blackbird

Everyone should have the right to make a cake or not make a cake for whomever they wish. Goddess, you don't understand the bible. It's the same as doctor-assisted suicide or abortion. You can't ask someone who disagrees with those things on religious grounds to help you perform doctor-assisted suicide or abortion on someone. That makes the person helping complicit.

Disagreeing with some practice or belief is not "reviling'. Calling people who disagree "revilers" is just a way to shut down debate or disagreement, much like liberals who call anyone who disagrees with M103 "racists" or bigots.

Yes. The RC church has it's relics which are highly venerated. A lot of money has been made by the Vatican over the centuries with relics and fake claims.

The word religious can mean pursuing something with a kind of fervour or deep conviction even if it doesn't fit in with one of the world's recognized religions. Trudeau for example is very religious about his feminism and fake defence of abortion rights by cutting off funding for summer students. He is quite religious in a perverse way. Another example might be the leaders of Communist revolutions. Chairman Mao or Castro pursued their ideology in a religious fervour. To them it was a kind of religion.

This will be a good topic for you to get your digs in and try to stir up a bit of dung.

There is no fake Christianity involved. Believers are called to follow the Bible which expressly condemns homosexuality. It's as simple as that. It's wrong to try to force people to do something against their conscience.

The Rebel Media has sent a investigative journalist and cameraman with security to South Africa to put together a documentary on this. Apparently white farmers have been attacked by black armed militias.

I think some politicians are out of touch with many American citizens. I believe most Americans want to see some sort of gun control and restrictions on assault weapons while a minority are supporting the NRA tough gun rights stand. Big money is involved in funding pro NRA politicians.

You forget the U.S. is not a tiny banana republic on an island. The U.S. is supposed to be a leader of the free world and a model of what the rest of the world should strive for.

Yes, but the U.S. is still in a league of it's own. I think there were over 14,000 gun-related deaths around 2015 and over 20,000 injured. A 30 year low doesn't have much meaning when you're in those numbers.

That's true but it's too bad authorities and gun sellers didn't stop the long list of other killers from buying military style guns over the past several years.

I just read an article about a man in Texas who was shot twice in a church by a police officer, after he stopped a shooter and took the gun away. This happened the same day as the Florida school massacre two weeks ago. Fortunately nobody was killed at this church. Several people charged a man with a handgun and this man helped by taking the handgun away from him. Then a police officer arrived and told him to drop the gun. He was bending over to put it down because he thought if he dropped it, it would go off. The officer shot him twice. He has a blood clot in one lung but is recovering in a hospital. He will be taking legal action and wants compensation from the police department. This proves how dangerous it would be for even some teachers to be armed with a gun. The police are taught to shoot first and not take any chances. Ask questions after.

Not every issue. He is wrong about guns and going in unarmed, but he is correct about building a wall and keeping bad characters out of the U.S. He is correct about a lot of things.

Did you see Trump say he would go into a school (to confront a shooter) even if he (Trump) had no gun! Sounds very brave, but who would actually do that and why? Easy to say when you don't have to do it. Most people have a desire for self-preservation.

Trump sounded like he might be changing his mind a tiny bit and maybe not accepting everything the NRA says. All Trump might have to do is issue one of his Executive Orders instructing the FBI, police departments, and Military to begin collecting all automatic firearms and illegal handguns. That would be a good way to start. Fight about the details afterward.

With the billions of dollars worth of cocaine being brought into the states every year from Mexico and south America, the swat teams are getting lots of practice dealing with criminals with guns. Adding collecting automatic military guns and illegal handguns to their confiscation duties would not be much extra work or expense. Just think of the new work that would be created for unemployed ex military folks.

Obviously you're not aware the police in cities like Chicago already go into houses with swat teams, shields, tear gas, and knock doors down and go in armed with automatic military style weapons. It's the war on drugs. Is going on all the time. They are very professional and experienced at it. Once in a while they get shot. Watched it on Netflix. So confiscating guns would be nothing new. They already do those kinds of raids every day and night all over the place. They are training constantly. Anybody foolish enough to try to resist wouldn't stand a chance and will be taken away in a hearse.

Probably a good place to start. All guns possessed illegally should be confiscated of course. I'm not sure how authorities go about it. But that's just the first step.

CNN was questioning a higher rank officer in a police department in Florida about why nothing was done when clear information came to light about the shooter. He didn't seem too anxious to take responsibility for anything himself. Perhaps passing the buck to some extent. I guess that is what they will all do, pass the buck. Too many people are pinning their hopes on filtering out the bad guys before any shooting happens. I think they need to filter out the guns, especially the military type guns. So many lives could probably be saved by that one step alone.

Maybe because of all the illegal handguns smuggled into Canada from the U.S. and obtained by criminals and gang members, would be a good guess. I doubt the UK has many firearms per capita compared with Canada. But we're deviating. The problem we're trying to discuss is all the shootings in the U.S. Do you really think all the guns and free for all killing is worth having when some gun control and strict screening would likely still allow rational people to have some guns?

People can work on changing the system and politicians but that must be considered a very long-term goal. In the meantime, better prepare for continuation of around 14,000 gun deaths a year and over 20,000 injuries, even with no war. That will continue as a fact of life. In the meantime, Canada can continue to confiscate any illegal firearms being brought across the border and try to confiscate illegal handguns in Canada.

I think the US has about 30 times the rate of gun deaths of the UK. The countries you point out as being bad, Russia, Mexico, and Brazil are bad choices because they in drug wars or in some anarchy and not models of anything. Again you lose on that comparison.

Isn't there a significant number of teachers that are assaulted in schools? Add guns to the mix will not work well.

Didn't somebody post on here the elimination of a huge number of guns in Australia and a corresponding drop in gun killings or am I just imagining seeing it? They could start by collecting all automatic weapons from society and banning them completely. I'm sure that would make a difference. But first they are going to have to elect a congress that is on side. That will be a tall order.

Mass shooters would just shoot any adults they see first and then kill everyone else. Shooters don't give notice they are coming for you. Arming teachers or security guards is unlikely to be much help. Who would take a job as an armed security guard at a school? The prevalence and easy availability of assault weapons and hand guns is the biggest issue. Unless that changes, the shooting statistics will probably remain high.