It would appear that all some here have is a aversion to the use of words. None have a real fix to the problem. So, the use of words are attacked as if that in and of itself is a fix to the problem. If your objection to the use of words is all you have then you have no fix to the problem and you become part the problem.

Mental health is not dangerous if it's addressed.

A firearm has never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

So, who or what is dangerous?

Well the people who have a aversion to the use of words that describe the same object in question, example magazine and or clip, that is defined in the dictionary as being the same thing are dangerous to the liberties of a sane person. That is well defined by the posts here.

If this is the case, then why are the US so against Iran having nuclear weapons?

After all, a nuclear bomb never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

---

Reality Internet Personality

It would appear that all some here have is a aversion to the use of words. None have a real fix to the problem. So, the use of words are attacked as if that in and of itself is a fix to the problem. If your objection to the use of words is all you have then you have no fix to the problem and you become part the problem.

Mental health is not dangerous if it's addressed.

A firearm has never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

So, who or what is dangerous?

Well the people who have a aversion to the use of words that describe the same object in question, example magazine and or clip, that is defined in the dictionary as being the same thing are dangerous to the liberties of a sane person. That is well defined by the posts here.

If this is the case, then why are the US so against Iran having nuclear weapons?

After all, a nuclear bomb never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

Do you also have a problem with cause and effect?

It would appear that all some here have is a aversion to the use of words. None have a real fix to the problem. So, the use of words are attacked as if that in and of itself is a fix to the problem. If your objection to the use of words is all you have then you have no fix to the problem and you become part the problem.

Mental health is not dangerous if it's addressed.

A firearm has never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

So, who or what is dangerous?

Well the people who have a aversion to the use of words that describe the same object in question, example magazine and or clip, that is defined in the dictionary as being the same thing are dangerous to the liberties of a sane person. That is well defined by the posts here.

If this is the case, then why are the US so against Iran having nuclear weapons?

After all, a nuclear bomb never jumped up on it's own power and killed anyone.

Do you also have a problem with cause and effect?

Do you have a problem with answering questions?

---

Reality Internet Personality

That was the answer.

The moment ethics and morality are separated you have none of either. Fatwa is one result. The inquisition is another. The suspension of one because of the other. There is no suspension ever. They are identical.

this is dancers room mate

morals are what are taught to you by society/parents/religion

ethics is your own sense of right and wrong

most people i know and have talked to about this type of thing tell me that i am

a very moral person where as although i do consider myself ethical i am also an

amoral sob the morals of my society mean nothing to me only my own personal

sense of what is right and wrong do.

---

If guns kill people by themselves then mine are defective.

The moment ethics and morality are separated you have none of either. Fatwa is one result. The inquisition is another. The suspension of one because of the other. There is no suspension ever. They are identical.

this is dancers room mate

morals are what are taught to you by society/parents/religion

ethics is your own sense of right and wrong

The dictionary disagrees with you and says they are the same thing. But your example shows the point I was making about separating them. Get taught by your religion that it is okay to kill people who "blaspheme" your religion. You realize on your own that killing is wrong. Which do you obey?

---

The moment ethics and morality are separated you have none of either. Fatwa is one result. The inquisition is another. The suspension of one because of the other. There is no suspension ever. They are identical.

this is dancers room mate

morals are what are taught to you by society/parents/religion

ethics is your own sense of right and wrong

The dictionary disagrees with you and says they are the same thing. But your example shows the point I was making about separating them. Get taught by your religion that it is okay to kill people who "blaspheme" your religion. You realize on your own that killing is wrong. Which do you obey?

killing in and of itself is not wrong

i would not kill anyone that was not seeking to harm me or others

---

Get taught by your religion that it is okay to kill people who "blaspheme" your religion. You realize on your own that killing is wrong. Which do you obey?

You've just highlighted one of the dangers of an over fervent religious belief. Perhaps that question should be asked in one of the religious threads here?

Get taught by your religion that it is okay to kill people who "blaspheme" your religion. You realize on your own that killing is wrong. Which do you obey?

You've just highlighted one of the dangers of an over fervent religious belief. Perhaps that question should be asked in one of the religious threads here?

Yes, the religious zealot is without question the most dangerous of all humans. To be a zealot it has to actually believe in things that don't exist and ascribe to those things supernatural powers. There are even documented cases where they heard voices in their head from this supernatural being that doesn't exist and they act upon them and urge others to act upon them.

---

There are even documented cases where they heard voices in their head from this supernatural being that doesn't exist and they act upon them and urge others to act upon them.

That is a recognised medical disease called schizophrenia.

Do we have experts on mental health here?
I'm not so sure.
Encountering homeless people on the street frequently I do not think counts.
And the suggestion that it is not a problem if it is being treated? Ludicrous! I have experienced the danger. Don't tell me it's not a problem when treatment is going on.

What would be ludicrous is the misapplication of rights here on the issue of free speech.

There are even documented cases where they heard voices in their head from this supernatural being that doesn't exist and they act upon them and urge others to act upon them.

That is a recognised medical disease called schizophrenia.

Yet we have a religion based on a twenty five cent bet and another based on the visions of a schizophrenic. Do we need more more examples that religious persons are dangerous? Would all the killing in the various names of the God of Abraham be enough?
<ed>dang auto-spell complete

---

--

I've noticed no one in here has had the guts to start naming religions that espouse killing if you don't follow their way.

This is about GUNS not religion.

Although both get tied to each other at times, this is not the place nor the time, my friend.

---

My body may be here, but my mind is in a galaxy far, far away.

Have made friends here.
Most were cats.

--

I've noticed no one in here has had the guts to start naming religions that espouse killing if you don't follow their way.

This is about GUNS not religion.

Although both get tied to each other at times, this is not the place nor the time, my friend.

Double entendre, implications and connotations annoy me. Sorry.

Look, I am a scounrdel, not a scholar.

I don't mince words, just opinions.

Here it is..........
You try to take my guns, I shall kill you.
That is it. MY words, my guns, my rights.

Any more questions?

---

My body may be here, but my mind is in a galaxy far, far away.

Have made friends here.
Most were cats.

I've noticed no one in here has had the guts to start naming religions that espouse killing if you don't follow their way.

=============================================================
God of Abraham would be Jewish muslim and christian all worshiping the same god

in different way's much to man's grief.

---

I've noticed no one in here has had the guts to start naming religions that espouse killing if you don't follow their way.

This is about GUNS not religion.

Although both get tied to each other at times, this is not the place nor the time, my friend.

Double entendre, implications and connotations annoy me. Sorry.

Look, I am a scounrdel, not a scholar.

I don't mince words, just opinions.

Here it is..........
You try to take my guns, I shall kill you.
That is it. MY words, my guns, my rights.

Any more questions?

=======================================================
while I mostly agree your right's end were mine begin

so on your property do as you please, but don't come on mine and shoot me if I

disagree, I might shoot back:)

---