Apparently the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is NOT a good guy with a gun

(previous response continued due to internal server error)

You guys, with full awareness of what you were doing, decided to kick a hornet's nest. You (not just you, IronPalm, but all of you) will probably be stung, if the history of the participants in this thread is any guide. Since you are not only the hornet's-nest-kickers, but also the hornets, you will also be the ones doing the stinging. Note as well that this is not a derailment of an otherwise-innocent thread; Ginger started this thread with an inflammatory title. It's a political mess from the git-go.

What I was asking is, given that you're all hell-bent on making a mess, don't expect mods to clean it up. If you make us, then we will, but please be grown-ups about it and don't make us. As I said, this isn't an innocent thread that got derailed. You guys deliberately got yourselves into it.

 

“I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. The brave man is not he who does not feel afraid, but he who conquers that fear.” - Nelson Mandela

I honestly think linking this story to the gun debate does a disservice to this woman. She is an amazing example of a strong Christian woman who showed true faith in God and prayer.

I also find it sad that people are already beginning to attack her for her faith.

One comment I saw was this:

"One thing, everyone. There is no god, no gods, and while Ms Tuff was a hero she is also a nutcase and watch, her life will end tragically. She is a good example of the brainwashed masses re supernatural fake religion. I say this with thankfulness to her for her actions, however. But she is misguided trouble soul herself. Watch her story implode in future."

No matter what someone believes in, a tragedy was averted in large part due to this woman's faith in God.

 

What people fail to realize is that atheism is not an ideology or set of beliefs; it is an absence of an idea. I find it funny on profiles when people type "atheist" next to religion when they should say "none." People who stand behind their atheism as an ideology are mistaken. A notable speaker against theism, Christopher Hitchens, coined the term for his kind as anti-theists.

 

Yes, there are two types of atheists.

One chooses not to believe in a god and respects theists choice to believe.

The other is someone who is vehemently anti-theism and will belittle or otherwise disparage people who believe in God.

I will call him out because I respect him, but Lemex is someone who is an atheist, and believes the complete opposite of myself, but we are friends and I respect his beliefs as much as he respects mine. When two people give respect to each other and treat each other fairly, it's an amazing thing and just feels good

 

You are right, but there is a philosophy called 'Atheism+' or 'Brights' that is as far as I can tell made up of the Richard Dawkins types. I like to call them by another name: 'Wankers'.

Thanks for the shout out man. I may be an atheist, but that doesn't mean I can't understand what belief might be like. I'm very 'live and let live' with those of faith, and I even have a strong respect for religious art. I honestly sometimes wish I could believe, but I can't.


I can only back up what the other mods have said. I will be ignoring this thread if people can start e-drama after three posts. We are mostly adults here, lie in the bed you have made and all that.

 

[off topic]

While I have a lot to say but I'm getting some other work done first (my brain takes short breaks here) I must correct this as I am more than a little familiar with the communities you speak of.

The A+ crowd (Atheism + social causes) has been at war with Dawkins since Elevatorgate (look it up if you don't know what that is) several years ago. The war just exploded again a couple weeks ago when one leading member of the A+ group posted an accusation on his blog that another member of the Skeptic Community (not Dawkins) was guilty of rape.

And for the record, I am not only not in the A+ crowd, I have argued extensively against their radical version of feminism and don't agree with a lot of their nonsense.

[/off topic]

 

Ah, this is honestly news to me. But to be honest, I'm just tired of the pretentious Richard Dawkins type of Athiest who wonder around calling themselves 'scientists' when at best they have only an A-level in biology. What I hate is smugness, and I sense a lot of it from this sort people. You'll have to forgive the ignorance on my part.

 

Of course....If Ms. Tuff had her S&W 686 38+p airweight with shrouded hammer, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

Never heard of 'elevatorgate' until I just Googled it.

Wow.

I never thought I would agree with Dawkins on anything, but his response was perfect.

 

[offtopic]

Not sure which of the thousands of 'elevatorgate' hits you read, but given the confirmation bias 2/3 of all the info out there is saturated with, the following is a fairly factually oriented (IOW without all the judgement commentary) piece that summarizes the affair:

Dawkins, Watson and the elevator ride

[/offtopic]

 

I didn't read all the fallout, because there was just too much, but I got the gist of it.

It wasn't surprising that feminists and atheists sometimes split based on how radical they hold their beliefs.

I think it flows well into what I said about atheists. There are women who want equality, then there are women who hate men and shroud it in a self-righteous cloak of 'feminism'.

As Lemex said, 'wankers'.

 

This is the result of a thread with a built-in agenda (admitted or not). Lots of noise and heat, but little light.

 

Like Milton's fire I find.

 

I think Cogito summed this thread up.

What I find most amusing is that at the very beginning of this thread (and perhaps it's purpose judging by the thread title) was to provoke a game of one-up-man-ship.

"I have a singular example of a potential mass shooting being stopped by a brave, religious woman! How do you like them apples?"

"Fool! I have an equally profound example, except a gun is being used to prevent armed violence! What do you say to that?"

In practice neither of you have done anything significant relating to the gun debate, let alone made your own opinions on the issue seem au courant.

I am still not quite sure why the woman's religiosity has come up either, let alone why its sparked an equally irrelevant segway into New Atheism.

All this being said,

Please carry on.

 

And now this thread has become a self-referencing bit of metafiction (metafact?)

 

If you ignore the gun debate thread title, the body of the original post was about this women's heroic act, which she herself attributes to her faith in God.

So it's not off topic and atheism is only slightly off the rails, and should be permissible only if we get back on track at some point.

Just my 2 cents.

 

I bet this was all staged by the radical Christian leftists to illustrate their views on gun control and the power of God.

...or the Judean People's Front


...or the People's Front of Judea

 

...aaaaand the thread turns into a Monty Python sketch and we all saunter off to the pub, have a few pints and pretend this thread never existed.

 

Is sauntering allowed by the Ministry of Silly Walks?

In all seriousness, we can't abandon this thread yet. It was born to be a fifteen page debate using opinions as facts and unique instances used to represent the whole. You can't just abort it.

 

OK, I'll bite. Do tell what this built-in agenda of mine is?

 

If her religiosity is not off topic, and atheism is only "slighty off the rails", by your guarding I'd even hazard to say its on topic to a point, what exactly do you mean by "get back on track"? According to you it seems we are still quite on track?

I think once we know what the actual topic is, then we can "get back" onto it.

People have prayed for worse.

 

Fiction, I assure you.

I'll wait to see what Cog's imagination turned up.

Voltaire, I suggest you not make baseless assumptions about people you barely know.

I'm not nearly as bothered by the fact the thread title caused an unexpected ruckus as I am that so many people in this thread are convinced they can read my mind.

 

I like what I'm seeing on this page, at two least two separate sentiments I've expressed on more than one occasion. Of course, whenever I do it, everyone wants to shoot me.

 

Pray tell, what assumptions have I made regarding people?

 

You're all going to feel really bad when Ms Tuff births the antichrist because her silver tongue saved her from a divine assassin