Did the Oregon shooter really target Christians?

[Hoosierhawkeye]

What evidence is there that he targeted Christians for kill shots? I'm serious? Have you seen evidence that the dead are all Christian? Are their statements from those injured stating they didn't say they were Christian so they were shot in the leg? As I asked SEC, do you really think people defiantly still answered that they were Christian even after it became clear that he was targeting Christians?

The dead do not have to be all Christian for him to be targeting Christians. A while back a guy went on a mass shooting trying to target Jews. . . killed 3 people, not a single one jewish. But no one denies his intention to was target Jews.

As far as people saying they are Christian after it became clear who he was targeting.

Matt 10:32-33 "So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven."

There is no exception for being under threat of death. Jesus rebuked Peter for denying him 3 times while Peter was under threat of death if he told the truth.

Christians refusing to deny their faith and their savior even while under threat of death is nothing new nor surprising. Quite frankly it's commanded.

Here is one version that contradicts he was targeting Christians.

Rand McGowan, who was shot in the hand, told his mother it didn't seem the shooter was deliberately targeting Christians.


"It was more so saying, 'You're going to be meeting your maker,' " Stephanie Salas said.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/or...ympathy-calculated-killings-witnesses-n438286

Now 2nd hand witness accounts are valid, especially over the two 1st hand accounts that it just presented beforehand?

Again all evidence is that he targeted Christians. Sorry if that doesn't fit your political narrative as Christians are not on your approved victim's list.

 

[pablow]

That's the deepest cut of all to be called boring. Maybe the next killer could go after more interesting targets like the Goldman Sachs board of directors. We should encourage our killers to step up their game. As a bonus, I bet we could get libs to sit on their hands about gun control.

Perhaps I went too far with the boring remark. Fred is a predictable contrarian.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Do you think we could get serious gun control if it was actually true that Christians were being targeted?

Somehow I doubt it.

Would we get serious gun control if there were another shooting where Christians were targeted? How about another after that? Or another after that?

How many shootings where Christians were targeted would it take?

If we banned guns entirely, what would those dastardly Christian-targeters use? Knives? Pipe bombs? Words? Or would the attacks stop?

I really doubt that even multiple shootings targeting Christians or conservatives for that matter would change many's opinion on guns.

It would likely only serve to convince them that they need to be packing heat 24/7.

 

[hawkeye54545]

Just curious, but eyewitnesses said this. What reason do you have to doubt them?

We can turn the tables on this just as easily. How many of the resident cons would be so quick to believe the eyewitnesses if the shooter were a straight white Christian male who was only shooting Muslims? See how easy that was?

Now if you actually want to act like an adult and have a grown-up conversation let us know.

The last person on this board who should ever tell anyone to act like an adult is you.

 

[MichiganManLifer]

So all the real examples of Christians being killed in the Mid East and around the world come from some sort of echo chamber? It seems to me to deny Christians are being being persecuted world wide is being part of an echo chamber

If there was a Palestinian killed for their religion, you'd hear that guy screaming about it. Typical lib hypocrite.

 

[naturalmwa]

I really doubt that even multiple shootings targeting Christians or conservatives for that matter would change many's opinion on guns.

It would likely only serve to convince them that they need to be packing heat 24/7.

I don't know. It only took 4 planes to shift our position on the 4th amendment. If the world was really as OiT perceives it, I think it would be an easy matter to get cons to support gun control.

 

[fredjr82]

The last person on this board who should ever tell anyone to act like an adult is you.

Sorry that you argue like a child. You chose that route. Let me know if you need help with the quote function.

 

[fredjr82]

Perhaps I went too far with the boring remark. Fred is a predictable contrarian.

Well at least my mother isn't a whore

 

[Hawk in SEC Country]

That's the deepest cut of all to be called boring. Maybe the next killer could go after more interesting targets like the Goldman Sachs board of directors. We should encourage our killers to step up their game. As a bonus, I bet we could get libs to sit on their hands about gun control.

I'm all for open season on the banking elite.

 

[BABiscuit]

The dead do not have to be all Christian for him to be targeting Christians. A while back a guy went on a mass shooting trying to target Jews. . . killed 3 people, not a single one jewish. But no one denies his intention to was target Jews.

As far as people saying they are Christian after it became clear who he was targeting.

Matt 10:32-33 "So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven."

There is no exception for being under threat of death. Jesus rebuked Peter for denying him 3 times while Peter was under threat of death if he told the truth.

Christians refusing to deny their faith and their savior even while under threat of death is nothing new nor surprising. Quite frankly it's commanded.



Now 2nd hand witness accounts are valid, especially over the two 1st hand accounts that it just presented beforehand?

Again all evidence is that he targeted Christians. Sorry if that doesn't fit your political narrative as Christians are not on your approved victim's list.

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but all the quotes are from family.

I believe you would stand up and say you are Christian. I don't believe most would, though. I'm not saying there isn't evidence that he targeted Christians, but there isn't any evidence that he didn't target other religions, also. There is also evidence he killed people without regard for their religion. Do you really think in the chaos of everything that somebody may interpret his actions incorrectly?

 

[tarheelbybirth]

 

[Jan Itor]

Fair enough. It wasn't an eyewitness that started the "Targeting Christians" narrative but a father of an eyewitness. If parents helped drive the narrative for Columbine why do you think it couldn't be done in this situation?

Oh it could, but as has already been stated in this thread, the eyewitness has done an interview explaining their perception of what happened. I have no reason to doubt them at this point. Could their perception be wrong? Certainly it could. Could it be right? Certainly.

 

[fredjr82]

the eyewitness has done an interview explaining their perception of what happened. I have no reason to doubt them at this point.

The kids that survived Columbine did interviews too. They said things that weren't true (driven by their parents as already noted).

Whatever, its pointless to even argue. Christians are looking to be victims and no amount of evidence is going to change that.

 

[TailgateTom]

It wouldn't be surprising in the least if this was true. His online dating profile has Black Magic, Occult, and Devil worshiping references.

 

[Jan Itor]

The kids that survived Columbine did interviews too. They said things that weren't true (driven by their parents as already noted).

Whatever, its pointless to even argue. Christians are looking to be victims and no amount of evidence is going to change that.

What evidence are you talking about? Columbine? Two different situations. And in the same post you quoted I said the eyewitnesses perception of what happened could be wrong or right. We don't know. And in the meantime, you're citing some evidence that Christians are trying to be victims in "this" situation?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but all the quotes are from family.

I believe you would stand up and say you are Christian. I don't believe most would, though. I'm not saying there isn't evidence that he targeted Christians, but there isn't any evidence that he didn't target other religions, also. There is also evidence he killed people without regard for their religion. Do you really think in the chaos of everything that somebody may interpret his actions incorrectly?

I don't know if I would or not. I've never had a gun to my face. I'd like to think I would, but I also would prefer not to find out. As for others or most, it is hard to say. Very few people have and no one wants that opportunity.

That's always possible that people mis-interpreted but no reason to openly go out and say their claims are false just because Christians don't fit into your pre-approved victim group.

Even if the person was only targeting religious believers it's still a very similar outcome. It doesn't seem to be too outlandish either way given his well known distaste for organized religion. I mean if this guy was in church every Sunday and people said he was targeting Christians then it might be outlandish. But when people are saying he's targeting Christians or religious believers and his internet activity strongly suggests a hatred of organized religion, it makes sense.

The quote was from family but earlier when a family member was citing claiming Christians where targeted that information was shot down as 2nd hand information.

Either way the bulk of the reports indicates that he is at the very least targeting religious believers.

And it seems highly unbecoming to question that simply because it doesn't fit a certain political or social narrative that some of us hold to as I highly doubt many of you would even question it if the information had been that he targeted people who where not religious. In fact I tend to think the same people questioning it now would trumpet it as religious believers violent hostility to them.

 

[timinatoria]

Because it interests me and I don't like false narratives.

You must have been SUPER pissed about the whole 'hands up, don't shoot' false narrative.

 

[BABiscuit]

I don't know if I would or not. I've never had a gun to my face. I'd like to think I would, but I also would prefer not to find out. As for others or most, it is hard to say. Very few people have and no one wants that opportunity.

That's always possible that people mis-interpreted but no reason to openly go out and say their claims are false just because Christians don't fit into your pre-approved victim group.

Even if the person was only targeting religious believers it's still a very similar outcome. It doesn't seem to be too outlandish either way given his well known distaste for organized religion. I mean if this guy was in church every Sunday and people said he was targeting Christians then it might be outlandish. But when people are saying he's targeting Christians or religious believers and his internet activity strongly suggests a hatred of organized religion, it makes sense.

The quote was from family but earlier when a family member was citing claiming Christians where targeted that information was shot down as 2nd hand information.

Either way the bulk of the reports indicates that he is at the very least targeting religious believers.

And it seems highly unbecoming to question that simply because it doesn't fit a certain political or social narrative that some of us hold to as I highly doubt many of you would even question it if the information had been that he targeted people who where not religious. In fact I tend to think the same people questioning it now would trumpet it as religious believers violent hostility to them.

The idea that somebody only questions this because they don't think Christians can be victims or it doesn't fit a political or social agenda is ridiculous.

 

[BABiscuit]

You must have been SUPER pissed about the whole 'hands up, don't shoot' false narrative.

I wouldn't say I wasn't super pissed as I think most recognized it as a false narrative. If it became established as fact when it clearly wasn't, I would then be in the realm of super pissed.

 

[lucas80]

There is a sneaky fascinating point in here.

Two things I seek to be on HROT. Sneaky, and fascinating.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

The idea that somebody only questions this because they don't think Christians can be victims or it doesn't fit a political or social agenda is ridiculous.

Anytime I've EVER seen anyone start questioning who was actually targeted during an attack or what the motivations of the attack was this long after the fact it's always been because it doesn't jive with their political/social agenda.

 

[swagsurfer02]

I wouldn't say I wasn't super pissed as I think most recognized it as a false narrative. If it became established as fact when it clearly wasn't, I would then be in the realm of super pissed.

Who recognized "hands up, don't shoot" was a false narrative?

The looters, protestors, and media drove that shit home for months...

C'mon man

 

[mstp1992]

Who recognized "hands up, don't shoot" was a false narrative?

...

Any person capable of rational thinking.

 

[mstp1992]

So all the real examples of Christians being killed in the Mid East and around the world come from some sort of echo chamber? It seems to me to deny Christians are being being persecuted world wide is being part of an echo chamber

I think he's referring to the lack of evidence of such persecution here in the USA, not world-wide.

 

[swagsurfer02]

Any person capable of rational thinking.

So I guess you're calling several of our more vocal posters incapable of irrational thinking.

Also CNN reporter Don Lemon?

 

[mstp1992]

So I guess you're calling several of our more vocal posters incapable of irrational thinking.

Also CNN reporter Don Lemon?

Oh, I think everyone is capable of irrational thinking from time to time. It's what makes us human. I should have clarified and said "capable of rational thinking on this particular topic." I can see why some continue to believe the narrative despite evidence to the contrary. Inherent biases can alter ones perceptions and deny evidence that contradicts their prepotent response to a stimulus or situation. It's a process mediated by regions of the prefrontal cortex, specifically the vmPFC.

 

[swagsurfer02]

Oh, I think everyone is capable of irrational thinking from time to time. It's what makes us human. I should have clarified and said "capable of rational thinking on this particular topic." I can see why some continue to believe the narrative despite evidence to the contrary. Inherent biases can alter ones perceptions and deny evidence that contradicts their prepotent response to a stimulus or situation. It's a process mediated by regions of the prefrontal cortex, specifically the vmPFC.

Well it didn't help that the accomplice to the strong armed robbery told a tall tale.

So when does that guy get charged as an accessory to the robbery and obstruction?

 

[BABiscuit]

Anytime I've EVER seen anyone start questioning who was actually targeted during an attack or what the motivations of the attack was this long after the fact it's always been because it doesn't jive with their political/social agenda.

How many times have you seen people questioning who was targeted in an attack and how did you figure out what their intentions were?

 

[ANYCHawk]

Why do you randomly question it then? Witnesses said that it happened, why should you doubt them?

cause its been shown in study after study that eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable?