Even a vicious pro-lifer like Paul Ryan has basically called for the party to drop it.
Remember the good old days when Jimmy Carter was the face of American Jesus freaks? Where did that go?
I still believe the majority of Republicans are moderates. It's just that they can either vote for a guy they mostly agree with but who's essentially taking his marching orders on a few key social issues from an imaginary friend, or they can vote for the guy who they largely don't agree with but who's not.
Conservative is a matter of perspective. I dare say, what with our civil rights laws for African Americans and Women, the founding fathers might think us mad indeed. Why we've even done away with... The Landed Aristocracy!
Thats why older people tend to become conservative. They may have been radical when they were young, but getting older tempers your viewpoint and/or your radical causes are now codified as the new norm.
You know, Jesus never really actually had anything bad to say about anyone but the rich people. Strange when you consider Christianity and Republicans.
AustonT wrote: Republicans fer Jebus, which is most of the party now, allow themselves to be goaded into those issues and beaten up. Even a vicious pro-lifer like Paul Ryan has basically called for the party to drop it.
Remember the good old days when Jimmy Carter was the face of American Jesus freaks? Where did that go?
I still believe the majority of Republicans are moderates. It's just that they can either vote for a guy they mostly agree with but who's essentially taking his marching orders on a few key social issues from an imaginary friend, or they can vote for the guy who they largely don't agree with but who's not.
Religion really doesn't have a whole lot to do with the positions Republican evangelicals have taken. Part of the Voter ID/reform attacks by the Rs is aimed at preventing congregational voting; going straight from church to the polls. Which is a Democratic tool. It happens in conservative congregations it's just not as iconic. The difference is that Democrats don't go shovig it in everyone's face and planking it...until forced too.
Think about Barry's first big scandal, it was about his pastor. It's not like Ds are any less religious; they just aren't moronic enough to pretend its the reason behind thier policy.
Thats why older people tend to become conservative. They may have been radical when they were young, but getting older tempers your viewpoint and/or your radical causes are now codified as the new norm.
You know, Jesus never really actually had anything bad to say about anyone but the rich people. Strange when you consider Christianity and Republicans.
He didn't say rich people were bad because they were rich. He said it because their hearts were rotten, and he was referring to very specific people. it wasn't a blanket statement.
AustonT wrote: Republicans fer Jebus, which is most of the party now, allow themselves to be goaded into those issues and beaten up. Even a vicious pro-lifer like Paul Ryan has basically called for the party to drop it.
Remember the good old days when Jimmy Carter was the face of American Jesus freaks? Where did that go?
I still believe the majority of Republicans are moderates. It's just that they can either vote for a guy they mostly agree with but who's essentially taking his marching orders on a few key social issues from an imaginary friend, or they can vote for the guy who they largely don't agree with but who's not.
GOod point.
The Democrats have their reverse of course. Thats why the Green Party is the way to go. Once you vote Green no oher color will do.
Kilkrazy wrote: To be fair to the member, if you believe that every pregnancy is sacred there is no more excuse for abortion after rape than any other case.
Indeed,
The only sticky case is the case where the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. Which is damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Someone is possably going to die and nothing can really change it.
Fortunatly, with medical advancements this case is really rare in developed countries.
Phototoxin wrote: It's clear that he means God creates life and can bring good out of an evil situation.
Man the obsession with bashing republicans, abortion and rape on wargaming fora is scary!
Children of unwanted pregnancies, from any reason, can feel unloved. The idea that God accepts you into his plans even if noone else did is a comfort.
It's a comment on human value, not on a doctrine of allegedly God endorsing rape.
No apology or shuffling was required over this one. The real problem is that to make a political issue of theological one you need to explain the theology, which often make more sense when looked at more deeply than the quickfire responses of a political debate will allow. If unable to explain the wisdom behind a deep comment, don't say anything. Jesus himself knew that one and even when He had something to say often did not do so if He lacked the platform to explain the context.
Phototoxin wrote: It's clear that he means God creates life and can bring good out of an evil situation.
Man the obsession with bashing republicans, abortion and rape on wargaming fora is scary!
It just shows how people will take any chance they can to take something out of context. And people need to be VERY careful with what they say to avoid this thing.
Like Mitt Rommny being accused of being sexist or something after his reply to the question about equal rights for women. IIRC, he said he had an employee who was married and he offered to let her leave work early so she could get home and cook for her family. Man did people run with that.
I mean, damn, nobody ever takes what Democrats or Liberals say out of context and hammer them for it right? You guys might be on to something.
Oh and by the way, Photo, your statement makes it seem like you are against those that bash rape, does that mean you are pro-rape? You obviously mispoke. There it just happened again!
Orlanth wrote: If unable to explain the wisdom behind a deep comment, don't say anything. Jesus himself knew that one and even when He had something to say often did not do so if He lacked the platform to explain the context.
Oh come on Orlanth, it wasn't a "deep" comment, it was a fething stupid comment.
feth me, when you are a politician and you know that every sentence is beamed around the world, you have to be an idiot to make such a statement.
Its only an acceptable comment to you because you are a full on Christian yourself, so you are biased in his favour. You can't possibly tell me that you are being objective when you say he said something deep there. He said something really silly considering the majority of people that are going to see it AREN'T proper happy clapping Christians that study the bible.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and lets say it was a sage and wise thing to say, a mob is only as smart as its stupidest member, and politicians are addressing the mob. You keep gak simple, you don't say things like that, things that anyone who isn't a born again Christian will (perfectly logically) be really fething offended by what you said.
Orlanth wrote: If unable to explain the wisdom behind a deep comment, don't say anything. Jesus himself knew that one and even when He had something to say often did not do so if He lacked the platform to explain the context.
Oh come on Orlanth, it wasn't a "deep" comment, it was a fething stupid comment.
It was both frankly. I can see where he was coming from, and the logic behind it, and its a fairly long journey to get there even with a firm grounding in theological teaching. Its deep theology alright, not standard Sunday school stuff as it involves the penny dropping over apparent contradictions about the nature of God.
feth me, when you are a politician and you know that every sentence is beamed around the world, you have to be an idiot to make such a statement.
This much I agree with. He ought to have been much wiser. With no excuses this time. I am pretty much convinced that everyone in a Republican party leadership would have received a memo by now on political comments on rape and pregnancy in electiontime.
Its only an acceptable comment to you because you are a full on Christian yourself, so you are biased in his favour. You can't possibly tell me that you are being objective when you say he said something deep there. He said something really silly considering the majority of people that are going to see it AREN'T proper happy clapping Christians that study the bible.
I am being objective. Are you? To be fair you do like to go off on one when religious comments are aired.
Theologically what he said made sense, politically it did not. Do you understand the theology of what was said? I can explain if you like. It would take more than a couple of sentences though as it is quite deep. It involves things like the doctrine of predestination and the nature of God's omniscience. To muddy the waters further it's at its core Calvinist teaching, and as I am an Armenian I only partly agree with it anyway, though I do understand it. Concepts which would derail this thread if they were to be properly aired let along a live debate amongst politicians. He even clarified his comment in a way that supported what he said, which still wont do him any good without the full theological explanation.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and lets say it was a sage and wise thing to say, a mob is only as smart as its stupidest member, and politicians are addressing the mob. You keep gak simple, you don't say things like that, things that anyone who isn't a born again Christian will (perfectly logically) be really fething offended by what you said.
You need not give him the benefit of the doubt here, it was a sage thing to think, but not to say. I agree wholeheartedly with your comment here, it was foolish to come up with this answer outside of a theological seminar, but it wasn't alike to the nonsense of similar comments heard recently.
The only way to bring this up politically would be in an article, where you have the time to put the point forward properly and completely, and even that is very risky.
The only thing positive I can say about the comment is that it took balls to say, the man stood up for what he believed when he knew it could hurt him.
AustonT wrote: I can't tell if you and Kronk are serious.
About voting? Yep we have early voting here.
Yes, we have early voting here. Not sure if that's what you're asking about. At my local courthouse annex, I can vote all week from 8-5, Saturday from 7-7, and sunday from 1-5. Next week, I can vote 7-7 all week.
We have a few million people in Houston and the surrounding area. Anything to get the votes in, I suppose.
AustonT wrote: I can't tell if you and Kronk are serious.
About voting? Yep we have early voting here.
Yes, we have early voting here. Not sure if that's what you're asking about. At my local courthouse annex, I can vote all week from 8-5, Saturday from 7-7, and sunday from 1-5. Next week, I can vote 7-7 all week.
We have a few million people in Houston and the surrounding area. Anything to get the votes in, I suppose.
Children of unwanted pregnancies, from any reason, can feel unloved. The idea that God accepts you into his plans even if noone else did is a comfort.
It's a comment on human value, not on a doctrine of allegedly God endorsing rape.
I actually agree with you.
I still think the candidate's response, and clarification, is laughably wrong; but he was very clearly not claiming that God wants people to be raped.
daedalus-templarius wrote: Here's a helpful rape chart, just in case you needed some guidance on the different types of rape from prominent republicans.
Spoiler:
I hate to think what the non-prominent republican politicians are saying.
it would be more classic if it didn't try so hard. I especially like the bonus. 45 some odd years after it was the motto of the Lubin Government. It's cool though I'm sure he thought it up himself...
mattyrm wrote: Exactly. Why did they let Jesus hijack the party? Most people are socially moderate, most people are fiscally conservative. I'm conservative here, but in America I'd vote democrat because it's those guys or nuts about Jesus conservatives.
You need some nice normal conservatives, maybe you can steal Boris Johnson he was born in America!
Socially conservative evangelicals get out and vote like no other group. Rain or shine, no matter what they're out there casting their votes for whoever loves Jesus the most. And what's more, they get out and vote in primaries too, which means if you're a Republican then to even have a chance in the main election you have to have these folk on side.
And the other big factor is that they get a lot of their information from their church groups. Bulletin boards, small seminars, you can say damn near anything because it doesn't get picked up in greater media, so you're not accountable. You can tell these church groups whatever crazy nonsense that'll get them to like you, and they'll turn out in force in the primary and in the main election to vote for you.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote: The point abvout Jesus being a radical is not a valid one I'm sorry to say.
Radical either eventually become mainstream or remains radical and dies out.
Christianity became mainstream, and as such is the conservative viewpoint.
Its natural cycle really. Today's radical is tomorrow's conservative.
Empowering the powerless is still radical, and the exact opposite of the platform of the Republican party.
but thats basically how this works. If you made the graphic with all the crazy racist gak Dems say you'd hear a lot of hemming and hawing to excuse it.
Both parties step on thier dicks now and again, the GOP jus allows themselves to be brought into a discussion about rape and abortion over and over again like fething groundhogs day.
but thats basically how this works. If you made the graphic with all the crazy racist gak Dems say you'd hear a lot of hemming and hawing to excuse it.
Both parties step on thier dicks now and again, the GOP jus allows themselves to be brought into a discussion about rape and abortion over and over again like fething groundhogs day.
Perhaps as an experiment you should remake the chart as you suggest and see what the reaction is.
but thats basically how this works. If you made the graphic with all the crazy racist gak Dems say you'd hear a lot of hemming and hawing to excuse it.
Both parties step on thier dicks now and again, the GOP jus allows themselves to be brought into a discussion about rape and abortion over and over again like fething groundhogs day.
Perhaps you should re-post some of this 'crazy racist gak' you are referring to?
but thats basically how this works. If you made the graphic with all the crazy racist gak Dems say you'd hear a lot of hemming and hawing to excuse it.
Both parties step on thier dicks now and again, the GOP jus allows themselves to be brought into a discussion about rape and abortion over and over again like fething groundhogs day.
Perhaps as an experiment you should remake the chart as you suggest and see what the reaction is.
That will require one of those magic thinky boxes with a mouse, but I'll see what I can do.
Grey Templar wrote: Obviously you missed what he meant. Not that I blame anyone for missing it. Its rather badly explained.
He means that if someone concieves from rape, God has a plan and purpose of some sort. "all things work together for the good of those that serve him" God will use this horrific thing for good.
Un-hunh. Tell that to a woman who's been abstaining from sex because she can't afford a kid... and now she's got one whether she likes it or not. Now she has to pay for one, even though she couldn't. Now she has to take care of one, even though she can't. Now she has to live with a daily reminder of the most horrific epsiode of her life.
And heaven forbid she ask the government for help taking care of the kid; then to the Republicans she becomes some sort of welfare whore, squirting out kids sho she can get mo' gov'ment money!
And if God wanted her to have the kid, there is precident for giving her one without torturing her first.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote: The point abvout Jesus being a radical is not a valid one I'm sorry to say.
Radical either eventually become mainstream or remains radical and dies out.
Christianity became mainstream, and as such is the conservative viewpoint.
Its natural cycle really. Today's radical is tomorrow's conservative.
Thats why older people tend to become conservative. They may have been radical when they were young, but getting older tempers your viewpoint and/or your radical causes are now codified as the new norm.
Actually, even by modern standards Jesus is exremely liberal. He advocates taking care of the poor and gave away free health care. He demonstrated great disdain for wealth, saying "It is easier to pass a camel* through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kindom of heaven.
* Possible translation error. I have heard the word in this sentence that is translated as camel was originally one letter away from the word for rope - a sloppy manuscript, a transcription error, and now we're trying to get a large animal into a place no one would ever even consider taking it...
Kilkrazy wrote: To be fair to the member, if you believe that every pregnancy is sacred there is no more excuse for abortion after rape than any other case.
Indeed,
The only sticky case is the case where the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. Which is damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Someone is possably going to die and nothing can really change it.
Fortunatly, with medical advancements this case is really rare in developed countries.
...and growing more common in America, where deaths during pregnancy are the worst in the developed world and growing worse.
So, if the pregnancy threatens the mother's life and the only way to save her is an abortion, it's a sticky case? Do we save who we can, or do we let both die over an abstract principle? If you seriously have to think hard about it you're not pro-life. At least if the mother survives we've saved ONE life. Killing a woman because someone else might use it as justification for a non-necessary abortion is still murder too.
The idea that it's better to let the mother die than abort the fetus gives lie to the idea that the most die-hard anti-abortionists are pro-life. Fortunately they are rare; most Pro-Life advocates are sane enough to realize there is a major difference.
I can barely make heads or tails of this, and I can't watch the video due to my "honor" of living in '2nd slowest internet speed country in the world' thing so someone care to summarize it?
To make a very short precis, the member says that if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, it is the will of God that she is pregnant, and the baby should be carried to term.
I hope that I am wrong and that there is actually a benevolent, loving God as described by many gentle, kind loving people I have met in life, who will welcome me into paradise after death. I see this version of God as someone who would say "You know what, I made you a sceptic by nature, but that was a mean trick, so now let me give you some honest guidance to become a believer."
If, on the other hand, God is as described by your typical media-reported Republican, he doesn't deserve to be worshipped anyway, and on point of principle I refuse to be bullied by anyone, even if they did happen to create me. I never put up with being bullied by my father, so I don't see why I should accept it from God. If they are that vindictive, then I say say feth 'im, on general principle.
Fifty wrote: I am an atheist - quite a firm one, in fact.
Nobody trusts you. Go on...
I hope that I am wrong and that there is actually a benevolent, loving God as described by many gentle, kind loving people I have met in life, who will welcome me into paradise after death. I see this version of God as someone who would say "You know what, I made you a sceptic by nature, but that was a mean trick, so now let me give you some honest guidance to become a believer."
I don't think athiest was the word you were looking for.
LordofHats wrote: Ignoring other things, no where does the Bible say you go to hell for 'murder.' Few theologies support the position either.
Interesting. I've always heard that "Thou Shalt No Kill" is actually a mistranslation, and the real meaning is "murder", as opposed to "kill". Being that the society in question thought killing was acceptable quite a lot of the time, for example in war, in criminal justice, and killing of animals for food.
LoneLictor wrote: If its God's will that someone raped you, why isn't it God's will that you got an abortion?
I'm a genius.
There is a thing called free will and the woman must make the right choice in order to have salvation.
Its not Gods will that someone was raped.
God was aware that someone would be raped and planned a life for any child arising from that rape. This didn't get in the way of the free will of humans which resulted in the rape, nor does it get in the way of the free will of the victim as to whether there is an abortion.
To God there is no failure of His plan, if the child is carried there is a Plan A involving the life of that person, if the person is aborted God moves to alternative Plan A, never a Plan B. God has the secret advantage in that he knows which Plan A is needed, but He makes plans for all ends, not just the ones that actually come to be.
That is the easiest short answer I can give you. There are several immediate secondary questions to raise from that, which will take a bit longer to explain. Threadjack Y/N?
So God makes a woman get raped, and then if she gets an abortion he sends her to hell?
No people are damned on the life choices in aggregate, not from a solitary act.
That is itself a very limited explanation. If the person has accepted salvation then the abortion is 'sin living with them' for which they are being perpetually forgiven. To understand this think of Divine forgiveness not as an action or instance, but as a continuing effect.
If the person has not accepted salvation and continues to choose not to do so, then Hell is the likely result. The abortion being one line on the rap sheet.
LordofHats wrote: Ignoring other things, no where does the Bible say you go to hell for 'murder.' Few theologies support the position either.
Interesting. I've always heard that "Thou Shalt No Kill" is actually a mistranslation, and the real meaning is "murder", as opposed to "kill". Being that the society in question thought killing was acceptable quite a lot of the time, for example in war, in criminal justice, and killing of animals for food.
This is correct.
there is plenty of justified killing in the Bible. Just look at the word 'smite'.
Jesus called the priests, prostitutes, and money lenders to repentance in relation to their occupations. The only direct comment to soldiers in the Gospels was the command by John the Baptist for soldiers to 'be content with your pay', meaning do not use your power as a soldier to extort from the populace. Soldiers however killed either in battle, policing or executions. If this was a crime against God, something would have been said about it. Jesus spoke to a lot of soldiers in ther Gospels and by and large he had transparently more respect a number of Centurions than for most other leaders in the province.
Interesting. I've always heard that "Thou Shalt No Kill" is actually a mistranslation, and the real meaning is "murder", as opposed to "kill". Being that the society in question thought killing was acceptable quite a lot of the time, for example in war, in criminal justice, and killing of animals for food.
That's the intended meaning of the verse, but violating a commandment is not a "go to hell" card. In almost all Christian theologies there's only one thing that gets you into hell (and no its not being gay ). The Catholic Church also maintains suicide, though not all Catholics would agree with that position.
Interesting. I've always heard that "Thou Shalt No Kill" is actually a mistranslation, and the real meaning is "murder", as opposed to "kill". Being that the society in question thought killing was acceptable quite a lot of the time, for example in war, in criminal justice, and killing of animals for food.
That's the intended meaning of the verse, but violating a commandment is not a "go to hell" card. In almost all Christian theologies there's only one thing that gets you into hell (and no its not being gay ). The Catholic Church also maintains suicide, though not all Catholics would agree with that position.
Actually Suicide is no longer a instant ticket to hell....They changed it after Vatican 2 I believe
All the more reason to recognize sweeping generalizations about a religion that over 1/3 of the world's population subscribes too is probably a horrible idea?
Edited, because I can't appropriately state the idiocy of this guy without it sounding like an anti-religion rant and making the MODs angry.
Sometimes, sometimes, people (politicians especially) should get an award for hitting that above-and -beyond point of stupid where it goes beyond "just scary".
Mannahnin wrote: Off topic posts are being deleted. This is not another pro/anti religion thread. Further off topic posts will result in suspensions.
I would like to see ALL of the off-topic posts deleted. I'm disappointed that my responses were removed, but not the original posts I was replying to, giving the other person the last word (including one spammy reply to something I said that was left while my earlier post was removed).
illuknisaa wrote: There is a thing called free will and the woman must make the right choice in order to have salvation.
Problem there is that you're trying to have free will at the same time you've got people saying that conception, even through rape, is God's will.
So you have people saying young kids should abstain, because they're not ready for a child. So great, they make their choice, don't have sex, have zero chance of making a child, and the result is no chance for God's will to make the girl pregnant.
But then someone gets raped, and then it's God's will that she gets pregnant.
The whole thing is a pudding of stupidity.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orlanth wrote: Its not Gods will that someone was raped.
God was aware that someone would be raped and planned a life for any child arising from that rape. This didn't get in the way of the free will of humans which resulted in the rape, nor does it get in the way of the free will of the victim as to whether there is an abortion.
Seriously, no. God doesn't plan every conception. He doesn't sit there and say 'if that couple choose to have sex tonight I'll bless them with a child but if they don't good on them for not giving in to temptation until they're ready'. That's a muddling of free will and pre-desitination to produce nonsense.
Mannahnin wrote: Off topic posts are being deleted. This is not another pro/anti religion thread. Further off topic posts will result in suspensions.
I would like to see ALL of the off-topic posts deleted. I'm disappointed that my responses were removed, but not the original posts I was replying to, giving the other person the last word (including one spammy reply to something I said that was left while my earlier post was removed).
Jihadin wrote: A flamethrower is not a blunt weapon. Yu don't bash people....you FLAME people with a flamethrower
But if you're out of flame.....what then? do they have bayonet lugs?
Chesty Puller, patron saint of the Marine Corps asked where you mounted the bayonet when he reviewed demonstrations of flamerthrowers for Marine Corps use.
Set the tank down on top a frag with pin pulled with the tank holding the spoon in place. Enemy remove tank, spoon flys off...."Boom and whoosh" tank still under pressure and fuel in it still.
). The Catholic Church also maintains suicide, though not all Catholics would agree with that position.
