Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 6:25 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Online

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3655
My perspective/view begins where I live which includes family, community, nation, world, and universe. Not getting the hypocrite accusation, still again, simply because I see more than my own self and self interest in a narrow and nationalistic perspective. Are we not all world citizens and God's children in a friendly universe? Jesus asked who our neighbor is for a purpose and commanded we learn to love one another as a single family on both the planetary level and even greater than that global view. Small minds see small with self as the center of the universe. Your subjective view and claims deny the importance and value of objectivity and reality in our view of others....all others....and the worthy attempt to walk in another's shoes and learn to appreciate THEIR perspective....also as taught by the Master. It appears the definition of hypocrite eludes you.

Despite too little pay and training and poor policies and priorities by their leadership, I view those who serve their community and nation in service as engaged in noble and important work. Gun controls regarding ownership, size, killing capacity, etc. has nothing at all to do with those who serve and protect (the few bad apples certainly indicate the need for better training).

One may be for equal protection, human rights, constitutional freedoms, AND the right to bear arms....just not the right to abuse the right with mayhem and deadly force outside of their own home/property due to imminent threat.

But when one understands the political dynamic 250 years ago and how our nation has evolved since, no one needs high capacity, high speed, armor piercing, combat weaponry for self "defense"....or hunting rabbits for that matter. Evolution means new challenges and new solutions are needed for many issues. It's a sorry sight for the gun making and owning lobby to own and hold hostage our political process and national will. Goes directly to shady politics where money wins and without transparency or accountability....two very important issues presented in the UB for effective and progressive governance.

Your opinion is that we should be paranoid of the constitutional government and prepare for revolution with military style weaponry because of Castro. I thought Castro was the armed revolutionary who took down a government because he got his hands on military weaponry??!! So are we to be armed against the Batistas or the Castros? Here? Still? Or have we perhaps evolved beyond supporting violence and military weaponry....and maybe even guns at all....except in the hands of our public servants, the police and military and hold up that ideal when in time to come none has any need for deadly force? Is that not the inevitable and evolutionary destiny for us? Shouldn't we be trying to evolve further...and further toward peace and cooperation...and love? At which end of a gun is the love found? Or personal safety for that matter?

Besides expanding our "view" beyond our own importance and fears, we might also consider our time unit perspective. Where is the future? How does this moment fit within our past and that future? How might we change and choose differently because of such an expanded view of our place and our time?

Thanks for asking my opinion. 8)


Last edited by fanofVan on Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:10 am +0000, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
(55:5.4) The extent of civil government and statutory regulation, in an intermediate state of advancing civilization, is in inverse proportion to the morality and spirituality of the citizenship.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 920
MannyC wrote:

I live in the US and my view is from here. It is the hypocrite that claims a view not their own.


This statement makes absolutely no sense. Are we not to treat all as our brothers? Walk a mile in their shoes, as they say?

Gun ownership is not compatible or consistent with a belief in a friendly universe.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:23 am +0000
Posts: 818
Greetings,

It is my opinion that it is people who kill. What weapon they chose is immaterial to the discussion. As long as we have such a large anti-social element in society, so many unstable minds, we will have killing. Take away guns and they will find something else to kill with. Are we to also outlaw the ownership of butcher knives, box cutters, hatchets and the automobile? The problem lies with the proper handling of the elements within society prone to murder and killing. There are many reasons why human beings kill. It is not how they kill that is important. It is why they kill.

Ethically speaking,
Rexford


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Online

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3655
I agree Rexford. However, there is much to debate about the actual value and effect of an armed citizenry regardless of "rights" and constitutional issues that no longer hold context. The amendment was included due to the perceived tyranny of an occupying colonial force 250 years ago which is long past its "national self defense" applications. The tyranny faced today, internally to the USA, is lack of national citizen's representation and any transparency and/or accountability of those elected to represent the citizen rather than the politician and/or special interests which directly conflict with the needs of the population they supposedly "represent". Do we need an armed citizenry or one that votes and is actually informed rather than driven by fear mongering and acrobatic diversions?

Again....in which direction is the future? Will the USA lead the world into the future? Isn't peace, stability, and personal safety the future and the ideal to guide us there? The need for national defense and police enforcement is not the issue here.

The need for personal security is the issue. One might consider if owning guns, especially lots of guns and military weapons, truly serves or delivers personal security. For example, the number of home invaders shot compared to the number of gun-house residents/visitors/friends shot would suggest that personal safety is not assured by a gun but, rather, becomes significantly at greater risk to injury and death...not by any invader/attacker but more like self inflicted by the possession of the instruments of quick deadly force.

I heartily agree that culture and social dynamics, including education and employment and equal standing under the law needs far greater attention, priority, and resources. It is indeed a chicken and egg conundrum!! What is the goal and ideal? How do we get there from here? Why is the USA, by far, the most violent and deadly "civilized" country? Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" (Michael is an NRA member and gun owner by the way) demonstrated that Canadians have far more guns per capita than the US does but the murder rate is miniscule by comparison. His point was the same as yours Rex, people kill people. Guns are just one tool for such violence. But why so much here?

I think it might be that because we constitutionally idealize but do not deliver equal protection under the law, that many expressions of fear (racism, sexism, ism, ism, ism) and related mind poisons deliver a deadly cultural cocktail.

A difficult problem. But surely assault weapons of mass destruction are far more part of the problem than the solution? One or two people with clubs and knives cannot kill dozens in the same place at the same time can they? The logic eludes me that would conclude that since people kill people it is irrelevant to outcomes if they have access to deadly force on such a scale. What's the ideal again?

8)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
fanofVan wrote:
The tyranny faced today, internally to the USA, is lack of national citizen's representation and any transparency and/or accountability of those elected to represent the citizen rather than the politician and/or special interests which directly conflict with the needs of the population they supposedly "represent".

Couldn't have said it better, fanofVan.

When will the citizenry take hold of the people power enshrined by the constitution and get determined to AMEND it to, once and for all, make a move toward guaranteeing that misrepresention of the people is minimized, instead of institionalized?

In 1974, Richard Nixon resigned. That was the first sign.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 920
Nod's post, above, brings to mind the following quote: "Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." Wintston Churchill, speech, House of Commons, November 11, 1947.

TUB paper 71:
Quote:
2. The Evolution of Representative Government

71:2.1 (801.13) Democracy, while an ideal, is a product of civilization, not of evolution. Go slowly! select carefully! for the dangers of democracy are:

71:2.2 (801.14) 1. Glorification of mediocrity.

71:2.3 (801.15) 2. Choice of base and ignorant rulers.

71:2.4 (801.16) 3. Failure to recognize the basic facts of social evolution.

71:2.5 (801.17) 4. Danger of universal suffrage in the hands of uneducated and indolent majorities.

71:2.6 (801.18) 5. Slavery to public opinion; the majority is not always right.

71:2.7 (802.1) Public opinion, common opinion, has always delayed society; nevertheless, it is valuable, for, while retarding social evolution, it does preserve civilization. Education of public opinion is the only safe and true method of accelerating civilization; force is only a temporary expedient, and cultural growth will increasingly accelerate as bullets give way to ballots. Public opinion, the mores, is the basic and elemental energy in social evolution and state development, but to be of state value it must be nonviolent in expression.

71:2.8 (802.2) The measure of the advance of society is directly determined by the degree to which public opinion can control personal behavior and state regulation through nonviolent expression. The really civilized government had arrived when public opinion was clothed with the powers of personal franchise. Popular elections may not always decide things rightly, but they represent the right way even to do a wrong thing. Evolution does not at once produce superlative perfection but rather comparative and advancing practical adjustment.

71:2.9 (802.3) There are ten steps, or stages, to the evolution of a practical and efficient form of representative government, and these are:

71:2.10 (802.4) 1. Freedom of the person. Slavery, serfdom, and all forms of human bondage must disappear.

71:2.11 (802.5) 2. Freedom of the mind. Unless a free people are educated — taught to think intelligently and plan wisely — freedom usually does more harm than good.

71:2.12 (802.6) 3. The reign of law. Liberty can be enjoyed only when the will and whims of human rulers are replaced by legislative enactments in accordance with accepted fundamental law.

71:2.13 (802.7) 4. Freedom of speech. Representative government is unthinkable without freedom of all forms of expression for human aspirations and opinions.

71:2.14 (802. 8 ) 5. Security of property. No government can long endure if it fails to provide for the right to enjoy personal property in some form. Man craves the right to use, control, bestow, sell, lease, and bequeath his personal property.

71:2.15 (802.9) 6. The right of petition. Representative government assumes the right of citizens to be heard. The privilege of petition is inherent in free citizenship.

71:2.16 (802.10) 7. The right to rule. It is not enough to be heard; the power of petition must progress to the actual management of the government.

71:2.17 (802.11) 8. Universal suffrage. Representative government presupposes an intelligent, efficient, and universal electorate. The character of such a government will ever be determined by the character and caliber of those who compose it. As civilization progresses, suffrage, while remaining universal for both sexes, will be effectively modified, regrouped, and otherwise differentiated.

71:2.18 (802.12) 9. Control of public servants. No civil government will be serviceable and effective unless the citizenry possess and use wise techniques of guiding and controlling officeholders and public servants.

71:2.19 (802.13) 10. Intelligent and trained representation. The survival of democracy is dependent on successful representative government; and that is conditioned upon the practice of electing to public offices only those individuals who are technically trained, intellectually competent, socially loyal, and morally fit. Only by such provisions can government of the people, by the people, and for the people be preserved.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
fanofVan wrote:
The amendment was included due to the perceived tyranny of an occupying colonial force 250 years ago which is long past its "national self defense" applications.

The perception at the time fanofVan, was that if the government that was being framed lost its way and ended up oppressing the people again, like the British did, the people, if they decided, could take up arms to dispatch the tyrants who might dare to usurp the power of government.

We are now dealing with a situation where the level of corruption by the representatives of the people is so high that it is certainly conceivable that something that hasn't occurred yet in the history of America, may be upon us.

Heaven forbid.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 920
nodAmanaV wrote:
fanofVan wrote:
The amendment was included due to the perceived tyranny of an occupying colonial force 250 years ago which is long past its "national self defense" applications.

The perception at the time fanofVan, was that if the government that was being framed lost its way and ended up oppressing the people again, like the British did, the people, if they decided, could take up arms to dispatch the tyrants who might dare to usurp the power of government.

We are now dealing with a situation where the level of corruption by the representatives of the people is so high that it is certainly conceivable that something that hasn't occurred yet in the history of America, may be upon us.

Heaven forbid.


Does anyone really believe that an armed militia of citizens could stand more than a fraction of a second chance against the US government with its nuclear technologies and drone strike capabilities? Armed citizens are powerless against a tyrannical US government and will only create useless bloodshed, undoubtedly involving citizens who do NOT wish to participate in armed retaliation against, yes, even a tryannical, government.

The TUB does not endorse armed insurrection.

Quote:
71:2.18 (802.12) 9. Control of public servants. No civil government will be serviceable and effective unless the citizenry possess and use wise techniques of guiding and controlling officeholders and public servants.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 1369
Agon D. Onter wrote:
Armed citizens are powerless against a tyrannical US government and will only create useless bloodshed, undoubtedly involving citizens who do NOT wish to participate in armed retaliation against, yes, even a tryannical, government.

We'll said Agon.

Yes, at the outset of rebellion, there are always those who identify with that position.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:23 am +0000
Posts: 818
Greetings,

A few things come to mind. Society has changed dramatically, we can all agree. When I was growing up every house had hunting rifles and knives. There were no deliberate or accidental killings in my rural neighborhood. The purpose of those guns was self-preservation and occasionally self-protection. Today's society, for the most part, is no longer rural. Poor people no longer rely on hunting and fishing to survive, as in my day. It seems that the primary purpose of guns today is self-protection, and that is a definite change.

I wonder why people feel they have a greater need for protection today than just 60-70 years ago. Back then, no one locked their door in my neighborhood and it was not uncommon to find a neighbor in your house helping himself to a cup of coffee or dropping off some surplus from his garden. The paper boy would let himself in once a week and take change out of the change bowl to pay the weekly fee. I am willing to bet that most people today who wake up to find a person sitting at the kitchen table or walking through the house would look for their gun and call 911. This is all relatively new and I think we are having trouble adjusting as a culture.

Another thing we know is that it is not possible to legislate morality. All the weapons in the world could disappear tomorrow morning, and we would still have a huge delinquent, antisocial element in our society hellbent on causing law abiding citizens as much pain as possible. Perhaps one of the problems today is that there are greater numbers of antisocial, mentally unstable and delinquent people living in closer proximity to one another, which contributes to the feeling of insecurity.

Paper 81 has some illuminating ideas:

But cultural society is no great and beneficent club of inherited privilege into which all men are born with free membership and entire equality. Rather is it an exalted and ever-advancing guild of earth workers, admitting to its ranks only the nobility of those toilers who strive to make the world a better place in which their children and their children's children may live and advance in subsequent ages. And this guild of civilization exacts costly admission fees, imposes strict and rigorous disciplines, visits heavy penalties on all dissenters and nonconformists, while it confers few personal licenses or privileges except those of enhanced security against common dangers and racial perils. 81:5:3

American culture has changed. Today it will admit anyone, not just the noble toilers who strive to make the world a better place. No longer does American culture exact costly admission fees in order to be a member of its society. Lately, it has become taboo to penalize anyone for anything including destruction of the very fabric of society itself. However, American culture continues to demand security against outside dangers.

Social association is a form of survival insurance which human beings have learned is profitable; therefore are most individuals willing to pay those premiums of self-sacrifice and personal-liberty curtailment which society exacts from its members in return for this enhanced group protection. In short, the present-day social mechanism is a trial-and-error insurance plan designed to afford some degree of assurance and protection against a return to the terrible and antisocial conditions which characterized the early experiences of the human race. 81:5:4

Security against outside dangers is the one thing that society is supposed to provide, but in order to do so the citizens must be willing to make certain sacrifices. American culture is currently rebelling against those sacrifices. Few realize that sacrifices must be exacted. Most instinctively know that citizens cannot demand ultimate freedom and still have a society for self-protection. Somewhere, somehow sacrifices must be doled out, and it is the fair allocation of sacrifices which cannot be agreed upon, and probably will not be agreed upon until we return to the terrible antisocial conditions of the past. No matter how you look at it, the antisocial stock must be identified and dealt with in such a way that they no longer disrupt society and make citizens feel so insecure that they need to buy weapons for defense.

Society thus becomes a co-operative scheme for securing civil freedom through institutions, economic freedom through capital and invention, social liberty through culture, and freedom from violence through police regulation. 81:5:5

People must be willing to accept the law, and the police must have the power to control violence. People are responsible for violence. If it is not guns, it is mowing people down with cars, setting buildings on fire and flinging pipe bombs. Antisocial people must pay the price of their antisocial behavior. Right now, we coddle them and treat them as misunderstood children just trying to get attention. People do have the right to protest and to bring issues to society's attention, but peacefully.

Peacefully means that a dissenter appreciates the society he is living in but wants it to improve it, gently and carefully. Gandhi saw problems with his society but he never wanted to uproot and destroy it, burn it to the ground and kill all those who disagree, in order to change the world according to his image. If you cannot help others see and understand your moral issue, then you cannot change morality on that issue. Neither violence or laws will change morality.

Might does not make right, but it does enforce the commonly recognized rights of each succeeding generation. The prime mission of government is the definition of the right, the just and fair regulation of class differences, and the enforcement of equality of opportunity under the rules of law. Every human right is associated with a social duty; group privilege is an insurance mechanism which unfailingly demands the full payment of the exacting premiums of group service. And group rights, as well as those of the individual, must be protected, including the regulation of the sex propensity.
Liberty subject to group regulation is the legitimate goal of social evolution. Liberty without restrictions is the vain and fanciful dream of unstable and flighty human minds.81:5:6-7


The legitimate goal of social evolution is liberty with restrictions. American culture is rebelling against many of its restrictions. It will not work. Sacrifices will have to be made by all. Some gun owners will have to sacrifice. Some rebellious dissenters will have to sacrifice. Antisocial persons will have to be greatly restricted, regulated and controlled. Education must be improved. Fear does not stay lit long in an illuminated mind.

Rexford


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
fanofVan wrote:
My perspective/view begins where I live which includes family, community, nation, world, and universe.


How much of the above includes those that you have personally experienced, Bradly? How much is what you have read in a book somewhere? Do you actually travel by looking in pictures in a Travel Magazine?


fanofVan wrote:
Are we not all world citizens and God's children in a friendly universe?


Potentially.


fanofVan wrote:
Small minds see small with self as the center of the universe.


Small minds do not see that an atom is a Universe with Paradise as its nucleus.


fanofVan wrote:
It appears the definition of hypocrite eludes you.


Yes Bradly, you do elude me.


fanofVan wrote:
One may be for equal protection, human rights, constitutional freedoms, AND the right to bear arms....just not the right to abuse the right with mayhem and deadly force outside of their own home/property due to imminent threat.



Well enough, Bradly, so perhaps you can judge whether an individual is in imminent threat and decide for him/her whether to use deadly force. But I think that you can do that because, as you claim, you are not self-centered and can put yourself in others shoes.


fanofVan wrote:
But when one understands the political dynamic 250 years ago and how our nation has evolved since, no one needs high capacity, high speed, armor piercing, combat weaponry for self "defense"....or hunting rabbits for that matter.


Yes, these are the talking points of the left, or was that your original and independent thinking? And who appointed you to decide what someone else needs or wants? I've seen some pretty huge rabbits around here. Some won't even fit down a rabbit hole.


fanofVan wrote:
Or have we perhaps evolved beyond supporting violence and military weaponry....and maybe even guns at all....except in the hands of our public servants, the police and military and hold up that ideal when in time to come none has any need for deadly force? Is that not the inevitable and evolutionary destiny for us? Shouldn't we be trying to evolve further...and further toward peace and cooperation...and love? At which end of a gun is the love found? Or personal safety for that matter?


Perhaps you should be the one to remove guns out of the hands of citizens who are potential murderers. That would certainly further peace, cooperation and love. And how are you going to do that, Bradly? Perhaps at the trigger end of an even bigger gun? But you would do all that for love, would you not, Bradly? I do not have to go far to find my definition of a hypocrite, and who needs a definition when I can present an example.


fanofVan wrote:
Shouldn't we be trying to evolve further...and further toward peace and cooperation...and love?


The harder you try, Bradly, the sooner we will get there. Perhaps you prefer an even more rapid approach. That is called revolution. Yes, that is the answer! Peace and love through violent means. Love is the answer so it must be had at any cost, even a the point of a gun. Is that an original thought from a real thinker or was it borrowed from Che Guevara? BTW, I've seen some really cool t-shirts with his mug on it. Do you own one?



fanofVan wrote:
Besides expanding our "view" beyond our own importance and fears, we might also consider our time unit perspective. Where is the future? How does this moment fit within our past and that future? How might we change and choose differently because of such an expanded view of our place and our time?


Choose and change for yourself, Bradly. Only hypocrites are self important enough to presume to choose for others. And you feel that you must choose for others because you fear others. You are lacking in trust.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
Agon D. Onter wrote:
MannyC wrote:

I live in the US and my view is from here. It is the hypocrite that claims a view not their own.


This statement makes absolutely no sense. Are we not to treat all as our brothers? Walk a mile in their shoes, as they say?

Gun ownership is not compatible or consistent with a belief in a friendly universe.


I did not expect that it would make sense to you, Agon. You cannot walk a mile in a brother's shoes, metaphorically or otherwise. But you can walk a mile with your brother, even a second mile. Never presume that you can know your brother as Father knows him.

To say that gun ownership is not compatible or consistent with a belief in a friendly universe is most certainly an idolatrous statement. Since when is a gun a person? Is the gun evil or is the owner evil? If you say that the gun is evil then you have given the gun a personality. Can you do that and not usurp the prerogatives of the Creator? If you say that the owner of the gun is evil, then you do not trust your brother with the gun.

Do you trust your brother with hands that can strangle? Do you trust a brother with a pillow that can smother? There are so few real thinkers.


By who's authority does John baptize?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
fanofVan wrote:
I agree Rexford.


I wonder if you do agree, Bradly, but I will trust you on this. It's nice to have friends.


fanofVan wrote:
Do we need an armed citizenry or one that votes and is actually informed rather than driven by fear mongering and acrobatic diversions?


You tell us what we need, Bradly, but first do your research and report back to us. And how do propose to inform the citizenry? Who do you trust to give us that information? Is it your comrades in the halls of academia, or the professors of education in those halls that teach our kindergarten teachers just how to begin the indoctrination of the innocent? The very young learn to fear the weather, they learn to fear humans who will bring their Earth to its knees. It's the beginning of learning self-loathing and dependence on a benevolent government that can fix things and being to replace God. It is worse than slavery, it is fear mongering and acrobatic diversions! Then these little ones can grow up to vote the right way, the way they are supposed to. In that way, the pretense of a free society and democracy can be transparent, even in darkness.


fanofVan wrote:
The need for personal security is the issue. One might consider if owning guns, especially lots of guns and military weapons, truly serves or delivers personal security. For example, the number of home invaders shot compared to the number of gun-house residents/visitors/friends shot would suggest that personal safety is not assured by a gun but, rather, becomes significantly at greater risk to injury and death...not by any invader/attacker but more like self inflicted by the possession of the instruments of quick deadly force.


This is a perfect academic analysis, Bradly. Statistics are a perfect reason to eliminate reason from the equation. Perhaps there is some statistic to justify why you should not be limited to 140 characters on this forum. I would vote for that, reduce your voice to a tweet. How would you like that? It would be safer for you. It would greatly reduce your chance of the self-inflicted shot in the foot, followed by said foot in the mouth. Hypocrisy is a bitter and jagged pill to swallow, yet you seem addicted to that drug. It is incomprehensible, really.


fanofVan wrote:
A difficult problem. But surely assault weapons of mass destruction are far more part of the problem than the solution? One or two people with clubs and knives cannot kill dozens in the same place at the same time can they? The logic eludes me that would conclude that since people kill people it is irrelevant to outcomes if they have access to deadly force on such a scale. What's the ideal again?


Seems that all logic eludes you, Bradly. What does the quantity of murdered victims have to do with anything spiritual? Murdering one is no better than murdering one thousand. You who are so idolatrous cannot let go of the body count. We are not bodies. He who contemplates adultery is no better than the adulterer. He who contemplates murder is no better than the murderer. It is not the instruments of murder that matter, it is the murderous heart that injures ones Soul. Have you ever contemplated murder, Bradly?


fanofVan wrote:
What's the ideal again?


What good is it to gain the world and lose ones Soul?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:23 pm +0000
Posts: 641
Agon D. Onter wrote:
Does anyone really believe that an armed militia of citizens could stand more than a fraction of a second chance against the US government with its nuclear technologies and drone strike capabilities? Armed citizens are powerless against a tyrannical US government and will only create useless bloodshed, undoubtedly involving citizens who do NOT wish to participate in armed retaliation against, yes, even a tryannical, government.


The words of a coward. Perhaps Peter would have lived a bit longer had he persisted in his cowardly act of denying the Master three times. Peter did not die a coward. There is hope for those who agree with your words above.


Agon D. Onter wrote:
The TUB does not endorse armed insurrection.


Nor does TUB endorse cowardice. You would do well to arm yourself with Truth. The gun thing is a red herring.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: fanofVan


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group