Lurker > BalisticWarri0r

BalisticWarri0r posted...

This is a dumb post. Someone who has a conceal carry permit does not have to transport his firearm unloaded and locked up.

If you treat all firearms as if they are loaded, you will never be in a position where you "accidently" discharge it.

You're saying you should never check the gun to make sure it's loaded before transportation to and from the range, and cleaning.
For example, a glock will require the trigger to be pulled, are you the type of person that wants to punch a hole through your wall while cleaning because "every gun is treated as if it is loaded, so why should it matter if it actually is"

This idiot should never have had a gun if he did not practice anykind of safety.

A gun should be unloaded before getting to the range with gun, magazine, and bullets all separated. Then after your done shooting at the range the gun should be EMPTY, magazine taken out, chamber checked, and bullets stored.

Gun safety is always the top priority, safety first, safety always.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

First rule before leave the range and cleaning, always visually and physically inspect that the gun is loaded.

Dumb post.

You always act like the gun is loaded. Don't "inspect" the gun and then point it at someone when you clean after you established it isn't.

Just ensure you're not pointing it at someone, period.

This is a dumb post.

You're always supposed to inspect your gun before transporting and cleaning, it doesn't matter if your supposed to treat them as loaded, no matter what you always check the gun.

The idea of this as a "test" is just silly. What was the test for those who died in the shooting? I imagine they wouldn't much appreciate getting murdered for the sake of some random guy's religious epiphany.

Going to operate under the assumption that this is actually true even though it's the first I've heard it and am pretty sure it isn't true

A.) What if I entered my pin already? I mean, it's the second thing you do after swiping, right?

B.) As mentioned above, what if said pin is 4554? It's the same forwards and backwards.

Honestly, point B is really the more important one.

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Callixtus posted...

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Callixtus posted...

Still waiting for a source on these "influences" on Catholicism.

I mean you could literally Google it and I could post links and resources of research. But you are going to claim it false anyway.

Here is just one you could read.

http://www.hope-of-israel.org/mithraism.html

Yeah I just wanted to see what conspiracy theory-esque website you were drawing your delusions from.

Now I know. Thanks.

Ah typical catholic mindset.

So you're telling me I should engage in debatimg a website that can't even get basic latin right such as Sol Invictus, says St. Jerome's name was Eusebius Heirymonius Sophronius, and says Mithraism was the primary religion of the Roman Empire in the 200s BCE, despite the Roman Empire, as we cal it, not even existing yet and the scholarly consensus holding it wasn't prevalent until the 1st century CE, ie 200 years later. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism?wprov=sfla1)

And that's just from a cursory glance. Doesn't help that it cites to no authorities either.

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Callixtus posted...

Still waiting for a source on these "influences" on Catholicism.

I mean you could literally Google it and I could post links and resources of research. But you are going to claim it false anyway.

Here is just one you could read.

http://www.hope-of-israel.org/mithraism.html

Yeah I just wanted to see what conspiracy theory-esque website you were drawing your delusions from.

Now I know. Thanks.

Still waiting for a source on these "influences" on Catholicism.

BalisticWarri0r posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

lilORANG posted...

PiOverlord posted...

Catholics have a distorted version of the Bible.

pretty sure all bibles contain the same basic foundation for the papacy.

they don't, actually. there was no conception of a "papacy" of any kind in the original text or in the earliest faith. the entire vernacular around a papacy was a catholic invention when catholicism first started.

Catholicism draws heavily from ancient babylonian mystery religions. Interesting that catholicism had influence from mithraism, which had the "father" of that religion both seated in Rome.

Do you have a citation for this slander?

As far as I know, the Romans considered Mithraism a religion from the East, not one based in Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism

lilORANG posted...

PiOverlord posted...

Catholics have a distorted version of the Bible.

pretty sure all bibles contain the same basic foundation for the papacy.

they don't, actually. there was no conception of a "papacy" of any kind in the original text or in the earliest faith. the entire vernacular around a papacy was a catholic invention when catholicism first started.

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

The establishment of the papacy more-or-less arose in the 4th century as a product of political maneuverings and contingent historical circumstance in favor of the Bishop of Rome (who was not above asserting their supremacy with the aid of forged documents). Biblical justification was manufactured after the fact.

Matthew 16:18 ?

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

The establishment of the papacy more-or-less arose in the 4th century as a product of political maneuverings and contingent historical circumstance in favor of the Bishop of Rome (who was not above asserting their supremacy with the aid of forged documents). Biblical justification was manufactured after the fact.

There has been a pope since peter lol.

The holy spirit is part of the trinity of the faith.
I thought it alluded to the religion because the followers were all blessed with the holy spirit. To walk as followers of Christ, you had to repent your sins to the God and be baptised. Since most if not all members of the church were baptised, the only active part they had to do was repent their sins at church or in a regular confession. Yeah i am not sure though.

So, to me the bible verse means to not ever denounce the faith.

Not really. She seemed to irritate people for some reason I remember.
But I can't believe anyone would rather see that irritating Flo and that fucking talking box of Progressive's over her.

Flo, that talking box, any and all "real people" car ads and cartoons peddling drugs. fuck them all. fuck whoever came up with them all, fuck everyone who makes them, fuck the product they're selling and I hope all involved rot in the deepest level of hell. And those creepy cartoon hipster trash hamsters driving Kias too.

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Zikten posted...

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Catholicism itself has a major foundation built on a lot of pagan tradition and worship.

it's still not true paganism though. I know. I used to consider myself a pagan for an entire decade. Catholicism may have some rituals that come from pagan religions, but it's still focused solely on Jesus. Otherwise I never would have felt the need to switch to Paganism after having been raised a Catholic

the church fails to adhere to standards that Christ himself put out.

The same could be said about all religions.

BalisticWarri0r posted...

Catholicism itself has a major foundation built on a lot of pagan tradition and worship.

it's still not true paganism though. I know. I used to consider myself a pagan for an entire decade. Catholicism may have some rituals that come from pagan religions, but it's still focused solely on Jesus. Otherwise I never would have felt the need to switch to Paganism after having been raised a Catholic

Tmaster148 posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

That's forgivable but for some reason being gay isn't.

Pretty sure there's nothing saying God can't forgive someone who is gay. God is the one who decides whether or not to forgive people and he's the one who created humans who are capable of sinning.

He created them in his image, after all

LinksLiege posted...

something something not lovin' it

ha, dammit

I'd be fine with the death penalty for this piece of shit, but I also find the rest of the story bizzare. How long was she actually in the bathroom? I just went through a labor with my wife and that took around 6 hours. Even with shorter labors you're looking at a couple of hours atleast. You would think the employees would have done a little more than just check on her after a certain time. Plus did she not scream at all? What about the baby when it came out?

Story is insane all around

Hope that baby doesn't have brain damage...

Irvin Kershner

It's never going to be a commercial or product symbol. People in the back ass mountains of North Korea don't know the Disney logo or the Coca Cola logo. It has to be a universally recognizable symbol that transcends even what we'd call civilized parts of the world. Like others have said that's going to be a pictographic symbol for something that every human understands, like a stick man drawing or a symbol of the sun. If you want to expand beyond that then I'd say the "thumbs up." For whatever reason, that gesture seems to be about as close to a universal gesture as you can get.