FSU Student: It's great that he is unharmed, but this is just stupid.

[edhopper]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fsu-student-saved-bullet-books-article-1.2017814

The truth is I was almost killed tonight and God intervened. I know conceptually He can do all things, but to physically witness the impossible and to be surrounded by such grace is indescribable.”

Did God put those books in his backpack? No. Did God who "can do all things" stop the gunman from shooting others. No.
What is impossible about this?

God, doing the least possible at all times.

[notrightatall]

1. What ever happened is god's will.

How dare you question the lord and his ways??

[cbayer]

6. Yep, this is a really hilarious situation isn't it?

This kid came really close to dying today. If he thinks his god intervened, so what?

Cheap points scored by cheap thoughts.

[notrightatall]

15. Wank away.

I put this right up there with every "christian" sports personality who thanks god for letting them win.

Yup, it's hilarious. So what?

[Brettongarcia]

127. So what about the equally-Christian sports personality on the other team, who LOST the game?

God also makes people lose, I guess.

[randys1]

176. Funny story about that, Jeff Gordon is one of the greatest stock car drivers of all time.

When he became famous in his twenties he married an extremely religious and unbelievably gorgeous Woman, so after each win, and there were lots of those, Jeff would do that "I want to thank Jesus for this win"

And his faithful, religious, possibly brain-dead wife would be standing right there with a big lovely smile on her face.

They got divorced, he met and married a Woman from Europe named Ingrid Vandebosch, and about a year ago I saw Jeff Gordon in the audience of an Obama/Bill Clinton event, he was in the audience, all smiles taking pictures of the two liberals.

He grew up...most of his fans dont have a clue - and he NEVER mentions god when he wins, which he still does.

He got out of his own backyard, met people different from him, and the result is he became a liberal

[cbayer]

213. Ah, where did you go??

[marble falls]

214. Heck cb, he was just mixing it up.

[cbayer]

215. He was doing much more than that.

[marble falls]

216. Yeah he was, and he needed to go.

[gcomeau]

22. So what?

So this idiot apparently thinks he's ever so special enough that the all powerful supreme lord and creator of the universe directly intervened in the course of human events to make sure he didn't get killed or seriously injured... meaning said deity also thought there was no particular need or reason to intervene on behalf of the other 3 people who were wounded, or all the kids who died at Sandy Hook or any of the thousands of other victims of random gun violence in the country or anywhere else for that matter.

Which is a *fucking vile* belief to hold, even if the little moron is too oblivious to realize the implications of his ridiculous position.

[DeadLetterOffice]

30. Yup. That is EXACTLY the problem. Yup yup yup. +1000

[AtheistCrusader]

57. the automatic corollary is; god chose not to save the other victims.

One is then left to wonder 'why'.


It's a wildly arrogant and offensive premise. The epitome of 'fuck you, got mine'.

[Cartoonist]

169. A quick learner

You've only been here a little over a month and you've pegged our two shining lights. Welcome.

[rug]

195. Practice makes perfect.

Ask him who MarkCharles is.

[cbayer]

174. Hey JDDavis, what's shaking?

[rug]

194. What's your excuse?

I am starting to think that religions are all about people trying to legitimize their personal arrogance.

[Feral Child]

106. At it again, cbayer.

Apologia for another batshit Xian loony.

If he thinks he's just ever so special, so what?

[DBoon]

87. Will the ones who died say it is God's will?

Oh that's right, they are dead, they can't

[AtheistCrusader]

91. Pretty sure their families won't come to that conclusion either.

[trotsky]

110. Well, eerily, some do.

"I guess god needed another angel."

[Warren Stupidity]

2. the creator of the universe is vastly diminished from his former omnipotence.

So when it comes to miracles he can only do little things. Nudge one of many bullets out of the way, and then faint from the exertion.

All we are saying is give god a break. He's doing his best, even if it is a D-.

[arcane1]

14. That's a lot of work do to during football season!

With all those touchdowns to score, I'm impressed that He could spare time to save a life.

[cbayer]

3. So what? It's harmless.

He's glad to be alive. He believes in a god that provides protection at times. He thinks god intervened to save him for whatever reason.

Another daily news story posted her to take a cheap shot at a religious believer who has had a particularly bad day and spoke his beliefs out loud when asked.

[DeadLetterOffice]

31. It is not harmless.

See post #22.

[AtheistCrusader]

58. Harmless? If it gives the other victims even a shred of 'why me then' thought, it's not harmless.

A cohort of yours like to call atheists 'incurious'. I would say the same about a person who doesn't ask the next obvious question. 'Why him and not the other victims?'

There's a reason we call that 'god saved me' claim vile; it is vile. It automatically casts aspersion on the victims who were hurt.

[trotsky]

109. You nailed it right there.

It's the equivalent of saying "I guess god likes me better."

[NYC_SKP]

118. Yes, it is harmless.

I guess you're supposed to have been "served" by reply #22, which takes this one incident all the way around to Sandy Hook!



It's almost like invoking Godwin's Law!

[cbayer]

146. If I've been served, it must have been a net shot, because there is no #22 in this thread.

[DeadLetterOffice]

177. This 22?

gcomeau (4,222 posts)

22. So what?

So this idiot apparently thinks he's ever so special enough that the all powerful supreme lord and creator of the universe directly intervened in the course of human events to make sure he didn't get killed or seriously injured... meaning said deity also thought there was no particular need or reason to intervene on behalf of the other 3 people who were wounded, or all the kids who died at Sandy Hook or any of the thousands of other victims of random gun violence in the country or anywhere else for that matter.

Which is a *fucking vile* belief to hold, even if the little moron is too oblivious to realize the implications of his ridiculous position.

[cbayer]

178. I guess so. Like I said, net shot.

Certainly not an ace.

[Brettongarcia]

128. Not harmless. Now he believes in Magic; pray, and God does it. No need for an education, say.

Maybe he should have noted that it was a book that stopped the bullet. And deduced that Education saved him! : )

[stone space]

148. Which do you believe is more harmful?

Being shot at in a society overrun with guns, or thanking God for making it out alive?

[trotsky]

151. How many people's lives do you think are affected by Republican Christian policies...

based on prosperity gospel thinking?

Just want to get some numbers going to make a comparison.

[stone space]

155. Shit! How would I know how many NRA victims there are out there?

How many people's lives do you think are affected by Republican Christian policies...

I do know that he's not the only one.

Not by a long shot.

[trotsky]

159. Just pull a number.

You can use the total number of gun-related deaths last year if you want.

Then tell me how many lives Republican "I got mine, screw you" policies affect.

[bvf]

4. he sure can be a lazy cuss, no?

Happy and relieved the student is okay.

I just hope he matures someday to the point he can distinguish between pure luck and nonsense. This horror, sadly, will likely work against that.

[cbayer]

7. Do you have a link to support your contention that there is some correlation between maturity

and religious belief?

I'll wait.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Actually we discussed this last summer

There was a study on the ability of children to distinguish between fantasy and reality and the correlation of that skill with religiosity.

[bvf]

19. OK, then (sigh).

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/07/is_religion_good_for_children_secular_children_can_distinguish_between_magic.html

[DeadLetterOffice]

36. That was an interesting piece, thanks for the link. n/t

[bvf]

107. You're welcome.

There are several other citations of the study. I forget the search keywords I used to retrieve the Slate article I read a while back, but you can probably approximate them. (Note to interested posters: "delusion" was not one of them.)

[AtheistCrusader]

60. I think you just unintentionally made a really, really good point.

Not the point you meant to make, but a good point nonetheless.

[stone space]

5. The problem isn't guns. The problem is...

...whiney ass victims who thank God to be alive.

[cbayer]

8. Yeah, how dare he. He must be psychiatrically ill.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. And there is the strawman. Have at it.

[stone space]

16. Come on, Warren. Is this how...

...you'd really like to see gun victims treated?

Somehow, I suspect not.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. hmmm...

How do you imagine that reading a statement like this idiot made must feel to the families of those who died? Must make them feel just swell, right?

[stone space]

20. I remember a Thanksgiving story.

It was back in 2006, I believe.

A small boy was riding with his mother in a car on Thanksgiving Day, when they got into a terrible accident.

The mother was killed, and the boy survived the crash, but was stranded all alone in the Arizona desert.

At some point, an undocumented immigrant named Jesus who was crossing into this country passed by, and stayed with the boy and protected him while trying to flag down somebody to help.

Eventually, he was able to get the attention of a Border patrol agent, and the boy was saved, and Jesus was deported.

I remember the boy's Aunt on TV thanking God (and Jesus!) while calling it a miracle.

Now, you're an atheist like me, so we both have to put on our thinking caps when we hear religious language. Just like we have to do in any other sort of cross cultural communication.

What do you think the boy's Aunt was calling a miracle?

Her nephew being saved by Jesus, or her sister being killed in an accident?

Accurate cross cultural communication requires a little bit of thoughtfullness and good will.

Otherwise, one can miss-translate things very badly.

[AtheistCrusader]

61. That was so tortured, Dick Cheney's heart just grew three sizes.

[stone space]

64. What was tortured?

I saw her say it on TV.

What do you think she meant?

[AtheistCrusader]

68. Using it as an analogy.

[stone space]

72. What was the miracle? (nt)

[edhopper]

83. Nothing

There are no miracles.
If you were the atheist you claim to be, you'd know that.

[AtheistCrusader]

158. There was none. That's the point. It's a small point, should be easy to grasp.

[edhopper]

71. What she meant is immaterial

To the larger issue of what he beliefs mean in terms of divine intervention.
Just because she didn't see the larger ramifications, doesn't mean they aren't there.

[stone space]

74. What she meant was everything.

What she meant is imaterial

[stone space]

84. ??? (nt)

[edhopper]

85. Now I see what

You were saying.

It is not hard to know what she meant.

But why can't we examine the larger logical context of what she said.

Are religious beliefs exempt from examinations.

[stone space]

103. I don't know what a "logical context" is.

And I'm a Mathematical Logician by profession.

I do know what the context is, however.

The context is of a woman whose daughter was killed and whose nephew was feared dead but miraculously found alive, thanks to being cared for by Jesus in the desert.

The context is of a woman thanking God that her nephew was alive.

There isn't much more context than that. That's the whole shebang.

In the case of this shooting, the context is a country awash guns, and a student thanking God to be alive.

It is not unreasonable for somebody to thank God to be alive in a country this filled with guns.

It's just not.

And when atheists pretend that there is, it makes atheists look like assholes.

Atheists need to do something about the guns, and stop whining about gun victims who thank God to be alive.

[trotsky]

111. Nice attempt at at straw man.

No one is whining. What many of us are saying is that it's insensitive at best to the deceased, it's an attitude that implies one was spared because one is favored by god. The same attitude - being favored by god - results in a lot of evil in the world. Calvinism, prosperity gospel, etc.

[stone space]

123. The folks attacking the gun victim are being insulting...

...towards the victims.

Attacking gun victims for thanking God for being alive is most certain now what atheism is all about.

[trotsky]

139. Keep beating that straw man.

I'm sure he'll give up eventually.

[delrem]

199. I think the "logical" context is the deliberate insertion of an equivocation

wrt to the name "Jesus".

[stone space]

200. Jesus Manuel Cordova (nt)

[delrem]

201. yes. nt

[NYC_SKP]

120. It's almost like a tag team.

I'm glad I'm on the side of reason and calm.

Now if the families are so sensitive to this man's comment thanking God, then maybe they have a problem with acceptance of others' views.

Tolerance is the hallmark of wisdom and a primary progressive value.

I wish we would see more of that around here instead of cheap shots taken at my friends.

The worst of the DU community behaves this way.

Shame, really, we could do so much better.

[DeadLetterOffice]

179. My problem is that he didn't say 'thank god'...

He said "god intervened."

I am not an idiot, and do understand that in English 'thank god' is an almost reflexive response to tragedy averted.
I am also not a complete jerk, running around telling people not to say it. I have issues, big issues, with the concept of attributing all good things to a deity and all bad things to luck or happenstance, but that's for a different thread.

My issue is that this young person's response to not getting a bullet in the back was "god intervened."

God stepped in and stopped this kid from getting shot in the back.

Which is great I guess, unless you're one of the many people who didn't have the benefit of god's intervention. I'm not going to rehash where that perspective goes, or what the corollary message is, since it's been stated enough times already in this thread.

I'm sorry you feel like folks are taking cheap shots at your friends. OTOH, I do in fact have trouble accepting the view that a deity actively choses to save some people and let others die, so your accusation of a "problem accepting others' views" is certainly valid. I've noticed similar problems accepting other views around here though, so please don't make like this place is about treating all views equally -- if that were true no one would ever get tomb-stoned.

Respectfully,
DLO

[NYC_SKP]

183. Good point!

Still, the idea that their comment implies that others who weren't so lucky must have been unloved by god or whatever is just a stretch.

Live and let live-- I disagree with their feelings but support their right to feel that way.

[edhopper]

184. If he is right, and God saved him

it must be asked why God did not save the others, it is the logical next step.
No one is saying he thought that way, but if we examine this belief, that God did the impossible and counterviened the laws of physic to save him, we must ask why he lets others die.
It's not really about this young man spouting religious nonsense (no, there is no evidence God did a damn thing here) but about the larger questions of what those beliefs signify.

[delrem]

198. The implication is obvious.

It is also almost definitive of a certain kind of religion.

[AtheistCrusader]

202. It's hardly a stretch.

He framed it as an impossibility that the books could naturally stop the bullets. (ridiculous)
Then he claimed his god intervened directly to stop them.

The question 'what about the others' is the next obvious, logical question.

There are a few possibilities that would answer the question, and it would be a stretch to pick only one, perhaps. But the question must be asked.

[DBoon]

88. No, it is victims who did not believe strongly enough in God

If they did, God would work his magic power and avert the bullets.

[cbayer]

10. This OP is freaking flypaper. It's embarrassing.

I'm going out.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. Make sure you clean your feet off.

[cleanhippie]

26. More like make sure she takes off the hip-waders.

[bvf]

21. Why? n/t

[cbayer]

89. Wow, just wow!!!

Briefly checking back in, but wanted to give you a big slap on the back.

I think you've just about got them all in here. At any rate, you're closer than anyone I have ever seen before.

I'm going to give you a big !!!111!!DAWKINS!!11111!! just for that. And if you can do one better than this, I might give you the secret to other ways of knowing. Shhhhhh. That's just between us.

So as long as you don't call obvious jackasses, well…. jackasses, you should be getting your promotion any moment.

(If you want the secret code book to any of this, just PM me. I'll give it to you because you are nicer than some of your compatriots. You said so yourself.

Pay no attention to the noise this might create. It's merely the calling of the sirens. Resist, I beg you.

Extra bonus points: If you can place the 4 memes mentioned in this post in order beginning with the oldest to the newest and include the dates of their birth, I will, at no additional cost to you, pray for you or give you a ticket for an exorcism of your choice. Since i believe in neither, they are equally worthless.

[AtheistCrusader]

92. Do you realize you just replied to yourself?

[Raster]

102. Miraculous, wasn't it?

[bvf]

104. There's a word to describe that sort of behavior. n/t.

[trotsky]

112. Are you OK?

Seriously.

[NYC_SKP]

122. Will you say a prayer for me, too, pretty please?

.
I can't decide on the color for walls in the north guest bath at the Hampton house.

The upstairs north guest bath, not the downstairs. We're going to make that a mud-room for post-foxhunting.

Sandlefoot is nice, but Bitterweed semi is warmer and goes well with the granite countertops.

I pray that I can make a decision soon, please say a little prayer for me!

[cbayer]

145. I pray for you at least 6 times a day.

I hope that you are reap some benefit.

These decisions are so stressful, aren't they?

I am currently looking to overhaul part of the staff. Some of them are just not obsequiousness enough and it is getting on my nerves. And they insist on speaking Spanish.

Plus, the other day one of them used my silver to eat one of those horrible tamales. I might just have to throw the whole set out.

So send a little prayer my way.

[rurallib]

13. luckily it wasn't Saturday.

God watches Notre Dame on Saturday.

[irisblue]

54. I lived in South Bend for 5 years

this is true

[edhopper]

18. Why have gun laws

when God can obviously protect those that deserve protection.

[stone space]

24. Stupid Ammosexual Arguement #5,457 (nt)

[rug]

23. “That’s what happens when you write impenetrable prose,” he told The Daily News.

Lahey, who teaches classics at the University of Nebraska Lincoln, said he was “absolutely floored” to learn that his book helped save a young man’s life.

Sorry.

[Lordquinton]

175. Great, the right is gonna use this to promote even bigger and heavier books

for the kiddies to carry...

[stone space]

25. The NRA thanks you for your support in blaming gun victims. (nt)

[edhopper]

27. How did I blame the victim?

I said it was great he was unharmed and I in no way said he was responsible for the shooting.
However he does clearly state that God is responsible. Like him I guess we should blame God, who after all, can do all things.

[stone space]

29. I think that what you are really doing here is mascurading as an atheist to...

...push the myth that atheists have no morals by publicly bashing gun victims.

[Warren Stupidity]

32. project much?

[stone space]

34. Why else would somebody post something like this?

He's trying to make us all look like immoral jerks.

[Warren Stupidity]

37. for all the reasons mentioned.

None of which seem to have been comprehended by you.

[stone space]

42. Atheists are not as immoral and unthinking as this thread is trying to paint us.

This is fundamentalist bullshit.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. So basically you've come back to pick up right where you left off.

Well good luck with that.

[AtheistCrusader]

75. YEP. 2nd verse, same as the first.

[DeadLetterOffice]

33. I think that what you're really doing here is totally missing the damn point...

[stone space]

35. Real atheists aren't like this. That's a myth. (nt)

[DeadLetterOffice]

38. Wtf are you talking about?

I am a "real" atheist and I am totally "like this" -- the whole "thank you God for saving me" makes me INSANE, because many believers seem to miss the fact that if God is to thank when things go right then god is also to BLAME when things go wrong. If god saved child A, then god clearly chose NOT save the very dead child B. And with this conversion of random arbitrary events into "god's will" comes blaming the victim of illness or injury or catastrophe, because clearly god could have stopped said illness or injury or catastrophe but chose not to, and there must be a reason god chose not to, right? And that reason becomes that the victim deserved that illness or injury or catastrophe, because otherwise god would have chosen to save them.

And that makes atheists like me a little nuts.

So stop telling atheists what real atheists are like, 'kay?

[stone space]

39. Real atheists don't bash gun victims like this.

I've been an atheist for more than half a century, and this reads like a fundamentalist stereotype of a scary "atheist".

I don't believe it.

Atheism is simply not this cruel and immoral.

[DeadLetterOffice]

40. NOBODY BASHED THE GUN VICTIM.

You are reading something into the OP (and into other posts as well I think) that simply isn't there. ISN'T. THERE.

You know what, never mind. You live in a strange little world, and I hope you're very happy there.
Bye, now.

[stone space]

41. Yes, he's being bashed for his religion.

That's not atheism.

That's sadism.

[gcomeau]

43. But not in the context of it in any way being his fault he's the victim.

He's being bashed for saying something stupid and insulting to every other victim of gun violence that clearly didn't have a magic all powerful entity intervene on their behalf like this self important prick is trying to claim happened for oh-so-special him. Because clearly God didn't think they really needed to, you know, not get shot. Since apparently they're not as special as he is.


Nobody is bashing him as the victim. But being the victim of a gun crime does not grant you blanket immunity from being called on being a prick to all OTHER victims of gun crimes.

[stone space]

44. He didn't insult anybody, so ar as I know.

I suspect that you are just making that up.

[gcomeau]

45. Yes he damn well did.

If the reason he didn't get shot is because God intervened, then that is implicitly simultaneously stating that other people who DO get shot get shot because God couldn't be bothered to do the same for them. They're not worthy of the same protection or consideration from this guy's deity that he was granted.

That is monumentally insulting.

[stone space]

46. He said that?

then that is implicitly simultaneously stating that other people who DO get shot get shot because God couldn't be bothered to do the same for them. They're not worthy of the same protection or consideration from this guy's deity that he was granted.

That is monumentally insulting.

Do you have a quote?

This sounds like something that you just made up and are trying to pretend like he said when he didn't actually say it.

If so, that's dishonest.

[gcomeau]

65. Are you kidding?

Do you have a quote?

"The truth is I was almost killed tonight and God intervened."

From. The. Op.




And now I wait to see if the response to this will be something demonstrating a lack of understanding of what "implicitly stating" means.

[stone space]

67. OK, so he didn't say that. (nt)

[DeadLetterOffice]

73. And there it is, gcomeau, just like you predicted...

[gcomeau]

80. lol... was writing mine as you posted this. -eom

[DeadLetterOffice]

82. lol -- which is prolly a sign I should walk away from this thread before I stroke out...

[gcomeau]

76. And there it is, prediction fulfilled.

As I said in the first damn place, it was IMPLICIT in his freaking statement.

If God intervened to save him, then God intervenes when he wants to. If you want to deny that is a necessary conclusion to draw from his statement then present an argument.


If God intervenes to prevent people from getting shot when he wants to, then when someone gets shot God didn't want to intervene. If you want to deny that is a necessary conclusion to draw from his statement then present an argument.



So, anyone who DOES get shot therefore gets shot because God decided he would let it happen. Period. That is a necessary conclusion to draw from any claim that God will intervene to prevent these things when he DOES feel like it. So those other people that got wounded? God apparently didn't think it was as important to keep *them* from getting shot as to keep this idiot from getting shot. Those dead Sandy Hook kids? Ditto.



And THAT is the insulting damn part, for which he deserves any scorn heaped upon his oblivious self absorbed head.

[stone space]

90. By IMPLICIT you meam that...

...it is in your head and not his.

So now we're talking about something that only exists inside your own head.

[gcomeau]

98. So you have no argument then. Gotcha. -eom

[bvf]

99. Give it a rest.

You seem more interested in what your idiotic responses will elicit than in making a point.

[edhopper]

47. Atheists don't bash

stupid things said in the name of religion?
Really? Where have you been?

[stone space]

48. Atheists don't bash gun victims like this. No.

Except in stories made up by fundamentalists to make atheists look bad.

[edhopper]

49. Could you link to the rules

About how and where atheists can point out religious stupidity?
Since you obviously speak for all atheists, you should know.

[stone space]

50. You are no atheist. (nt)

[edhopper]

51. I do not accept the existence of any god

Or supernatural entity.
By definition that makes me an atheist.
If you think I am rough on believers, stick around and see what other atheist here say.
I am one of the nicer ones.

[AtheistCrusader]

95. Oh, stone has been here before... Don't let that low postcount fool you.

[trotsky]

113. When stone hasn't stuck around it's because he's gotten himself an involuntary vacation from DU.

Whatever he deems an atheist to be, you should be proud not to be considered one, if his behavior is any example.

[AtheistCrusader]

94. Attempt #B at the No True Scotsman fallacy. never gonna hit a home run with that whiffle bat.

[okasha]

59. Nailed it.

It's what bullies do.

[AtheistCrusader]

86. No, he's being bashed for his bullshit claim, which is unflattering toward the other victims.

He might as well have said 'fuck you, got mine'. If his salvation can be attributed to his god, then the injuries of the other victims can be attributed to his god's deliberate inaction.

Not a very flattering position for a believer to advance.
If I were a believer, I'd ask other religious people to knock that shit off. It's damaging the brand.

[stone space]

97. Not a very flattering position for anybody to take.

'fuck you, got mine'.

But it's not his position.

It's yours. (Still not flattering)

You're the one who made it up.

[Goblinmonger]

116. Then please explain what his position is.

He says that God saved him. If we are to believe that to be true, it reflects the following in his thinking:

1. There is a God.
2. That God is capable of intervening in the events of everyday life.
3. When intervening, God is capable of saving a life.
4. God intervened in this event and saved this person's life.

Which leads to the next logical....
5. God did not intervene with the other people that died in that event.
6. God did not intervene with any other event on that day when people died.
7. God did not intervene with any other event on any other day when people died.

So this guy is claiming that he is someone special in the midst of the millions of people that have died this year.

[AtheistCrusader]

131. I simply boiled the claim down to its basic elements.

It's not surprising to me that the analysis escapes you.

[stone space]

132. No, you made up a new position on your own.

Now own it.

It's yours, and nobody else's.

[AtheistCrusader]

134. It's the INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION of what he said.

It's been explained to you at least five different ways by five different posters. If you won't take your fingers out of your ears, there's no point talking to you.

[stone space]

136. It's your position, not his. Own it. (nt)

[AtheistCrusader]

137. It's not his words, no. That's why nobody put it in double quotes. But it is a valid paraphrase of

what he is saying.

And he should own that.

[stone space]

138. It is your position. Own it.

Nobody put those words in your mouth.

You typed them out yourself.

Your attempt to weasel out of your own position and disown your own words by falsely attempting to attribute your words to somebody else is dishonest in the extreme.

[AtheistCrusader]

141. No poster in this discussion is atempting to 'attribute those words' to him as a quote, except you.

It has been clearly explained to you several times by several posters. The EFFECTIVE meaning. Single quote paraphrase. Essentially. Etc.


Please tell me you are just faking your outrage here, to try and rhetorically turn the tables. I genuinely hope you aren't ACTUALLY confused by this point.

[stone space]

143. "fuck you, got mine".

Yes, you still have your gunz. You got yours. Fuck everybody else.

Are you just angry that this student didn't die for your freedumz like so many others have done?

[AtheistCrusader]

149. Excuse me, I put that in single quotes. It denotes a paraprhase, not a quote. Modifying that to

double quotes is a highly dishonest thing to do.


No, I am glad he was not injured. I deplore his bullshit claims about how he was not injured.

[stone space]

150. They are your words, and your words only.

Own them.

And stop trying to blame others for your own words.

Nobody made you say it.

[AtheistCrusader]

152. Do you know what a paraphrase is?

[stone space]

154. In your case, it is a straw man of your own creation.

But I suppose that his actual words were not enough for you to use to summon up outrage at gun victims.

[AtheistCrusader]

157. Getting tired of the bullshit.

[AtheistCrusader]

55. Of course it's there. You're ignoring it.

Victim claims god saved his life/saved him from any harm at all. Automatic implication; god either didn't give a shit about the other victims, or actively wanted them harmed.

It's really quite simple.

[stone space]

62. I think you mean simplistic, not simple.

Victim claims god saved his life/saved him from any harm at all. Automatic implication; god either didn't give a shit about the other victims, or actively wanted them harmed.

It's really quite simple.

[DeadLetterOffice]

63. I don't understand how that equates to blaming the kid for gettting shot at?

[AtheistCrusader]

66. It doesn't.

Three parties, all victims. One attacker. God steps in and saves one victim entirely. So effectively so, he didn't even know he was attacked.

Do you not then ask the next obvious question? Why didn't god save the other two from harm?

[DeadLetterOffice]

78. I totally do.

I'm in full agreement with you here.

What I'm confused about is why calling out this issue -- the "god saved me, too bad for the rest of you" -- why is stone space seeing that as blaming the gun victim (post #25)? I don't get it. Nobody is blaming the kid for getting shot at. Some of us are taking him to task for saying a thing that, as atheists, we see as pretty vile and offensive and arrogant. But we're not suggesting he deserved to get shot at, or brought it on himself, so why is it "blaming the gun victim?"

Maybe my migraine meds are interfering with my comprehension. If so, I apologize to all & sundry...

[AtheistCrusader]

81. OH! Now I understand. Yeah, i'm confused too.

I assume it's just deflection.

[stone space]

93. Because he didn't say that.

this issue -- the "god saved me, too bad for the rest of you"

Stuff some student didn't say after nearly being killed is being made up and put in his mouth so that folks can get their jollies insulting him.

What good sports we've become here at DU.

[AtheistCrusader]

96. Ahahahha you are truly incredible.

[TreasonousBastard]

101. That's one possible implication, but...

you're not looking at it from the perspective of the one who said it.

It is a common exclamation from believers of all stripes when they narrowly avoid catastrophe, and it's more a social/emotional construct than a religious one. Kinda like an atheist exclaiming "Holy Shit!" when if he sat back and thought about it-- there's nothing holy, and even if there were, it wouldn't be shit.

Yes, there are obvious differences, but please don't belabor the obvious in order to miss the point.

Now, if he really did believe that the finger of God moved the bullet, from his belief in the unknown motivations of a God that works in mysterious ways he would never assume God just didn't care about victims where there was no intervention. God always has a reason, even if we can't comprehend it.

This probably makes no sense to you, and it shouldn't. It's the way believers think, not nonbelievers.

But, this isn't "delusional" thinking. It is perfectly rational human thought within the confines of belief. We often see people acting in ways we don't understand, but upon further inquiry their actions often make sense when we get the full story.

[trotsky]

114. I don't think anyone is arguing that the person who said it intended...

to claim they were special and favored by god. But that is the logical consequence of the sentiment. "God intervened to save me, but didn't bother with those others."

[AtheistCrusader]

129. This is much more than a reflex exclamation.

He's insisting the books couldn't have stopped that bullet (easily within the realm of 'normal' and 'mundane', given the energy, or rather lack thereof in a .380 ACP) and that god intervened. He's thought this through, and decided on a narrative.

I'm sure to him, it seems an inescapable conclusion, but that is only because he is limited by his lack knowledge about the gun used.

[stone space]

135. As a gun victim, I think he's learned quite a bit about guns.

but that is only because he is limited by his lack knowledge about the gun used.

Of course, those on the other end of those guns might have some specialized technical knowledge of their hobby that they can self-righteously use to bash gun victims with, in order to avoid and hide their own complicity.

But being on the other end of the gun does not give you more insight into guns than the folks who find themselves on the business end of the gun.

[AtheistCrusader]

140. He's a victim in status only.

Compare his victimhood to the ones still in the hospital, and then consider his lack of realization that he'd even been shot AT, at all. Not the same thing.

And the fact that he didn't feel it AT ALL, speaks directly to the thundering power of the .380 ACP. Not that he wasn't injured, but the fact that the impact on his person, in the bag, was so weak as to not be felt at all.


Again, he has made a falsifiable claim, that the books COULD NOT have stopped the bullet. In order to fabricate a 'miracle' out of nothing. It is mundane and normal for such a dense object to halt .380 in its tracks.

[stone space]

142. How much does the NRA pay you to say shit like this?

He's a victim in status only.

He was fucking shot at. Had the bullet lodged in his body instead of his book, he could very well be dead now.

But of course the NRA doesn't consider him a victim.

He's the enemy. Just another gun victim to be mocked and ridiculed, so that the worship of the Holy Gun can continue without interruption.

[AtheistCrusader]

144. He is a victim of a gun crime. He will count for the FBI UCR.

I'm comparing the outcome, not the legal status. He was not injured. The bullet couldn't reach him, because there was a book in the way, and that is NOT A SUPERNATURAL MIRACLE. PERIOD. IT'S SIMPLE PHYSICS. A bullet with a 9mm cross section, with 200ft-lbs of energy OR LESS, is not going to make it through that thing.

I'm not defending the shooter's access to the gun. I'm not attacking the victim in this case, as not having a valid argument against guns. There are, in fact, a lot of unanswered questions around how the shooter got his gun, etc. Things I can't tell by looking at the picture.

What I am objecting to is the rank arrogance of this particular victim and his falsifiable claim that god MUST have stopped that bullet. It's charlatanism. He's a huckster for his god, who wasn't present, and didn't need to do anything anyway. He's claiming, flat out, in plain English, that the books could not have stopped the bullet without divine assistance, and that is simply untrue.

Worse, it has implications for the injuries of the other victims, who apparently did not rate his claimed god's divine intervention.

[stone space]

147. Really?

He's a huckster for his god

Do you have any actual evidence to back up your claim.

My impression is that this is just some random student who nobody had ever heard of before he was shot.

I think you are just making this up whole cloth without any evidence at all.

I don't believe that you ever even heard of the guy before he was shot.

[AtheistCrusader]

156. IT'S RIGHT THERE IN HIS FUCKING QUOTE.

He claimed it was impossible for the book to stop the bullet without divine intervention. That's hucksterism.

“The shot I heard behind me I did not feel, nor did it hit me at all,” the 21-year-old senior posted on Facebook. “He was about 5 feet from me, but he hit my books. Books one minute earlier I had checked out of the library, books that should not have stopped the bullet.”

"The truth is I was almost killed tonight and God intervened. I know conceptually He can do all things, but to physically witness the impossible and to be surrounded by such grace is indescribable.”



He is falsely attributing the bullet failing to penetrate the book, to his god. He's 'selling' a bullshit idea.

[stone space]

160. No it's not

He didn't say, "fuck you, I got mine".

That's what you and the NRA says to gun victims like him.

[AtheistCrusader]

161. He does, when you realize he's claiming his god saved him, and not the other victims.

You DO realize there were other seriously injured victims, right?
Hope that didn't escape you.

[stone space]

162. You got yours, so fuck 'em.

You DO realize there were other seriously injured victims, right?

[exboyfil]

28. Another take on this situation

[AtheistCrusader]

53. This guy is a fucking moron. Books are actually really good at stopping pistol rounds.

Hell, 52 AOL CD's can stop a .38 +P+.

.380 FMJ Ball ammo is not likely to rip through a book like that.

[stone space]

69. Gun nut calling gun victim a fucking moron? WTF??? (nt)

[AtheistCrusader]

70. He made a falsifiable claim.

"He was about 5 feet from me, but he hit my books. Books one minute earlier I had checked out of the library, books that should not have stopped the bullet"

Like the Jesuits you so happily quoted, he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. If you have a stack of books, you don't need a magical imaginary friend to stop a .380.

Physics will do it for you, just fine.

[AtheistCrusader]

79. Basically this is exhibit A in what miracles really are; ignorance. Books can stop pistol rounds.

Especially a 200ft-lb piece of shit, like a .380 Auto.

The phone book can do it.

[Kalidurga]

56. I guess it didn't occur to him that...

that God just hates John Wyclif.

[stone space]

105. As atheists, we need to change the way we respond to school shootings.

In a nation awash with Guns, a nation that has placed Guns in a position of worship, we atheists really need to criticize the worship of Guns and their easy availability rather than bashing folks who thank God to be alive in a nation awash with Guns.

[bvf]

108. Sadly, no one is listening to you

owing to the fact that your posts make absolutely no sense.

[trotsky]

115. You don't get to declare what atheists should or shouldn't do. n/t

[stone space]

119. Yes I do.

You don't get to declare what atheists should or shouldn't do. n/t

Atheists really do get to declare what we should and shouldn't do.

Why do you want to silence atheist viewpoints and atheist morality?

[trotsky]

121. LMFAO!!!!!

You are a riot! Thanks for the laughs!

[stone space]

124. Atheists have a right to speak out on this shit. (nt)

[trotsky]

126. They sure do.

And other atheists have the right to their own opinions. You're not an atheist pope. What is with you and the "civility" brigade and your need to control others?

[edhopper]

130. Okay Mr. Mathematics Logician

can you tell the difference between these two statements.

"You don't get to declare what is right for all atheists to speak out about"

"All atheists have no right to speak out".

[Goblinmonger]

117. I supported you on the Jesuit OP and the gun thing

but, seriously, there is a different forum for gun discussions. How about you take those there?

[NYC_SKP]

125. It was kind of you to cut a break on that one.

Not to brag, but years as a DU moderator helps one get a sense of what a member is "up to" in fairly short order.

Had the Jesuit post actually discussed the context and history and points of view of the Society of Jesus, there might have been some good discussion.

Check it out:

Formula of the Institute of the Society of Jesus

Whoever desires to serve as a soldier of God beneath the banner of the Cross in our Society, which we desire to be designated by the Name of Jesus, and to serve the Lord alone and the Church, his spouse, under the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth, should, after a solemn vow of perpetual chastity, poverty and obedience, keep what follows in mind. He is a member of a Society founded chiefly for this purpose: to strive especially for the defence and propagation of the faith and for the progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine, by means of public preaching, lectures and any other ministration whatsoever of the Word of God, and further by means of retreats, the education of children and unlettered persons in Christianity, and the spiritual consolation of Christ's faithful through hearing confessions and administering the other sacraments. Moreover, he should show himself ready to reconcile the estranged, compassionately assist and serve those who are in prisons or hospitals, and indeed, to perform any other works of charity, according to what will seem expedient for the glory of God and the common good.

There was so much that could have been written by the member about public service, reconciliation, and intellectual and cultural pursuits, that a great opportunity was missed.

Instead, it was a gun-hate flamebait OP about guns, not about religion. They found a post from two years ago and just posted it to see what would happen.

I might not have noticed except that they cross-posted another piece about religion and guns in this group and in RKBA.

Happy Friday!

[AtheistCrusader]

133. Anything else I need to be doing today?

(If the nation was 'awash' in guns, they wouldn't cost so damn much.)

[cbayer]

163. Welcome to the Religion Group PepperFarmerOH

Unfortunately, your admonition will fall on deaf ears here. In fact, you may even get attacked.

Not to worry. This thread has attracted the fringe. They neither speak for nor represent anyone on DU but themselves. One has to ask what their aim really is on a site like this.

I am currently living in Mexico and working towards permanent residency.

The religion here is different than in the US. As you know, there is a certain degree of indigenous belief that has been incorporated. It is fascinating and inspiring at times.

[trotsky]

168. Curious here...

what are the tax advantages of what you're doing? Are you avoiding a lot of US tax by moving to Mexico, or will you still pay your fair share?

[hrmjustin]

192. Her personal finances are really none of your business.

Why are you asking such personal info?

[skepticscott]

182. The only "fringe" in this thread

was your "new" "friend", who coincidentally happened to be from your home (sort of) country. But of course you defended a poster who's already been banned from DU multiple times (and now again), for no other reason than that he supported your attacks on atheists.

Strange bedfellows, indeed…what won't you do to advance your agenda?

[trotsky]

226. Sorry about your friend, cbayer.

I wonder what happened to him?

[Brettongarcia]

164. I like Hatch chilis

[edhopper]

165. Welcome to DU

On Du your Catholicism, or your heritage are not an issue. We only care about you politics and support of the Democratic Party (which we also criticize frequently).

On the religion forum though, we have a no holds bared discussion about religion and belief. No ideas are beyond questioning and no one is above criticism. Nonbelievers and believers engage each other here. There are other safe places in the Religion & Spirituality forums for a more communal dialog. It gets cantankerous here.

You are welcome to join the debate, or if that is not for you, there are many other forums that would interest you.

[AtheistCrusader]

166. The catholic church has some very anti-democratic/progressive opinions on things like abortion, birt

h control, etc. Those positions don't do well here, and the church itself is not really well liked.

That doesn't mean there is hate for catholic individuals here. And individuals may not adhere strictly to church doctrine anyway.



In this particular thread, the musings of a particular religious person have been taken to task, because what he said has vicious implications for the other victims of this shooting. That his god cared enough to divinely intervene and save his life, but not save the other victims (motive unspoken.)

That is, not a super nice thing to say. It didn't fly here.
There's plenty of religions, religious people, and religious ideas, that don't attract any flak here. Many that actually fall nicely in-line with progressive or democratic ideas/platform positions.

[trotsky]

167. Hello PepperFarmerOH!

Welcome to DU! Glad you could sign up just this morning and jump in right away to contribute on a thread conveniently to echo what some others are trying to say!

[truebrit71]

170. ROFLMFAO

[mr blur]

171. Oh, won't someone think of the goats!1!

[Heddi]

173. That goat only respects one man

http://metro.co.uk/2013/08/31/police-thwarted-by-goat-stuck-on-roof-in-gresham-oregon-3944570/

[muriel_volestrangler]

180. "Previously banned multiple times"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=318984&sub=trans

But - how can this be????

[skepticscott]

181. And yet they were welcomed with open arms

by the very persons they expressed fawning support for. Concidence? I think not!

[AtheistCrusader]

203. By EarlG no less. That was pretty funny.

[Warren Stupidity]

210. Oh what a shame. He was getting along so nicely with the God Squad.

They were in heaven, what with the newly arrived Pepper Farmer doling out Severe Admonishments on behalf of Mexican Catholics reading DU! Glory Be To God! it was Great to be a Believer in here! Wow. Just Wow!

And then gone. Just. Like. That. No more pepper farmer. What will Mexican Catholics do? Who will fight their battles?

Oh well.

[NYC_SKP]

172. God made trees, trees made the paper in the book that saved his life.

It's a miracle.

If he wants to thank God, I don't have a problem with it.

I've used the phrase myself on quite a number of occasions without meaning it in the literal fashion.

[AtheistCrusader]

204. He said the books couldn't have done it alone, without divine aid, so no, that's not what he meant.

[edhopper]

185. Perhaps I have missed it in this long thread

But has any one addressed or refuted the premise that thank God for saving one person means he did nothing for the ones harmed?

[hrmjustin]

186. Some believe everything is decided by God beforehand or that God makes things happen

to us and for us because it is God's will in realtime.

I am not one of those people.

[edhopper]

187. But if someone claims and believes

God saved them in a miraculous act, doesn't that mean he allowed others to come to harm.
If a person believs one, why wouldn't they accept the other.
It's not about your beliefs, but ones like the subject of the OP.

[hrmjustin]

188. It is so hard to answer exceot to say that they just believe this is how it is.

I personally do not think God decided what happens here.

[edhopper]

189. See that's the thing,

They don't think. They believe that God interviened for them without giving thought to what that would also mean for the other victims.
I am looking at the full ramifications of their beliefs, something they don't seem to do.

[hrmjustin]

190. Well faith tends to be personal and people tend to think of it that way.

People do think their faith out but when it can be overwhelming people sometimes just leave ut up to God.

Also we must remember that he just survived a near death experience and so we should cut him some slack, but your question is valid. It can seem hurtful to the families of those killed in violence that their loved one was not good enough or loved enough by God to save them.

[edhopper]

191. Thanks

I think talking about it here, far from this young man, is different than if i confronted him personally after the trauma.

[hrmjustin]

193. Yeah it is a good question though. n/t.

[edhopper]

208. thanks

I have at times been taken to task for asking questions about people's faith's. But my experience is that we should always ask the next question.
"If this is true, doesn't it mean this.."

[AtheistCrusader]

206. Mad props for being the first religious apologist to actually address the question in a reasonable

manner.

(I am not using 'religious apologist' with a negative tone, for clarification. That's 'Christian apologetics'.)

[cbayer]

196. Choose me!!! Choose me!!

:waving hand frantically:

The premise that thanking god for saving one person meant he did nothing for ones harmed is completely illogical.

- I want to thank the Academy for this award.

- For all of you that did not get the award, the academy did nothing for you. It could of, but it didn't.

Too bad, so sad.

It's called irrational thinking.

And yes, I am comparing god to the academy awards. Got a better analogy? Bring it.

[edhopper]

197. Yes

it meant the Academy did not deem the others worthy of an award.

You have made the case that it is the logically conclusion of what he said.

Thank you.

[cbayer]

209. Ah, but that is not the issue.

The academy does lots of things for it's members. While it may choose only one person for any given award, it provides lots of services for others.

If someone thanks the academy for that award, they are not saying, by default, that the academy does nothing for anyone else.

There is no logical conclusion other than your personal extrapolation.

[Warren Stupidity]

212. I now see what you mean by illogical.

[Rainforestgoddess]

217. Bah!

In that instance, there is only one winner to choose. Are you saying that an omnipotent omniscient being has to only choose one person to save? Why? By whose rules?

So either (presuming there is a god)

1)He can't do anything, and it's random chance
2) he chose not to help, and it was random
3)he's not watching
4) he for some reason, did choose one person over the others even though he could have saved more
5) some even higher being (or a side bet with Satan again) made him have to pick one person

I know that this is a few days old, but I was bored and it's my lunch break so I thought I'd tackle this thread.

[cbayer]

218. I have no idea what a god might or might not be able to do.

I just think that if someone feels they were somehow saved by god, the conclusion that their god chose not to save others is illogical. Who knows. Maybe you get 4 things and they used their up. That and about a gazillion other things could be at play.

This hostility towards people that express thanks for having been spared is illogical and not what one would expect from those who pride themselves on rational thought and reason.

So, bah back at you.

[Rainforestgoddess]

219. That's pretty disingenuous

You directly compared god choosing one person to survive a shooting to the academy awards where a group of people choose one person to win a nekkid gold man.

I'm not responding to the OP. I actually understand the sentiment in the moment. Though I would personally probably say 'thank goodness I had that book in my pocket' or something. Obviously there is no cosmic goodness that put the book in my pocket, it's just a way of expressing thankfulness at surviving the situation.

It's on further reflection that the inherent cruelty of that particular belief (subbing in god for goodness) becomes obvious.

[cbayer]

220. I am many things, but not disingenuous.

I made an analogy in order to show that just because someone wasn't chosen for one thing it didn't mean that the god/academy didn't do anything for them, or even worse, did something harmful.

I then wen on to offer my opinion that there might be an infinite number or scenarios and rejected the simplistic black an white assumption that because A, therefore B.

Your "obvious" is not so obvious to others. You don't believe that there was a cosmic goodness, but someone else does. Since there is no proof either way, who knows.

I firmly reject that there is any inherent cruelty in that particular belief. As I said, the scenarios could be infinite and the conclusion that it is inherently cruel is just one of them.

But it's the one that you embrace, and that's ok…. it's just not necessarily right.

[Rainforestgoddess]

221. urgh

yes, I said urgh out loud at home.


When *I* say 'thank goodness x happened", it is obvious that I am not referring to a all powerful cosmic entity called 'goodness', but that I am merely expressing gratitude at the circumstances that happened to be favourable to me.

This not a comment on religion in general, though I'm sure there's a religion out there with a god called 'goodness' (perhaps in another language). The adherents could be called Goodfellas.

Your analogy falls down because you're presuming a situation where there has to be one winner. I do believe Jesus wanted to save more than one person, himself.

[cbayer]

222. I said urgh too, but probably in a different way than you did.

Yes, you are expressing gratitude for fortunate and favorable circumstances. You are not thanking a god or making any king of religious statement at all.

Your analogy falls down because you presume that when someone expresses gratitude for fortunate and favorable circumstances which they think have something to do with their god, they are saying that god doesn't care about those who weren't so fortunate.

That is illogical and way too simplistic.

I don't assume one winner at all. In fact, I don't assume anything other than when people say "Thank goodness" or "Thank god", they are essentially saying the same thing. One is just saying it to happenstance while the other is saying it to what they perceive of as god.

IMO, there is absolutely no reason to believe that one is more right than the other.

[Rainforestgoddess]

223. urgh again ;)

You do realise, that for the most part we are saying the same thing, right?

I don't think that believers are intentionally being cruel when they say that god saved them.

I think that upon further reflection of the position, the cruelty becomes obvious.

Pretend for a moment that I'm the parent of a child killed in a building collapse.

It would be CRUEL for a survivor to speak to me and say, 'only the good lord's intervention saved me'. In fact, even if said survivor said the same thing most of the time,to most people, I would think that a person with an ounce of kindness would shut their trap and not say it to a parent of a child who had not been so lucky. If that's the case, then on some level, they understand the cruelty of the statement.

[cbayer]

224. urgh to you, too.

I am guessing this indicates that you are frustrated because I don't entirely agree with you.

I do not agree that the cruelty becomes obvious at all. I think that is a conclusion that has been arrived at by some people that don't believe in god and often look for something evil when believers, well, act like believers.

It would be cruel for you as a survivor to say, "haha, god loves me but he doesn't love you". But that is not what they say.

They say that they are grateful for being saved and that they think it's mysterious and inexplicable. I've never read a single story about someone saying anything like you are describing to the parent of a child who didn't survive.

Why is it any different than you saying, "Thank goodness I just happened to look to the left before I stepped out into the street". Wouldn't the implication be, "Too bad your kid didn't do the same thing. Haha, lucky me, no luck for you".

It is the insertion of god in there that so infuriates some people, while something almost identical that doesn't include the mention of god is perfectly acceptable.

I am often amazed at how some with no belief have such clear and strict definitions for god.

[Rainforestgoddess]

225. I am frustrated because we basically agree with each other

and yet you continue to argue with me as if it were some kind of massive difference in point of view.

I'm frustrated because I'm trying to engage with you on a lighthearted conversational level.

the only big point of disagreement that we have is that your analogy is a good one. <---this indicates that I'm trying to be a bit silly to lighten the mood

1- I don't think there is inherent ill will in expressing relief for survival with or without mentioning a deity. Do you agree?

2- your point " I've never read a single story about someone saying anything like you are describing to the parent of a child who didn't survive." actually shows you agree with me that there is some part of a person that knows there is cruelty in that kind of statement.

I didn't claim that there were people that do such an abhorrent thing. In fact, I said the fact that they don't shows that some part of them knows it would be cruel.

[cbayer]

227. Ok, I see that you are trying to make it lighthearted and I apologize.

I definitely agree with #1.

Where we may differ is that I don't think any thoughtful survival, believer or not, would say something to someone who had lost that might come across as gloating. Whether god enters into the equation or not is irrelevant, imo. It is cruel with or without a god.

[Rainforestgoddess]

228. I agree with that too

(gloating with or without a deity involved)

I do think that adding in deity adds a different level, beyond lucky to survive, to 'chosen' to survive. But that's a small quibble.

Look at us talking like growed ups!

[cbayer]

229. I will agree that it's a small quibble and glad that we are talking like this as well.

My objection to this OP was that this kid who had just gone through something we can't even imagine was being attacked. He was such an easy and defenseless target.

[AtheistCrusader]

205. You've claimed it's illogical. You've not explained in any way, why you made that claim.

[Warren Stupidity]

211. Uh what? Your metaphor is not proving the point you think it is proving.

When the Academy chooses, for example, the winner of the Best Actor category, in doing so they are explicitly NOT CHOOSING all the other nominees in that category, not only that, but they are saying that the winner was the ONE person in that category worth choosing.

You should have heeded your own advice upthread and stayed out of this.

[Turbineguy]

207. Nice of God to take time out from

all the sports events he's required for.