blackbird

Every single person is born with an evil nature or sinful nature that opposes God. This is a result of the fall of Adam and Eve, our first parents, who were representative of the human race. It is only by God's grace that some have been redeemed from the destiny of most of the world. But we know there are some who demonstrate their evil nature is far worse than most others. We observe that by the things going on in the world. However, non of us deserve heaven unless we are redeemed and born again by faith in Jesus Christ. Again this is a gift of God, not by works or our own self efforts as most religions teach. That is the most amazing thing; that God would give eternal life to those who believe in Christ as Lord and Savior.

There is no science proving the universe came about by a "big bang" and the theory of evolution has been well refuted. The big bang and theory of evolution are just theories, unproven. People who say science shows how the universe came about actually demonstrate they don't know anything about it. I suspect many scientists, if they are being honest, will admit there is no science on it. Science involves things that are observable or proven by the scientific method. There was nobody around to observe the so-called big bang or evolution, so there is no science on it. So atheism is a false belief system.

I don't think the federal government will act itself or in the immediate future on the law because it fears Quebec separatists will call for a referendum on sovereignty. More likely it will wait until other groups take it to court and when it gets to Supreme Court, the federal government could intervene, but that might not even be possible because Quebec could use the withstanding clause, which allows Quebec to ignore the Charter of Rights. It may depend on whether the Supreme Court over-rules the use of the notwithstanding clause. But doing that could trigger a move to separate.

One needs to be careful how the word "faith" is used. Some use it as if it is a blind belief in something. Biblical faith is not a blind faith. It is based on clear evidence of God and his actions as recorded in the Bible. Belief in God is also based on observable evidence of the universe around us. That evidence points to the necessity for an infinitely powerful intelligent designer/Creator, whom we call God. Faith in what the Bible says is a gift of God and one cannot believe it unless God gives him this gift of faith. One article describes faith this way: quote Where does faith come from? Faith is not something we conjure up on our own, nor is it something we are born with, nor is faith a result of diligence in study or pursuit of the spiritual. Ephesians 2:8-9 makes it clear that faith is a gift from God, not because we deserve it, have earned it, or are worthy to have it. It is not from ourselves; it is from God. It is not obtained by our power or our free will. Faith is simply given to us by God, along with His grace and mercy, according to His holy plan and purpose, and because of that, He gets all the glory. Why have faith? God designed a way to distinguish between those who belong to Him and those who don’t, and it is called faith. Very simply, we need faith to please God. God tells us that it pleases Him that we believe in Him even though we cannot see Him. A key part of Hebrews 11:6 tells us that “he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” This is not to say that we have faith in God just to get something from Him. However, God loves to bless those who are obedient and faithful. We see a perfect example of this in Luke 7:50. Jesus is engaged in dialogue with a sinful woman when He gives us a glimpse of why faith is so rewarding. “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” The woman believed in Jesus Christ by faith, and He rewarded her for it. Finally, faith is what sustains us to the end, knowing that by faith we will be in heaven with God for all eternity. “Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls” (1 Peter 1:8-9). Examples of faith. Hebrews chapter 11 is known as the “faith chapter” because in it great deeds of faith are described. By faith Abel offered a pleasing sacrifice to the Lord (v. 4); by faith Noah prepared the ark in a time when rain was unknown (v. 7); by faith Abraham left his home and obeyed God’s command to go he knew not where, then willingly offered up his promised son (vv. 8-10, 17); by faith Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt (vv. 23-29); by faith Rahab received the spies of Israel and saved her life (v. 31). Many more heroes of the faith are mentioned “who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies” (vv. 33-34). Clearly, the existence of faith is demonstrated by action. According to the Bible, faith is essential to Christianity. Without demonstrating faith and trust in God, we have no place with Him. Most people have a vague, disjointed notion of who God is but lack the reverence necessary for His exalted position in their lives. These people lack the true faith needed to have an eternal relationship with the God who loves them. True faith goes beyond a simple acknowledgement of God’s existence (James 2:19) to a life-changing reliance on who God is, as revealed in the Bible. Faith can falter at times, but, because it is the gift of God, given to His children, He provides times of trial and testing in order to prove that our faith is real and to sharpen and strengthen it. This is why James tells us to consider it “pure joy” when we fall into trials, because the testing of our faith produces perseverance and matures us, providing the evidence that our faith is real (James 1:2–4). unquote What does the Bible say about faith? | GotQuestions.org

We all know the Bible is not a science book and never claimed to be. But it is a mistake to use the word science as if it is the infallible truth on every matter to do with creation or the universe. To many people the word science is their religion and if anyone says something and claims it is the science, they automatically accept it as the gospel truth. They claim anything given the title of science is the absolute truth whether they have any proof or not. When you use the word "evolution" you should always remember to add the words "theory of evolution". A theory is just that, a theory. It is Darwin's speculation and it is not supported by "observable evidence, mathematics, and genetics" as you claim. You make that statement as if someone told you as one would make a statement of dogma of a false religion. If you really want to learn some facts about the theory, you can go to the website creation.com and search for the book "Refuting Evolution" written by Johathan Sarfati, Ph.D. It is available to read online at that website. There is a vast difference between truth and falsehood. There are many false religions in the world. But you should not make the mistake of thinking that proves there is no absolute truth to be known about God, the universe, creation, our origins, and our future in this life and after. You are correct in saying faith does not change, but only in the sense that if it is faith in the truth, that does not change. It is important to understand that the Bible is not pretending to be a science book. It is a book men wrote under the inspiration of God. God who created the universe did not leave us with a blank page but gave us his revelation of how the universe came into existence, what the purpose of man's being here is, what the problem with man is, and what the solution is, and what the future is. Science is not a religion and should not be put on a pedestal as a kind of infallible guide on par with the Bible. Science is a study of knowledge. God gave man his brain and ability to study the creation around him. God created everything and the creation operates on the principles which God created. Therefore science is just a gift from God. It should not be made a god or used as a excuse to try to exclude God from the picture. God, the Bible, and the discipline of science all work together, but one does not nullify the other. Many of the greatest scientists that ever lived believed in God. They did not try to pretend there was no God. They understood and accepted that man is not superior to God and that we are created beings subject to our Creator.

What exactly does "impose beliefs on you mean"? Pro theory of evolution people teach evolution in the public school system as ordered by the government's departments of education. Isn't that what imposing means. If anyone expresses an opinion contrary to your belief, is that "imposing" something on you? Everyone is entitle to their views and freedom of expression. I have no problem listening to views contrary to mine and don't consider it an imposition or imposing something on me. So I'm not exactly sure what imposing beliefs on someone means. I have often heard that phrase used by people who try to silence others from speaking. Biblical faith is not a blind faith and it is not the opposite of science. Faith in something in the Bible does not contradict true science. Some of science today is falsely called science, but it is more of dogma that is clothed under the banner of science. Examples of unproven theories that are claimed as science are the theory of evolution and the big bang theory. Some of the world's greatest scientists who lived several centuries ago believed in God and made some of the greatest discoveries in history. Just because a scientist denies the truth of creation by God today does not mean what he is saying is based on science. There is no science that disproves the Genesis account of creation and real science is not trying to disprove the reality of God and creation. So what this means is genuine science is not in opposition to biblical faith or the Bible. They can both exist together. There are many scientists who believe in God, the Bible, and still believe in science although they may not believe everything that is claimed under the banner of science by other scientists. The theory of evolution is not based on the scientific method and has never been proven. There are scientists who reject the theory of evolution although they are in the minority. Truth is not determined by a majority and never will be. The majority believed in a number of things in history that were later proven to be false.

With all due respect, I think you have not really addressed anything I said in my original post. There are many people who believe in false religion or hold erroneous religious and atheist views. Whether they would be convinced of anything on these forums I don't know. Only God can change a person's mind and heart. God revealed the absolute truth in his revelation we call the Bible; in English, the King James Version.

What would Jesus do if he were the President in America today? Many gun advocates say they are Christians and attend many different churches in America. Lots of these people are opposed to abortion because they (rightly) believe abortion is killing a human child. What happens to their mind when it comes to guns? 97% of killings in America are illegal, either homicide or suicide. Only 1.2 % are legal shootings, mainly by police doing their lawful duties. So when it comes to gun ownership, possession or purchase, how does that fit into the picture of God's commandment "thou shalt not kill" and the sanctity of human life? I think the answer is clear. If those 400 thousand guns (handguns, assault rifles, etc.) were not out there, it would be impossible for all the shootings going on every day to take place. That is the answer. But we also remember the President does not have power to simply eliminate guns. It really boils down to the people, ordinary individual Americans. So what they believe and how they vote has a direct impact on this whole issue.

A lot of Americans, mainly Republicans and deranged individuals with a grievance of some kind, don't want to give up the right to shoot American kids, old people, and anybody who gets in the way of their mass shootings every couple days. Very mixed up country. There is no right to own guns that are used 97% of the time to kill innocent people or commit suicide.

Do you really believe the universe and man came into existence from nothing without an intelligent designer- Creator? There is a simple principle of science that you use to help understand things. It is the principle of cause and effect. There is no effect without a cause. Everything that exists had a beginning and a cause.

Author Posted Monday at 11:20 AM (edited) You're not thinking rationally at all. Just firing from the hip so to speak like the wild west gun slingers in the cowboy movies. Wake up! Something like 20,000 innocent Americans are killed per year by guns and tens of thousand more wounded. The rare case where someone is able to defend themselves with a gun in no way justifies allowing 20,000 innocent people to be murdered every year. That is the problem in a nutshell. Guns need to be removed from most American hands and only made available to hunters and such under strict controls and conditions. The present system is not working and you should be concerned about the enormous senseless loss of life. The chart at this website shows the actual numbers: Firearm Deaths, All Ages: 1999-2016 Suicides Homicides Unintentional Legal Intervention Undetermined Intent Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year* % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year Total 1999 16,599 57.5% 10,828 37.5% 824 2.9% 299 1.0% 324 1.1% 28,874 2000 16,586 57.9% 10,801 37.7% 776 2.8% 270 0.9% 230 0.8% 28,663 2001 16,869 57.0% 11,348 38.4% 802 2.7% 323 1.1% 231 0.8% 29,573 2002 17,108 56.6% 11,829 39.1% 762 2.5% 300 1.0% 243 0.8% 30,242 2003 16,907 56.1% 11,920 39.6% 730 2.4% 347 1.2% 232 0.8% 30,136 2004 16,750 56.6% 11,624 39.3% 649 2.2% 311 1.1% 235 0.8% 29,569 2005 17,002 55.4% 12,352 40.2% 789 2.6% 330 1.1% 221 0.7% 30,694 2006 16,883 54.6% 12,791 41.4% 642 2.1% 360 1.2% 220 0.7% 30,896 2007 17,352 55.6% 12,632 40.5% 613 2.0% 351 1.1% 276 0.9% 31,224 2008 18,223 57.7% 12,179 38.5% 592 1.9% 326 1.0% 273 0.9% 31,593 2009 18,735 59.8% 11,493 36.7% 554 1.8% 333 1.1% 232 0.7% 31,347 2010 19,392 61.2% 11,078 35.0% 606 1.9% 344 1.1% 252 0.8% 31,672 2011 19,990 62.0% 11,068 34.2% 591 1.8% 454 1.4% 248 0.8% 32,351 2012 20,666 61.6% 11,622 34.6% 548 1.6% 471 1.4% 256 0.8% 33,563 2013 21,175 63.0% 11,208 32.8% 505 1.5% 467 1.4% 281 0.8% 33,636 2014 21,386 63.7% 11,008 32.6% 461 1.4% 464 1.4% 275 0.8% 33,594 2015 22,018 60.7% 12,979 35.8% 489 1.3% 484 1.3% 282 0.8% 36,252 2016 22,938 59.3% 14,415 37.3% 495 1.3% 510 1.3% 300 0.8% 38,658 Total 336,579 58.8% 213,175 37.2% 11,428 2.0% 6,744 1.2% 4,611 0.8% 572,537 Average Per Year 18,699 11,843 635 375 256 31,808 I got the figure of 900 millions guns from some website but it is likely incorrect. Another website says 339 million guns are owned by Americans. That sounds more accurate. But that is still a massive number of guns. The population is only 335 million. The problem is a gun mentality. It is the wild west continuing. The number of people murdered every years is staggering. 97% of people murdered every year are criminal in nature and suicide. Only 1.2% of the deaths are legal intervention. So the gun culture is illegally killing approximately 20,000 Americans per year illegally. Nobody in their right mind could justify that under some kind "right to bear arms". That is total and complete insanity to my way of thinking. Anybody who believes that is ok needs to get counselling help. America is the only country in the world with that number of guns per capita population. Sadly I don't see it changing. Large numbers of people will continue to shoot other Americans. America is a sick society. It is time to admit it. US Gun Deaths by Year - Gun Control - ProCon.org

I knew a young man who had a good job in the telephone company with all the benefits and good pay. He left it all and moved to Las Vegas, Nevada because he believed he should be able to carry a hand gun to protect himself. Sad.

The gun issue in the U.S. should be a non-partisan issue. People should not be embracing more guns or defending all the shootings and massive prevalence of guns in society simply because they are conservative or Republican or believe in freedom. This is simply a common sense issue of public safety that effects everyone. Nobody is invincible from bullets and guns.

The stats show 97% of gun deaths are by suicide or illegal homicide/murder. Only 1.2% of gun deaths are what you could say are legal. That tells me there is a huge problem with all the guns available.

You're not thinking rationally at all. Just firing from the hip so to speak like the wild west gun slingers in the cowboy movies. Wake up! Something like 20,000 innocent Americans are killed per year by guns and tens of thousand more wounded. The rare case where someone is able to defend themselves with a gun in no way justifies allowing 20,000 innocent people to be murdered every year. That is the problem in a nutshell. Guns need to be removed from most American hands and only made available to hunters and such under strict controls and conditions. The present system is not working and you should be concerned about the enormous senseless loss of life. The chart at this website shows the actual numbers: Firearm Deaths, All Ages: 1999-2016 Suicides Homicides Unintentional Legal Intervention Undetermined Intent Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year* % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year % of Total Firearm Deaths for Year Total 1999 16,599 57.5% 10,828 37.5% 824 2.9% 299 1.0% 324 1.1% 28,874 2000 16,586 57.9% 10,801 37.7% 776 2.8% 270 0.9% 230 0.8% 28,663 2001 16,869 57.0% 11,348 38.4% 802 2.7% 323 1.1% 231 0.8% 29,573 2002 17,108 56.6% 11,829 39.1% 762 2.5% 300 1.0% 243 0.8% 30,242 2003 16,907 56.1% 11,920 39.6% 730 2.4% 347 1.2% 232 0.8% 30,136 2004 16,750 56.6% 11,624 39.3% 649 2.2% 311 1.1% 235 0.8% 29,569 2005 17,002 55.4% 12,352 40.2% 789 2.6% 330 1.1% 221 0.7% 30,694 2006 16,883 54.6% 12,791 41.4% 642 2.1% 360 1.2% 220 0.7% 30,896 2007 17,352 55.6% 12,632 40.5% 613 2.0% 351 1.1% 276 0.9% 31,224 2008 18,223 57.7% 12,179 38.5% 592 1.9% 326 1.0% 273 0.9% 31,593 2009 18,735 59.8% 11,493 36.7% 554 1.8% 333 1.1% 232 0.7% 31,347 2010 19,392 61.2% 11,078 35.0% 606 1.9% 344 1.1% 252 0.8% 31,672 2011 19,990 62.0% 11,068 34.2% 591 1.8% 454 1.4% 248 0.8% 32,351 2012 20,666 61.6% 11,622 34.6% 548 1.6% 471 1.4% 256 0.8% 33,563 2013 21,175 63.0% 11,208 32.8% 505 1.5% 467 1.4% 281 0.8% 33,636 2014 21,386 63.7% 11,008 32.6% 461 1.4% 464 1.4% 275 0.8% 33,594 2015 22,018 60.7% 12,979 35.8% 489 1.3% 484 1.3% 282 0.8% 36,252 2016 22,938 59.3% 14,415 37.3% 495 1.3% 510 1.3% 300 0.8% 38,658 Total 336,579 58.8% 213,175 37.2% 11,428 2.0% 6,744 1.2% 4,611 0.8% 572,537 Average Per Year 18,699 11,843 635 375 256 31,808 US Gun Deaths by Year - Gun Control - ProCon.org

It's pointless to debate with people who think more guns is the answer. By the way there were 13 more mass shootings on this last Memorial Day weekend in the U.S. The NRA and gun advocates claim that a good guy with a gun is the solution is a sick excuse and pure insanity. In Uvalde Texas, where one guy with an AR-15 killed 19 children and 2 school teachers, there were about 19 "good" guys with guns who were prevented by their leading officer from going into the classroom to stop the shooter for around an hour. So much for good guys with guns. Your example of a woman with a gun shooting a bad guy with a gun is a very rare situation and does not in any way justify 337 million Americans having 900 million guns. It is pure nonsense. There is no human right to owning or possessing guns. That is pure fiction.

Your thinking that justice means hatred shows your complete lack of understanding of what justice means. Punishing a child for bad behavior is similar to the justice system punishing a criminal for his crime. It is not done because of hatred. That is a bizarre way of looking at justice. What do you do with a criminal who murdered someone for example? Do you reward him with a comfortable number of years in rehabilitation as if he needs health care for sickness? No, that is not what justice means. The purpose of punishment has nothing to do with hate or hatred. It's purpose is simply to provide justice for the victims, for society, and for the accused who rightfully must pay for his crimes somehow. It is exactly the same reason you must pay a fine when you get a speeding ticket or break the traffic laws in some way. It has absolutely nothing to do with hatred. Of course if a criminal can be rehabilitated at the same time he is paying for his crimes, that would be a good thing and would help protect society from having another repeat offender. But the main purpose of sentences are punishment, protection of society, and rehabilitation if that is possible at the same time.

There is a difference between vengeance and justice. You don't seem to understand that. You talk as if someone convicted of a crime should not be punished. This is classic liberalism. They believe the offender is just a misguided individual who needs rehabilitation. The Supreme Courts is totally misguided and are nothing more than a bunch of liberals, probably because they were appointed by liberals. They somehow think a convicted murderer should have the same rights as everyone else. They completely reject the principle that justice requires punishment in proportion to the seriousness of the offence. Liberals and left long ago abandoned capital punishment as a form of punishment under the misguided view that nobody should receive capital punishment, that it somehow violates their human rights even though they murdered other people. Yet they are ok with killing the unborn and giving medical assistance in dying, even to the mentally ill. Their thinking is totally warped. I have never heard of a conservative complaining that a form of capital punishment was too quick or too painless. Another lie by the lying leftist.

You are typical of the so-called freedom protesters, totally absent from reality. A denier of the Covid pandemic and the needs of governments everywhere to take action to protect their populations. For the deniers, it's a continual shrieking of me, me, me, ....blah blah blah... me, me, me. That's all that matters.

Those who think the so-called freedom convoy was a legitimate protest and believe the Emergency Act was not needed should watch the CBC's Fifth Estate program being broadcast tonight on CBC. You can probably watch it on the internet at their website. It reveals the anarchist nature of the occupation, the blockades at the borders, and the criminal type elements involved and threat to law and order. It reveals how the Ottawa police were unable to deal with it. It reveals some of the violent characters involved in the protests and danger to our country. There were even police who fraternized with protesters and simply did nothing about the things that were going on in the occupation. The Ottawa police had no real plan on how to end it.

I think you have a lot of misunderstanding on this. First, many people in the U.S. albeit mostly Democrats want to see an America without 900 million guns in the population. This has nothing to do with legitimate gun owners. Nobody needs an AR-15 or military assault rifle to begin except the armed forces. That is the first thing. They need to ban all military assault rifles from private ownership. Secondly, many Americans rightly question the need for everyone to be able to carry a handgun concealed or openly. That is like the wild west. America is probably the only country in the world that has the right to bear arms in it's constitution. That was written in a different age, perhaps 250 years ago when they lived in the wild west. We have all seen the movies where every guy in every little town carried one or two guns on his holster. That mentality still exists in America and is the reason why they have this problem now. Guns are just part of American thinking and there are far more in America than people. Average about two or three times as many guns as people counting every child, man, woman, and boy. The gun lobby ideology is still the same as the wild west. They believe everyone has a right to guns. But I don't think the 2nd amendment envisioned assault rifles or mass shooting of people which is common now. I don't think the widespread possession of firearms in cities, whether they are mostly Democrat or mostly Republican, can be justified on any moral ground. The number of shooting of people per year in America proves it is completely wrong. If I had my way, the Constitution would be changed and the only people permitted to own guns would be legitimate hunters and target shooters at a rifle range. And I would ban hand guns completely from private ownership. There are millions of people who are mentally disturbed in one way or another and there is no way to filter them out of the equation except to remove the possibility of them getting their hands on guns. I know America will never ban hand guns, so they will have to live with tens of thousands of innocent citizens being shot every year as is the case now. Mass shooting will continue. They don't need assault rifles to do it although assault rifles just makes it worse. I would completely ban assault rifles and require very strict screening to give people hunting licences. Perhaps require target shooters to require their guns be kept at the rifle or gun range in supervised lockers. No hand guns in homes or held by private citizens. All would be locked at the gun range if I had my way. But I know it will never happen. So the shootings will continue.

Are you serious? "Defined most commonly as any shooting in which four or more people—not including the perpetrator—are injured or killed, mass shootings happen every day in America, and sometimes more often. In 2019, there were 417 such assaults. In 2020, there were 610—nearly two mass shootings per day—killing 513 people and injuring 2,543. But mass shootings represent a tiny fragment of the problem. Nearly 20,000 people were murdered by guns last year, and another 40,000 injured. That doesn’t even account for the approximately 24,000 suicides by gun in 2020. Another way to look at it: Guns are involved in 75 percent of all murders and 51 percent of all suicides." Gun Violence Statistics in the United States in Charts and Graphs | Reader's Digest (rd.com) So how do you figure the 20,000 people murdered by guns last year was "lawful"? We can't easily control or prevent people from falling, especially older people who have poor balance, but society can eliminate the massive number of guns and assault rifles.

It is shameful that the NRA is holding it's convention in Texas a few days after the massacre of 19 children and 2 teachers at the school in Uvalde, Texas. And it is equally deplorable that Trump is scheduled to make an appearance at the NRA convention. Many Americans still don't get it that the widespread number of guns and the easy availability of assault rifles is killing countless Americans. The 18 year old suspect that killed all the children and teachers could not go into a bar to buy liquor, but he could easily go into a gun shop and buy two AR-15 assault rifles and ammunition. Madness. Americans reportedly own 900 million guns in the population of 337 million people. Total insanity.

You're lying a bit there. Everyone has a right not be infected if reasonable measures can avoid it. Unvaccinated people were never kept out of grocery stores, drug stores or essential services. Only restaurants which were not considered essential for unvaccinated people. They could still get take out food. They could ride buses if they wear a mask. They could not fly on aircraft because of close quarters and the possibility of likely spread if they carried the virus, which is reasonable. Getting vaccinated was not such a big deal and if people want to work in close quarters to others, the responsibility is with them to get vaccinated. Other people who got vaccinated should not have to put themselves at risk working with ignorant people would refused to get a jab. Makes sense.

"There can be competing rights, and balancing them doesn’t mean all freedom is lost — unless your definition of freedom is the four-year-old’s simple mantra of “me — me — me — me.” Wangersky: Consider carefully how 'freedom' is defined by advocates (msn.com)