ElishaElijah
Return
@Windwalker - any way to get the Wikipedia archives of Kyle Rittenhouse pre trial, before edited version? Would be curious to see
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
You really believe that?Much better. Less lawlessness.
Whether it's my things or somebody else's things, life is more important than things.Especially when it's not your things or your money.
Whether it's my things or somebody else's things, life is more important than things.
Do you disag
I watched parts of both of them, and the only thing they focused on in the negative was why was Rittenhouse there to begin with, and why was he armed as he was being a teen, and why didn't the military and police tell him to get out of harm's way?
As far as guilty or innocent, I believe both had people covering different sides. And I for one thought that he was likely innocent on the charges under Wisconsin law, and I heard some others say the same on those networks.
Life is more important than things, meaning what? That we should not defend our things? That piece of land that my father gave me, I should just let people trash it if they want, and burn all the trees and pollute the water?Whether it's my things or somebody else's things, life is more important than things.
Do you disagree?
Hindsight is usually 20/20.Sounds like we agree on this verdict and here is another example of the problem in a different situation:
View attachment 58226
Come to find out something different happened.
And why people shouldn’t make comments, rush to judgement or make assumptions before the facts come out. Biden’s comments were wrong on Jussie and Rittenhouse both comments were way off, some news sources joined in the folly, people took up the offense or the gossip and still believeHindsight is usually 20/20.
I do agree with you, but let me just add that such jumping to conclusions is hardly just within Biden's domain. IMO, let the facts speak for themselves.And why people shouldn’t make comments, rush to judgement or make assumptions before the facts come out. Biden’s comments were wrong on Jussie and Rittenhouse both comments were way off, some news sources joined in the folly, people took up the offense or the gossip and still believe
and promote the lies.
It means, life takes precedence over material things. I'm pretty sure Jesus would agree with me.Life is more important than things, meaning what? That we should not defend our things? That piece of land that my father gave me, I should just let people trash it if they want, and burn all the trees and pollute the water?
It's not a quote. It's how I feel about human life.People like these pithy quotes on the internet, but in real life, things mean something.
It's not as important as human life, to me. Sorry.When you have worked and sweated for something, or it's been passed down to you, it's important, and you don't just let someone burn it unless you are a coward.
He showed up there to shoot people because he thought things were being destroyed.And BTW, Kyle didn't shoot anyone for things. He only shot to protect his life.
No, he didn't show up to shoot people. That's just a lie that's already been debunked. So quit repeating lies.He showed up there to shoot people because he thought things were being destroyed.
That's not the question. The question is whether you have the right to defend your property... And the law here says yes.It's not as important as human life, to me. Sorry.
He showed up with a friggin gun. I won't stop repeating what is obvious.No, he didn't show up to shoot people. That's just a lie that's already been debunked. So quit repeating lies.
Rittenhouse wasn't defending his property.That's not the question. The question is whether you have the right to defend your property... And the law here says yes.
It wasn't his property, and I think a screw up is that the police didn't tell him to leave such a hostile environment. If he were black carrying such a gun around while roaming the streets, do you seriously think the police would likely have treated him the same and even handing him a bottle of water? I doubt that very much.The question is whether you have the right to defend your property...
Lots of people showed up in lots of towns with guns. They were there to protect their neighbors and friends. I applaud them for that.He showed up with a friggin gun. I won't stop repeating what is obvious.
Why? There were black individuals doing the same thing in the same types of situations.It wasn't his property, and I think a screw up is that the police didn't tell him to leave such a hostile environment. If he were black carrying such a gun around while roaming the streets, do you seriously think the police would likely have treated him the same and even handing him a bottle of water? I doubt that very much.
Did they all kill people too?Lots of people showed up in lots of towns with guns. They were there to protect their neighbors and friends. I applaud them for that.
Stop playing games, as you should know darn well why.Why? There were black individuals doing the same thing in the same types of situations.
I have no idea what you're talking about.Stop playing games, as you should know darn well why.
Yes, he did not cross any state lines with a weapon. The weapon was his friend's at his store, and when the looters and arsonists became very dangerous, he was given the firearm by his friend.Are you denying that he crossed the state line with a unregistered weapon?