I wonder if he recovers will he have changed his mind on any of these issues?
Really American
Really American
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The irony, oh the irony
- Thread starter Crabtownboy
- Start date
Why does that matter? Are you saying he deserved to be shot?
Pathetic post. Absolutely despicable. You should be ashamed.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Not at all. There is never an excuse for such an action.
It is ironic that what he supported almost killed him and what he stood against saved him.
He voted for allowing mentally ill people to have firearms. A mentally ill man shot him.
He has been a foe of gay people. A lesbian saved his life.
He has fought against government health-care for the American people. His bills are being paid for by a government funded health-care program.
So, I wonder if he will think all this over and change his mind on any of it.
If you do not believe me, maybe you will believe the Bible:
Proverbs 12:15
The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, But a wise man is he who listens to counsel.
Last edited:
IIRC, the "allowing mentally ill people to have guns" was actually "don't strip a person's gun-ownership rights without due process." And thinking that ACA is not the way to go does not necessary equal "against government health care" (though Rep. Scalise may have come out against any kind of gov't healthcare - I don't track the statements of every congressperson.)
And for one who has, with reason, criticized the President's inflammatory statements, posting this link certainly does nothing to elevate the conversation. And adding the "if he recovers" just pigpiles on top.
And for one who has, with reason, criticized the President's inflammatory statements, posting this link certainly does nothing to elevate the conversation. And adding the "if he recovers" just pigpiles on top.
Why would he? He never claimed to be against a Police protection detail provided for top officers of the Congress, (which is why there were two Police officers present at the ball field, before the shooting began.)
Scalise was shot, wounded, and dragged himself out of the line of fire. Others were also shot. The Police protection detail, drew their weapons and returned fire to the shooter, killing him, and thus prevented the shooters ability to keep firing upon all those present at the ball field.
And BTW there has been no medical report of mental illness of the shooter.
I seriously doubt he was in favor of people shooting at other people engaged in baseball practice. A security guard and doctors and nurses saved him. I doubt he's against that.
Pretty sure he doesn't want mentally ill people to have firearms. Where has it been shown that the shooter was mentally ill?
He's "a foe of gay people"? Don't think so. He may oppose gay marriage.
A security guard defended his life by taking aim at the shooter. Are we going to define people by their sexuality? I thought leftists opposed that sort of classification.
He fought against certain provisions in the ACA, and he may oppose government run health care for all I know. But he was taken to the emergency room and he would have gotten treatment no matter what his beliefs or health care coverage.
Why would he? A security guard (who happened to be a lesbian) did her job. The doctors and nurses did their jobs. It's likely that someone failed at screening this person and allowed him to get a firearm--he's been arrested a couple of times and was a known child abuser--or the guy had the gun for years.
The man is not even out of the hospital yet and people are making political points at his expense. It's sordid and nasty.
Last edited:
He has undergone several surgeries.
His condition was first thought to be grave, then called critical and recently upgraded to serious, which is an improvement.
Yeah! Then let's tear into his political positions!
Found this....Oh how far WaPo has fallen....
It’s unclear whether James T. Hodgkinson suffered from mental illness. But his attack yesterday on Republicans practicing baseball in Alexandria, Va., reopened the controversy over gun control. And that issue leads to another hard question: Whether and how the mentally ill should be able to access firearms.
You do realize, of course, that in this case -- the "counsel" to which you refer was a gunshot? Are you really saying "a wise man is he who changes his mind after being shot for what he believes"?
I hope that you soon see how cringeworthy this really is.
You love posting hate. Now you are posting hate filled lies.
How many bills did the black lesbian police officer sponsor? What did she do to get shot? She is just as wounded by the progressive gunman as the Congressman is.
Reckon she'll rethink her skin color and sexuality to keep from getting shot in the line of duty again? Wonder if she'll trade her government sponsored insurance for an Obamacare policy because she's being so well treated at the hospital?
It's the left wing narrative. They have to make every occasion fit it. Whether or not it actually fits doesn't seem to matter.
Utter nonsense.
Utter nonsense. He stood out AGAINST the government taking citizens rights to own and bear arms.
“Efforts to restrict the second amendment rights of law-abiding Americans will only punish those who play by the rules and will be ignored by criminals who break the law,” Scalise said.
Utter nonsense. Making up the the shooters mental state is but projecting a false imagery.
He has voiced his stance against homosexual marriage. So what?
Are you FOR homosexual marriage?
A police officer assigned to his detail shot the shooter.
A surgeon prolonged his life.
So? The US Constitution does not provide for the government to provide the American people at large with health-care.
His medical bills are being paid for by his insurance provider, most likely and most commonly provided through his employer.
Why would you even wonder IF he has intentions to change his mind on his own standings, based on your ideas ? How would he even KNOW your ideas?
Can you reveal WHEN Scalise has sought YOUR counsel?
Can you reveal WHEN YOU have counseled Scalise?
Did you notice the scripture you give is about "listening", but you are wondering about his "actions"?
Did you choose that scripture because you thought it might imply Scalise' standing as "foolish", and your ideas as "wise"?