“Georgia’s political leaders think otherwise, so the new law allows people to carry guns in their houses of worship.
So what is the problem? I’m sure that EJ wouldn’t be caught dead in a church.
Whether parishioners are forbidden, allowed, or required to carry firearms within a church is a matter for that church, and only for that church. The government has no business in the matter.
Ah, Newspeak! Lovely to have our Orwellian betters inform us of the new, approved, politically correct vernacular. We have “Gun Supremacists” now, a rather nasty slur that deliberately resembles White Supremacists, and from a headline yesterday, “Gun Reform” instead of the more accurate “Confiscation by a Fascist Government”. The arbiters of modern language are working overtime to frame the issue their way but I think we’ve reached the point where it’s too stilted and contrived to catch on. If E.J. could possibly feel any shame for promoting idiot neologisms, he should.
So....then you admit the current batch of laws isn't as biased toward freedom as you've been telling everyone. Shocking admission. Thanks!
People can and have gone into churches and committed mass shootings. Wouldn't it make sense to have the non-deranged people capable of defending themselves?
those who would keep their sanctuaries gun-free may worry about being branded as liberal elitists.
So your position is that we should enact liberal laws so liberals can pretend not to be liberal? That's the first time I've heard that one. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. Plus, if you prefer a gun-free congregation, wouldn't you prefer that those nasty freedom-lovers be driven out to worship somewhere else anyway by finding out who you guys really were?
More thumbsucking from E.J. whoopee...
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!