Somehow You Just Knew Atheists Were Responsible

“You know what really gets me, as a Christian, is to see the ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and then some senseless crazy act of a derelict takes place,” Gohmert said.

What really gets me is that when they say stuff like this, they don't just mean that cultural trends have people behaving less Christian, but that God Himself has been gradually removing sacred protection from one of his favorite countries, the USA. One again proving that God is a narcissistic monster.

If I was in that theater and was legally carrying a gun, I would think twice about shooting back at the shooter while in a dark, crowded room full of panicking people.

And if you saw someone shooting at someone else in a theatre, was that an armed civilian defending himself, or the gunman?

Mr. Gohmert has been watching too many Westerns. Blaise @1232 correctly implies that the risk of hitting innocent bystanders is too great. In addition, imagine a third person responding (or the cops rushing into the room): who is the "good" guy and who is the "bad" guy? Choose correctly and you're a hero; choose wrong and you are the one who's looking at murder charges.

WashPo is reporting that he was a grad student in neuroscience (but was quitting after 1 year).

So,expect to see some science-bashing or academia-bashing added to the godless-bashing.

Of course atheists tend to be responsible, and law-abiding, and courteous.

What? The other definition? He meant atheists were the cause of the shooting? Oh, my. How stupid.

Did the good Representative explain why a person attacking Judeo-Christian beliefs would do so by shooting up the crowd at a Batman movie?

His name was James Holmes. I wonder if he is any relation to the late Long John Holmes/

"Johnny Wad" would probably have done his shooting with a different weapon.

The Los Angeles Times reports: "A San Diego neighbor of alleged Colorado shooter James Holmes remembers him as a very shy, well-mannered young man who was heavily involved in their local Presbyterian church."

I'm kind of waiting for the NRA's, more guns will solve all problems, argument to gain traction and about half the people in any given theater to be armed. Then someone, completely unarmed, jokes about shooting someone. This is taken as a threat by someone uninvolved and they pull their gun. Hearing some shouting about a gun and a threat, and seeing someone with a gun, a third person pulls their gun, which triggers a chain reaction of gun pulling. Somewhere along the way someone, acting in a panic, accidentally discharges their gun, and the shooting commences with everyone assuming everyone else is a mass murdering terrorist. Between the aimed shots and crossfire everyone gets shot and scores die.

You know it is going to happen. Just a mater of time.

Gomer, er Gohmert is a victim of some kind of birth trauma. Recently, here on Long Island, a druggie was using a plastic pistol to hold up a pharmacy. Enter the Special Agent who was in the process of taking down the guy. Enter then two ex-cops. All of these characters had REAL guns. They had to pick who the real BAD GUY was. They picked wrong. Result: Special Agent's wife a widow. Druggie also dead. We don't really need these guns, now do we?

A strange coincidence - I was listening to NPR's Science Friday today, and they were talking to the producer of some new TV show where a paranoid schizophrenic scientist/psychologist of some sort helps solve crimes. I think they may actually have referred to this character as a neuroscientist..

If I was in that theater and was legally carrying a gun, I would think twice about shooting back at the shooter while in a dark, crowded room full of panicking people.

Not our pal Louie though, he wouldn't hesitate for a second. Someone shooting innocents in a theater? Ol' Louie will teach him AND the innocents a lesson....

Isn't the Old Testament full of massacres justified as the will of God, as relayed by someone who thinks God talks to him?

On the other hand, did you cherry pick this political quote to suit your own purposes?

One could compare this with the description of Anders Breivik on BBC News' Web site as a "Christian" extremist, in spite of his own Web-published manifesto in which he denounces "Christian fundamentalist theocracy" and speaks favourably of the "Christian-atheist". 

The BBC's claim, dated 7/26/11, is still published on their Web site for anyone looking for "evidence" against Christianity.

See, odd thing is, everybody thinks SOMEBODY ELSE is extreme.

PS where are your quotes sourced from, 'cos I say you made them up.

I have heard it both ways. Some blame the lack of values which of course is partially the fault of the 1960s era of do what hyou want no consequences type of rebllious thinking. Then I even heard an MSNBC man blame it on the TEA party.

Let's face it. SIN is the root of all man's problems. And the ban of guns or clips will not solve the problem either. Jack the Ripper killed numerous people with only a knife, there was no call to ban all knives. Vikings pillaged and burned entire villages raping the women and killing every last man woman and child there wiithout "assualt" rifles, Glocks, or Kevlar. Yet, there were never bans on battle axes and swords.

Atheists are not repsonsible for this act , but perhaps the church is for night doing enough to keep rebellious actions in the past from making it throughout the coming generations.

I am not sure of his political affiliation, but the media lied about Jared Loughner who shot Gabby Giffords. They said he was a right wing tea partier but when all the smoke ceared he turned out to be a fanatical left wing pot smoking hippie with a fixation on satanic rituals. My thoughts were that he made one too many satanic rituals, called some demon forth and it inhabited his body, committed the crime, and then left or may be still inhabiting his body.

Not only is setting up rituals and asking demons for favors real, but it is extrememly dangerous. They can and often do takeover the person who called them forth. Except for King Solomon, no person has ever been able to control a demon called forth to grant a desire or wish.

I have read about certain procedures for these things and supposedly if the correct rules are followed precisely the demon has to obey and cannot harm the medium or the subject, but it is too risky to try.

As for this latest goofball, I would suggest giving him 25 lashes with a whip, striping him naked, turn him loose in downtown Bagdad, and let him go free. Justice would be served. Better yet, the victims should get together and string him by the ankles and gut him like a deer and leave him to bleed to death.

One problem this society has is that people no longer fear punishment for their crimes. We need to bring back severe punishment for these types of crimes. A punishment that may scare a would be copycat into submission.

Of course the comments were offensive and stupid, but it was Louis Gohmert. What do you expect?

Wow:

Citation here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/louie-gohmert-aurora-shootings…

Also - CORRECTION: Due to a transcription error, a previous version of this article quoted Gohmert as referring to the shooting as a "crazy act of a derelict." He in fact called it "a crazy act of terror like this." The error has been corrected.

Tom, that piece is titled ...a response to attacks on judeo christian belief.

That link is supposed to show he's not christian?

If he says he's not an extremist christian, then he obviously believes his acts are in accord with moderate christianity...

Wow:

Just sourcing the quotes for you (in response to your P.S.)

But the problem remains.

Either he's an extremist and therefore killing heathens is mainstream christianity, or those statements are incorrect.

Read through the piece again, the quotes you attribute a scource to ins,t in there.

So I'm gonna stay with you're making it up.

Or, unless tom isn't kevin with a sock on, HE is making it up.

Maybe tom thought I was posting to the author of the thread and not re kevin's no tru scotsman af anders.

See,s like preacher may be partially correct, but I am starting to have my doubts about this shooter. He has too many similaries to other shooters in the area.

He was on Vicoden (thanks big pharma) so he may have made himself crazy, but it seems af if he may be a plant. Not a real man? http://robhood.us/weblog.php

@Wow

My bad, but I thought you were responding to the article.

There's an order of magnitude more kooks in this comment thread than is normally found on this blog. What's going on?

That's OK, Tom, I thought I was clearer than I was.

Don't jump to conclusions about the shootings.

David Cullen makes a very convincing statement for skepticism about these kind of killings, for waiting until we have accurate data about the situation first, before making conclusions. The vast majority of the lead stories for ,many months after Coluymbine were way off base in understanding it. . As the Ne York Times book review says about his best seller, Columbine, Columbine “is an excellent work of media criticism, showing how legends become truths through continual citation.”

So. Take a deep breath and enjoy all the speculation but just wait a while until we understand what happened at Aurora first.

We all want to know right away.

Michael, the thread is about a prominent political figure who didn't do whst you said.