Should our Constitution's 2nd Amendment be amended ... ?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Delusion.

Yes... it follows you like a shadow.

 

[LOki]

What's really funny? You forgot having your ass handed to you.

You see sis, bringing your "vague 'feeling' with no real basis in actual fact" to this as proof of your assertion . . . well Cupcake, it's you that just never had a chance. Absent any contest to the contrary argument provided, the assertion that in the absence of God, HUMAN RIGHTS CANNOT EXIST, has been demonstrated to be FALSE.

A wonderful demonstration of how time has no relevance to God's law, OKA: Sound Principle... The brilliance of that contributor, stands even in their absence.

The simple, but immutable truth is: In the Absence of God, there can be no such thing as Human Rights.

And that is because in the absence of God... The origin of all things... the supreme authority in the universe, Rights are merely whatever the individual claims them to be, or whatever the governing body claims them to be, thus... because people are inherently subjective in their reasoning, and because their needs change, so will their sense of what that to which they are entitled.

And this without regard to the consequences of such, to another.

And here we see, in indisputable evidence of that truth, an individual who rejects God's law, demanding that rights are whatever they 'believe' rights to be.

And this without even the slightest understanding of human rights, what they are, how they work, or the responsibilities that are intrinsic to rights.

What the above cited would-be 'contributor' is advancing, is the formula for Anarchy. Plain and simple: Idiocy.

Your God is pure superstition.

Your attacks are based upon nothing but devotion to your superstition.

There's no basis in reality for your assertions. They are pure delusion.

You've been proven wrong with mathematical certainty, Princess.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Superstitious delusion AND irony! How charming!

And your THIRD Concession to the same Standing Point(s) is Duly Noted and Summarily Accepted.

And again Reader... the Key to defeating Leftists in debate, rests in two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftists.

2- Get them to SPEAK!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Your God is pure superstition.

Baseless conjecture.

Your attacks are based upon nothing but devotion to your superstition.

Objectively, irrefutably: FALSE.

There's no basis in reality for your assertions. They are pure delusion.

Baseless Conjecture, factually FALSE!

You've been proven wrong with mathematical certainty, Princess.

ROFLMNAO! Such represents an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

 

[Mudda]

So what doesn't change over time? The bible? Nope, changed many, many times. The constitution? Nope, changed 27 times. So what doesn't change, well, aside from your underwear.

Natural law does not change, as natural law is not relevant to time. Again... if you had the slightest understanding of what time is... you wouldn't be prone to these humiliating spasms of hysteria.

So you have a natural law to own a killing machine? I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

(which, btw, you have no proof that natural laws don't change, and the Big Bang is proof that space and time change).

A "killing machine?" You mean like a GAS CHAMBER? Or is killing machine your new progtard buzz phrase?

The truth bothers you. I get it.

 

[LOki]

Superstitious delusion AND irony! How charming!

And your THIRD Concession to the same Standing Point(s) is Duly Noted and Summarily Accepted.

And again Reader... the Key to defeating Leftists in debate, rests in two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftists.

2- Get them to SPEAK!

Again Reader, the key to defeating superstitious retards in any intellectual exercise, rests upon two fundamental elements:

1- Find a superstitious retard.

2- Get them to SPEAK!

 

[Mudda]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

 

[Boss]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

You have no proof that YOU exist, moron.

 

[Boss]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

 

[Mudda]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

You have no proof that YOU exist, moron.

So you're of the position that these posts are being posted by a non-existent being? Bravo! You're an idiot!

 

[Mudda]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

Being possible and being real are two different things. Now go back to your legos.

 

[LOki]

Your God is pure superstition.

Baseless conjecture.

No. It's an irrefutable fact of reality.

Your attacks are based upon nothing but devotion to your superstition.

Objectively, irrefutably: FALSE.

Sorry about your luck. You are all superstition.

There's no basis in reality for your assertions. They are pure delusion.

Baseless Conjecture, factually FALSE!

Sorry again, Princess. The record is clear... you're ruled by superstitious delusion.

You've been proven wrong with mathematical certainty, Princess.

ROFLMNAO! Such represents an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

Your concession is noted and accepted.

 

[LOki]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

Dipshit.

 

[Boss]

Everything changes over time, it's a fact of nature. Now you know.

No... everything does not change over time. And if you had the slightest understanding of time... you'd understand why that is.

So what doesn't change over time? The bible? Nope, changed many, many times. The constitution? Nope, changed 27 times. So what doesn't change, well, aside from your underwear.

Yes, the thermodynamic laws of entropy apply to everything in the universe... (except for life if you believe the theories of idiots like Mudda.) You see, in his retarded way of thinking, while everything in our universe follows entropy (declines and decays over time) the emergence of life did just the opposite. But you see, this 1859 theory isn't "magic" because Mudda has slapped a Science label on it and pretends otherwise.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So what doesn't change over time? The bible? Nope, changed many, many times. The constitution? Nope, changed 27 times. So what doesn't change, well, aside from your underwear.

Natural law does not change, as natural law is not relevant to time. Again... if you had the slightest understanding of what time is... you wouldn't be prone to these humiliating spasms of hysteria.

So you have a natural law to own a killing machine? I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

(which, btw, you have no proof that natural laws don't change, and the Big Bang is proof that space and time change).

A "killing machine?" You mean like a GAS CHAMBER? Or is killing machine your new progtard buzz phrase?

The truth bothers you. I get it.

A lovely means to concede the standing point(s).

Your most recent concession to the standing Point(s) is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Boss]

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

Dipshit.

Hey... take your little website's own advice and stop trying to claim Science disproves God.

Possibility exists until you can rule out all possibility. If you want to prove there is no God, that's what you have to do. Otherwise, you are expressing an opinion based on faith. A faith-based opinion is fine, but we're going to be honest about what it is.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

Being possible and being real are two different things. Now go back to your legos.

No... Not at all. Such that is not possible, has no means of being 'real'.

For instance, the notion that objective human rights can exist in the absence of God... is not possible, therefore is not real.

At best under such conditions... the best that could ever be expected, are 'subjective temporal privileges', which are subject to being withdrawn at any given time, without notice or concern for the consequences to those who formerly enjoyed such.

See how that works?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

And you have NO PROOF it DOESN'T exist... now what?

I agree, there's no proof either way, that's why I'm agnostic. But you can't claim something exists on the sole fact that it can't be disproven, that's absurd.

You can claim something is possible until it's disproved. Now, get busy disproving God, dipshit!

Dipshit.

Hey... take your little website's own advice and stop trying to claim Science disproves God.

Possibility exists until you can rule out all possibility. If you want to prove there is no God, that's what you have to do. Otherwise, you are expressing an opinion based on faith. A faith-based opinion is fine, but we're going to be honest about what it is.

Agreed... and I'd only add that the faith of the Anti-theist rests in absolutely no evidence of any kind, at any level. It is subjective conjecture, from soup to Leftists.

 

[Boss]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

You have no proof that YOU exist, moron.

So you're of the position that these posts are being posted by a non-existent being? Bravo! You're an idiot!

No, I simply said that you cannot "PROVE" you exist. This has nothing to do with what I believe or whether you actually exist or not.

 

[Mudda]

You suffer from delusions if you think that an invisible superbeing endowed you with anything...

Ah... so you're working on the premise that your senses are capable of sensing all that exist in the universe?

Interesting... . Will you snap a photo of the next quark that passes through you?

If that's not possible, please snap a recording of what gravity sound like... .

Can't do that, then offer me an explanation for the consequences, wherein an individual chooses to satisfy their every immediate whim, only to find that their life is unsatisfying?

You can't see, taste, hear or touch ANY of those realities... yet each are an immutable fact of nature.

So tell me now about why it is that these invisible realities exist, and you're
here demanding that if something is beyond the scope of human senses, that it cannot exist?

I'm saying that you have NO PROOF that it exists.

You have no proof that YOU exist, moron.

So you're of the position that these posts are being posted by a non-existent being? Bravo! You're an idiot!

No, I simply said that you cannot "PROVE" you exist. This has nothing to do with what I believe or whether you actually exist or not.

You're an idiot. Please move along.