ForumGarden

magentaflame;1514135 wrote: I mean ...what are you afraid of if you just say no to all the guns?

Some nutter going around shooting everyone cause his guns are being taken? you've got that already!!!

an industry slowly killing you all being upset it can't kill you anymore? Tell em to get ****ed!!!

FFS!!!!

Brave America my arse!!!


The gun industry has assured itself that plenty of bad guys have access to their product so to make the argument that all the good guys need guns too. Brilliant marketing strategy, which is transparently more important at this stage than are the lives it destroys.

look we bit the bullet (so to speak) ...don't get me wrong there were campaigns and ads and political upheaval...but we did it. And we havent had a massacre since.

Of course there are people with firearms still. The stipulation was to prove you needed one. and of course the criminals still have them and they are smuggled in all the time.

Of course of course of course!!!! But they aren't in the hands of every day people .......the very people that in your country don't pull their guns out to shoot people who have just shot people .

God I'm so angry with your country right now!!!!

Isn't it ironic that a rogue radical kills 8 people in the name of Allah & immediately goes up the call, once again, to ban all Muslims from the country, yet when yet another mass shooting (27 killed at last count) happens, the NRA jump to the defence of the 2nd Amendment.

This sort of thing isn't really newsworthy any more - it's an everyday occurence. The stupid thing is that the wording of the 2nd Amendment clearly states that the Right to Bear Arms relates to an organised militia (Army), not to individual citizens.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.


It is time the American People come to realise that they are no longer at threat from King George's Redcoats (which is why the 2nd Amendment was written in the first place).

Ahso!;1514136 wrote: The gun industry has assured itself that plenty of bad guys have access to their product so to make the argument that all the good guys need guns too. Brilliant marketing strategy, which is transparently more important at this stage than are the lives it destroys.


Guns will always be accessible to the bad guys weather it's outlawed or not. The only solution is to put guns in the hands of the good guys too. Also, the 2nd Amendment wasn't just there to give US Citizens to defend themselves against the bad guys. It's there to protect the people from their own Government.

Ahso!;1514126 wrote: Depends on what kind of church it was. If it was a white congregation there were guns there. If it was a black congregation - probably not and your sentence would most likely be correct in its totality.


That is a good one.:wah:

xfrodobagginsx;1514190 wrote: Guns will always be accessible to the bad guys weather it's outlawed or not. The only solution is to put guns in the hands of the good guys too. Also, the 2nd Amendment wasn't just there to give US Citizens to defend themselves against the bad guys. It's there to protect the people from their own Government.


Banning guns is a great idea.

Just follow the example of the War on Dugs.:guitarist

xfrodobagginsx;1514190 wrote: Guns will always be accessible to the bad guys weather it's outlawed or not. The only solution is to put guns in the hands of the good guys too. Also, the 2nd Amendment wasn't just there to give US Citizens to defend themselves against the bad guys. It's there to protect the people from their own Government.


Argue that in front of the United States Supreme Court.

D.C. V. HELLER

McDonald v. Chicago

Is it weird that I actually understand Sia's lyrics? Why do people have trouble understanding her?

FourPart;1514163 wrote: Isn't it ironic that a rogue radical kills 8 people in the name of Allah & immediately goes up the call, once again, to ban all Muslims from the country, yet when yet another mass shooting (27 killed at last count) happens, the NRA jump to the defence of the 2nd Amendment.

This sort of thing isn't really newsworthy any more - it's an everyday occurence. The stupid thing is that the wording of the 2nd Amendment clearly states that the Right to Bear Arms relates to an organised militia (Army), not to individual citizens.



It is time the American People come to realise that they are no longer at threat from King George's Redcoats (which is why the 2nd Amendment was written in the first place).


When you think about it, it's quite psychopathic in reasoning. Trumps response is cheap in it's reasoning as well. That poor man is a mess now. He doesn't need our hero worship nor condemnation.....or trumps bull****..... he is going to need counselling for a really long time.

I can sit up no longer, the temperature in this room is 9°C and my fingers are numb.

That's 48°F. It's a cloudless evening, hence the drop.

Nawwhhhh...(with aussie high inflection)

spot;1514245 wrote: I can sit up no longer, the temperature in this room is 9°C and my fingers are numb.

That's 48°F. It's a cloudless evening, hence the drop.


That is about 20°F warmer than our high temp here, today.

I feel guilty now. I think it's about 16c

spotty? SPOTTY? come out to play? ..............I'm sure there's a song in that? :guitarist

<--------and that is the end of the day at Flemington racecourse where I worked yesterday for the Melbourne cup. Tomorrow is ladies day .......Oaks day.

These Shootings Are Not A Gun Problem. They Are A Heart Problem. Democrats Want To Pass Laws To Continually Increase Government Control Over The People. Republicans Want To Teach Biblical Morality And Personal Responsibility in Schools Like We Did For 200 Years. This Stuff Never Happened Until We Stopped And Kicked God Out Of Schools. I Think The Evidence Is Clear What The Solution Is. It's Not Gun Control It's Self Control.

xfrodobagginsx;1514272 wrote: These Shootings Are Not A Gun Problem. They Are A Heart Problem. Democrats Want To Pass Laws To Continually Increase Government Control Over The People. Republicans Want To Teach Biblical Morality And Personal Responsibility in Schools Like We Did For 200 Years. This Stuff Never Happened Until We Stopped And Kicked God Out Of Schools. I Think The Evidence Is Clear What The Solution Is. It's Not Gun Control It's Self Control.


Fine. Just stop letting people who have no self control play with guns.

xfrodobagginsx;1514272 wrote: These Shootings Are Not A Gun Problem. They Are A Heart Problem. Democrats Want To Pass Laws To Continually Increase Government Control Over The People. Republicans Want To Teach Biblical Morality And Personal Responsibility in Schools Like We Did For 200 Years. This Stuff Never Happened Until We Stopped And Kicked God Out Of Schools. I Think The Evidence Is Clear What The Solution Is. It's Not Gun Control It's Self Control.


All Capitalized ?

I Would Call That Capital Punishment.......................................for all us having read it.

xfrodobagginsx;1514272 wrote: These Shootings Are Not A Gun Problem. They Are A Heart Problem. Democrats Want To Pass Laws To Continually Increase Government Control Over The People. Republicans Want To Teach Biblical Morality And Personal Responsibility in Schools Like We Did For 200 Years. This Stuff Never Happened Until We Stopped And Kicked God Out Of Schools. I Think The Evidence Is Clear What The Solution Is. It's Not Gun Control It's Self Control.


Religion was never IN schools. It's specifically forbidden by the Constitution.

OK. You want religion in schools. Great. What religion should we teach? Buddhism? Hinduism? Islam? Oh, of course! “In God We Trust! It’s got to be Christianity! America is overwhelmingly Christian after all. (Although I do know a very nice Hindu family, aren't they an important part of our country?) Fine, which version of Christianity should we teach? Lutheran? Presbyterian? Baptist? Methodist? Catholic? (It is the oldest after all) Are Mormans Christian? Are you starting to get my point? No matter what the schools did, they'd never please everybody.

Perhaps they’re worried that Christian values and morals aren’t being taught to young people. They shouldn’t worry another second. Every teacher I've ever met has modeled and practiced nothing but the best of Christian virtues: honesty, integrity, respect, and dignity. But who will teach religion if not the schools, you ask? Simple. The family and the Church. Who better to teach these things than the people that care the most about the children, their parents. Where better to learn than the Church?

The Pilgrims came to America because they didn't like their religion being controlled and dictated by the state. George Washington didn't like it. Thomas Jefferson didn't like it. Trust me, you won't like it either.

Saint_;1514283 wrote: Religion was never IN schools. It's specifically forbidden by the Constitution.

OK. You want religion in schools. Great. What religion should we teach? Buddhism? Hinduism? Islam? Oh, of course! “In God We Trust! It’s got to be Christianity! America is overwhelmingly Christian after all. (Although I do know a very nice Hindu family, aren't they an important part of our country?) Fine, which version of Christianity should we teach? Lutheran? Presbyterian? Baptist? Methodist? Catholic? (It is the oldest after all) Are Mormans Christian? Are you starting to get my point? No matter what the schools did, they'd never please everybody.

Perhaps they’re worried that Christian values and morals aren’t being taught to young people. They shouldn’t worry another second. Every teacher I've ever met has modeled and practiced nothing but the best of Christian virtues: honesty, integrity, respect, and dignity. But who will teach religion if not the schools, you ask? Simple. The family and the Church. Who better to teach these things than the people that care the most about the children, their parents. Where better to learn than the Church?

The Pilgrims came to America because they didn't like their religion being controlled and dictated by the state. George Washington didn't like it. Thomas Jefferson didn't like it. Trust me, you won't like it either.


Religion wasn't taught in Schools your right. Christianity was. Separation of Church and State doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution. Fisher Amnes wrote the Constitution. He would know if it were unconsitutional to have Christianity in Schools or not. He ordered thousands of Bibles to be used in the Schools. The Bible was the primary textbook in US Schools for over 100 years. The US Capital Building was turned into a Church every Sunday Morning. The US Military's band was a Praise band at Church. The United States Supreme Court has a painting of Moses with the 10 commandments on the ceiling above the Judges. They still to this day open each session in prayer. The liberty bell has a bible verse on it along with many other monuments in Washington. Interesting your revisionist history is wrong. Question, if it were unConstitutional for Christianity to be taught in Schools, why did it have to be taken out of Schools? It's Christianity because overwhemingly it was the religion of 90% of Americans up until a few decades ago. It wasn't any other religion. It wasn't a specific denomination that was taught in Schools, it was basic Biblical morality and it made America the greatest nation in the world. Better than any other nation.

Of course they don't want Christianity to straighten these kids up and make them act civilized. They hate America and want to tear it down. No one said that I wanted to force anyone to be a Christian. It has never been like that in America. History isn't on your side, so Liberals are trying to rewrite history. Unfortunately for you, I was alive when it was still overwhelmingly Christian and watched it systematically get removed.

Okay I'm getting sick and tired of every thread becoming a religious argument. frod you're an evangelical troll.

magentaflame;1514298 wrote: Okay I'm getting sick and tired of every thread becoming a religious argument. frod you're an evangelical troll.Members such as he and Pahu and the like are no different from bots or advertisers who join forums for the sole purpose of injecting their products into threads or starting threads for commercial exposure, and yet the religious salespeople are tolerated and the commercial salespeople are not. I question that decision.

I believe in freedom of speech but surely there's a limit to flooding the airways

God you're up early

magentaflame;1514303 wrote: God you're up earlyI tell my family members that when a certain age is reached, taking a series of naps throughout each 24 hour period becomes normal. I'm presently between naps.

Ahso!;1514304 wrote: I tell my family members that when a certain age is reached, taking a series of naps throughout each 24 hour period becomes normal. I'm presently between naps.


I agree, but then, I have a full workday from around 7 am to 6 pm and things that need to be done in the evening, and being awake at 3 am seldom really works out well.

I woke at 3 this morning, and couldn't get back to sleep. It will be a long day.

I am getting too old to run on 3 hours sleep a day. Maybe I can sneak a nap in before my meeting with the boss.

anyone else notice the uptick in the accusations of famous men molesting, abusing, and harassing women?

This is a scary trend. I think women have finally tired of being second-class citizens in the Western world, and are "taking it to the street" so to speak.

LarsMac;1514306 wrote: anyone else notice the uptick in the accusations of famous men molesting, abusing, and harassing women?

This is a scary trend. I think women have finally tired of being second-class citizens in the Western world, and are "taking it to the street" so to speak.


Is it an increase in the incidence or has the Weinstein revelations emboldened the rest to come forward ?

Bruv;1514308 wrote: Is it an increase in the incidence or has the Weinstein revelations emboldened the rest to come forward ?


I believe it to be the latter.

I seem to remember brushing up against a girls breasts in junior high (kinda on purpose). I suppose I will remember her name when I am outed.

On a serious note: Everyone seems to have known about these perv's but no one was willing to make it public, I'm surprised someone didn't shoot them, that seems to be trends now days.

It has been known about by everyone since the days of silent films under the general heading of the casting couch. It was just as disgusting a phenomenon in 1917 as in 2017.

The revelations of 2017 are meant to make it an expectation that abusers will be outed and that whistle-blowers will continue their career instead of being blacklisted out of sight. I don't think it could have happened before, say, 1960. I think it's a disgraceful aspect of employment that it's taken a further sixty years to actually happen.

If it takes down every living male producer, director and actor in the Western world it's still worth doing.

magentaflame;1514298 wrote: Okay I'm getting sick and tired of every thread becoming a religious argument. frod you're an evangelical troll.


I wasn't making every thread a religious thread. I was stating my opinion and it's the truth. "Someone responded with America is not a Christian Nation..." I responded. How about the Huston Astros winning the World Series? Did you watch it?

xfrodobagginsx;1514328 wrote: "Someone responded with America is not a Christian Nation..."I've no idea what you think Judaism or the Church of Latter Day Saints are.

spot;1514341 wrote: I've no idea what you think Judaism or the Church of Latter Day Saints are.Two more similarly abusive cults?

Ahso!;1514344 wrote: Two more similarly abusive cults?


I have no problem at all with Judaism, it isn't evangelical.

spot;1514312 wrote: It has been known about by everyone since the days of silent films under the general heading of the casting couch. It was just as disgusting a phenomenon in 1917 as in 2017.

The revelations of 2017 are meant to make it an expectation that abusers will be outed and that whistle-blowers will continue their career instead of being blacklisted out of sight. I don't think it could have happened before, say, 1960. I think it's a disgraceful aspect of employment that it's taken a further sixty years to actually happen.

If it takes down every living male producer, director and actor in the Western world it's still worth doing.


One problem, now, is there is also an uptick in false accusations, as well. Sorting out fact from fiction is a painful process for all involved.

LarsMac;1514348 wrote: One problem, now, is there is also an uptick in false accusations, as well. Sorting out fact from fiction is a painful process for all involved.


That for my money is the worrying result.

My local MP and Secretary of State Damian Greene is under scrutiny for a laptop from his office having had porn on it from an illegal raid on his offices from several years back. HERE

I have never voted for the numpty, by the way,

I'm sure there's something in the Bible about the appropriate penalty for bearing false witness. It should certainly be brought against that chap from the Met if he can't substantiate what he claimed. Twice over, if possible.

spot;1514347 wrote: I have no problem at all with Judaism, it isn't evangelical.Judaism might not be evangelical and have a relatively liberal slant, but it still lacks in the equal rights category for females within the family structure, not to mention that the children born into the jewish religion are raised and conditioned to think traditional practices like the bris are acceptable. Judaism teaches that the first five books of the old testament are law and that Moses was the ultimate prophet. That in and of itself should be enough to make twenty-first century beings shiver.

Jusaism may be generally more loose than other religions, but it's still a cult, and like other religious cults its practices run from extremely orodox to varying degrees of less orthodox.

There is no God watching our every action and thought - that includes the Jewish G-d. The further we get from the delusion of God/G-d the more clearly accurate we can decipher and interpret life and create fair and practical principals to live by.

I would not presume to judge Judaism, I'm in the same position as every other non-Jew in the historically Roman and Orthodox Christian world: that my ancestors persecuted them unjustifiably whenever they appeared, from the fall of the Second Temple until within living memory. Collectively we all owe an debt, part of which involves letting the remnant choose its own course.

The facts that Judaism is extremely reluctant to accept acolytes from outside and that any member can renounce Judaism free from legal sanction make it even less of my business to condemn those who choose to persist.

Mormons, on the other hand, along with Bible Literalists and the dupes of Scientology, are comical buffoons designed to be laughed at, and all three groups are definitively evangelical.

I can't justify excusing practices such as genital mutilation and misogyny based on historical atrocities visited on the ancestors of the abusers. Of course, genocide is wrong. Just ask the Palestinian people about that.

LarsMac;1514306 wrote: anyone else notice the uptick in the accusations of famous men molesting, abusing, and harassing women?

This is a scary trend. I think women have finally tired of being second-class citizens in the Western world, and are "taking it to the street" so to speak.


Like waves in the ocean, this will pass followed by a different one. Fickled attention span directs the entertainment industry know as news.

I suspect a lot of it is by social media, passions of the mob/populace.

Just some thoughts.

spot;1514352 wrote: I would not presume to judge Judaism, I'm in the same position as every other non-Jew in the historically Roman and Orthodox Christian world: that my ancestors persecuted them unjustifiably whenever they appeared, from the fall of the Second Temple until within living memory. Collectively we all owe an debt, part of which involves letting the remnant choose its own course.

The facts that Judaism is extremely reluctant to accept acolytes from outside and that any member can renounce Judaism free from legal sanction make it even less of my business to condemn those who choose to persist.


As far as accepting proselytes, it depends. In the US there are three main bodies of Judaism practiced, each with their own requirements. Let's just say the Orthodox are the most restrictive, Conservative and Reform are generally accepting.

The Orthodox will not accept conservative or reform.

As far as leaving the fold, a doc on Netflix, One of Us. Now, this is an extreme example.

I think I could safely say almost all American Jews do not stand out among our fellow citizens.

spot;1514352 wrote: Mormons, on the other hand, along with Bible Literalists and the dupes of Scientology, are comical buffoons designed to be laughed at, and all three groups are definitively evangelical.

tude dog;1514355 wrote: [QUOTE=spot;1514352]I would not presume to judge Judaism, I'm in the same position as every other non-Jew in the historically Roman and Orthodox Christian world: that my ancestors persecuted them unjustifiably whenever they appeared, from the fall of the Second Temple until within living memory. Collectively we all owe an debt, part of which involves letting the remnant choose its own course.

The facts that Judaism is extremely reluctant to accept acolytes from outside and that any member can renounce Judaism free from legal sanction make it even less of my business to condemn those who choose to persist.


As far as accepting proselytes, it depends. In the US there are three main bodies of Judaism practiced, each with their own requirements. Let's just say the Orthodox are the most restrictive, Conservative and Reform are generally accepting.

The Orthodox will not accept conservative or reform.

As far as leaving the fold, a doc on Netflix, One of Us. Now, this is an extreme example.

I think I could safely say almost all American Jews do not stand out among our fellow citizens.


Bull****e

magentaflame;1514372 wrote: Bull****eThat's your opinion about whether we should condemn Jews who decide to remain a part of Judaism? Or have I misinterpreted your single-word response and if so what did you actually mean.

I edited back one missing quote termination tag in your quote, without which it wasn't possible to see who had said what. Perhaps there's still confusion because of the bolding which was not in what I originally wrote.

What I think tude wrote is that very few Jews in America are distinguishable from the mass of Americans, and that no non-Jew, Conservative Jew or Reform Jew can worship as part of an Orthodox community.

Collectively we all owe an debt, <------- it was that bit, I stopped reading after that . I owe nobody a debt that I didn't have a hand in harming.....where does that sort of thing stop? I did research into world wars via Australian newspapers (national archives) I'm not responsible for Russias' pogroms I'm not responsible for Germanys' crap, I'm not responsible for Vietnam nor Cambodia .....Now in saying that I put on the record . I am responsible for what happens in my society NOW....HERE and NOW. I'm an adult and have a voice and I voice it.

I just really hate hearing that "debt" stuff.

Did you know that during an australian winter we have more snow cover than switzerland?..... that fact came from a 'tally ho' papers packet.

magentaflame;1514298 wrote: Okay I'm getting sick and tired of every thread becoming a religious argument. frod you're an evangelical troll.


I'm glad somebody finally said it.

magentaflame;1514610 wrote: Did you know that during an australian winter we have more snow cover than switzerland?..... that fact came from a 'tally ho' papers packet.


Oh come on. Everyone knows Australia is just one big beach all the way around, with an outback in the middle. Where is the snow? Ayers rock?

(PS just kidding!)

My research for facts has changed ....so if tally ho ciggy papers states a fact, then it must be so!

Now excuse me while i go off to check what interesting facts are on the packaging of the libra pads.

After much thought, I have ordered a Santakini in good time for the festive season. There's a pub in town where it will definitely earn me a free pint at the bar. I need a volunteer to take photos for the thread.