Yakuda

You're whining because you didn't get what you want. Waaaaaa

Name calling...the domain of the intellectually deprived.

AGAIN I mentioned "people" YOU added race. Everything is about race to a racist. I'll ask again, am I white?

Again I said people YOU mentioned race. Thats racist. What bothers me? Am I white?

Someone is butt hurt

Your first sentence is incomplete and nonsensical. I said "people" entering the country illegally but YOU sad "non-white". Interesting. I guess everything is about race to a racist.

How is the govt telling people who they can love and what clothes to wear? Sadly lots of people in America have surrendered liberty for safety. The plandemic was a perfect example of that.

Should we assume that everyone illegally entering the country is doing so for honorable reasons? No one should ever be worried about people illegally entering the country?

Jesus was brown but as far as we know he never illegally entered another country.

There is no bottom to human stupidity. The thing is that at some point in the past we would let people experience the natural consequences of their stupidity. If their stupidity killed them that was unfortunate but wasn't necessarily bad because their stupidity wouldn't spread to a new generation. If they happened to survive their stupidity and learned from it that was good for everyone. What we do these days is constantly protect people from their own stupidity and it's been to our continuing deterioration.

So the kooky ideas of protestants just keep coming. Many of the 20-30,000 non catholic Christian denominations believe in OSAS but it something we should believe? Well Philippians 2:12 tells us "Therefore my beloved just as you have always been obedient when I am present you must be so all the more now when I am absent as you work out our salvation with fear and trembling." Why then would anyone who believes (faith alone is what they claim) and salvation is assured once you believe, need to be told to be work out their salvation with fear and trembling?

You alter what people say. Not only are plastic crack ho youre a duplicitous plastic crack ho. Ken must get his moneys worth out of you

I thought you said you werent qualified to deal with a radical papist like me? I have no trouble dealing with rabid heretics such as yourself. Two questions for you 1) When tradition is being mentioned in the 3 passages I provided what are the traditions that are being referred to? 2) Where in the Bible does it tells us what books should be in the Bible?

I'm always impressed with how you people confuse what's "tangible" with what you like as if they are the same thing.

It's impossible to have an infinite regression so something or someone must exist outside time and space because we do exist. How many times do you need to hear that your not linking the evidence isnt the same thing as there is no evidence. I've been through this with you already. Are you being purposely obtuse?

Youve done neither Show me one

But i didnt what we believe is belief. You did because you can't address what I actually said. Well at least you have tacitly accepted you can't refute Aquinas. There's hope for you. What Aquinas posited there is empirical fact. Nothing creates itself. Prove it wrong. Oh that's right you can't. Shucks

I didn't say everything we believe is belief. You can't even keep straight what I'm saying The second of claim of Aquinas, efficient cause, is all I need. Nothing causes itself. I believe that cause is God which is no different than anything you believe is true if you havent independently verified yourself. You could prove me wrong but you either can't or won't.

I didn't say they were I said they are both rights and if access to one right can be restricted why not any of the others? I do know how they work but prove it works the way you claim or is this just ANOTHER example of something you think is true based on belief? We know which it is.

AGAIN I have but you don't like it. I'm not impressed with what you dont like. You're a drug addled plastic doll.

It's the method by which it is "made easier" that's the issue for me. I have no problem with making voting easier if we also make it easier to own a gun. That at least is a reasonable way to ensure the vote is valid. Sending mail in ballots to likely outdated addresses with no way to verify who is returning them isnt reasonable.

Yes I've heard of it. You know what i haven't heard? A cogent argument for why it should be made easier to vote. If youve heard of voting by mail in the US then you've also heard that some states like California in the last presidential election. They sent mail in ballots to everybody on the voter list at the last known addresses of those voters. There was no mechanism to ensure the ballots were valid. You need to make a cogent argument from voting should be made easier. BTW I've already said mail in ballots should e VERY VERY rare but like always people like you just don't pay attention.

No but I have spoken to you.

No i'm merely talking about access to the rights which is what we were actually talking about. The number of guns isn't the issue but you need to obscure the discussion it seems. So what? Maybe it should be regulated even more. There should be as many obstacles to voting as there is to owning a gun. Yes there are and one regulation except in very rare cases is get to the polls.

You seem to have benefited from such a world. Good for you.