Louis Gohmert (R-TX): The Aurora Shootings ‘Could Have Been Avoided if the Country Placed a Higher Value on God’

I have nothing smart or witty or well-reasoned to say. Fuck this guy. That is all.

Exploiting tragedy to further a religio-political agenda is despicable. Because no one who believes in his particular deity has ever murdered anyone, and if everyone was forced/coerced to follow his deity in exactly the way he wants them to, all killing would cease? As far as I can tell, belief in deities has little effect on human behavior, in that if someone gets it in their mind to commit atrocities, they will, regardless of their level of religious belief or lack thereof.  

“We” are not murderers. People who murder other people in movie theaters, schools, homes, and on streets are murderers. Most people manage to get by in life just fine without murdering anyone.

Studies, especially ones done by Greg Paul, have shown a correlation between the degree of religiosity in a country or region and social pathologies, including murder.  While correlation is not causation, it is clear that Gohmert has no empirical evidence to support his contention.  In other words, he’s pulling this out of his ignorant ass. 

Louie Gohmert is a Southern Baptist.  The Southern Baptist “Baptist Faith and Message” teaches that

“Salvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour…”

http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfmcomparison.asp
So, according to the SBC, if James Holmes has or will accept Jesus as his personal savior, then he will go to Heaven and have eternal bliss.  How anyone can call that a “moral system” is beyond me.  Christianity isn’t focused on morality.  It’s focused on Jesus and sexual shame.

This is the same guy who was going on about “terror babies,” women from the Middle East taking advantage of the Fourteenth Amendment and coming here to have their children who will then be sent back home to become terrorists or something and rise up to kill all the infidels. Or something. Bottom line: this guy is utterly insane. But how different is this from John Piper claiming that the tornadoes in Indiana this year were God’s warning to America to repent? Or Pat Robertson opening his mouth? This is typical mean-spirited fundamentalist Christian sentiment, bordering on schadenfreude.

Stricter gun laws would probably not have prevented this tragedy.  Laxer gun laws probably would not have prevented this tragedy.  The odds that this tragedy could have been prevented at all are minimal to non-existent.  That’s a bleak fact, but it’s one that anyone trying to push ANY agenda should be reminded of.  It’s a tragedy.  Treat, comfort and console the victims and their families; punish the perpetrator appropriately.  Anything else is just self-aggrandizement.

People waste no time in exploiting tragedies for their own means. Our local newspaper website has a few commenting trolls who do this. Comments for this story today have been along the line of, “This is what you liberals get for electing that ugly Nigerian baby! Your liberal commie agenda is making everyone a welfare bum like this guy who think they can just shoot people if they don’t get everything handed to them on a silver platter!!” …except with more caps and misspellings.  Really? 

Considering the scandal the catholic church has seen this decade regarding child rape  , I have to conclude this guy is full of shit.

So what’s Louis Gohmert’s take on George Zimmerman’s recent comment that shooting Trayvon Martin was in “God’s plan”?

So by Gomert’s logic Haiti, one of the most Christian countries in the Americas, should have one of the lowest crime rates, right?

He’s a Southern Baptist, so he probably doesn’t consider Catholics to be real Christians anyway.

Bordering? They so look forward to being in Heaven and looking down on all the unbelievers burning in Hell for all eternity. 

If only we all thought the same. If only we all though __________.

Sorry, but the bible has its share of violence.

Finally, we can play he No True Scottsmans Game if needed: “No true Humanist would have done this. If only everyone…”

I wish everyone had this much common sense.

That was Brian Ross on ABC News…on the other hand, Breitbart.com tried to paint him as a “registered Democrat” this morning.  

http://wonkette.com/478865/abc-news-should-fire-brian-ross-and-other-notes-on-being-terrible

I’m pretty sure Hemant was mostly focusing on the religious component of Rep. Gohmert’s disgusting audacity.

*hugs* to everyone involved. I can’t begin to imagine what they’re going through.

That said…I have a question for Mr. Gohmert. Why did his god not protect these people? His god is supposedly omni-powerful…How does our society not allowing him to be forced on others stop him from protecting peoples’ lives? And if he’s so good and just, why would he kil totally random innocent people to show his wrath?

 It was considered murder until Roe v. Wade outlawed it.  So the only thing that changed was the legal definition , not the reality of what is happening.

And here I was sure he was going to blame it on the constant anti-Obama rants about the Dark Knight movie by the on-air pilonidal cyst.

And in his district, it’ll work.

And the only reason killing in self-defense is not murder is because it is currently legal in some circumstances.  Abortion is even less murder than is self-defense killing.  Your beliefs do not make it otherwise.

Not true, and Roe v. Wade made it legal nationwide.

My daughter’s friend, a wonderful young woman who is a high school senior and an atheist wrote this on her blog in response:  
http://iamrootless.tumblr.com/post/27642058482/and-apparently-its-because-were-all-atheists-that

 Not true at all.  You need to read the Bible yourself if you believe that is what it says.

You’re hand-waving. There is no difference. Either way, the clump of cells dies. And there is no theological argument against abortion that actually comes from the bible, because your bible does not treat the loss of an unborn fetus as a loss of life. 

Calling an embryo a person is the fallacy here. It’s a clump of cells. The only thing it has in common with an actual person is that they both have DNA patterns. If you’re going to tout that as the end-all to life starting, then you’d best start demanding better treatment for corpses. Or no radiation treatment for cancer. Those are human as well, by your definition. 

Having a full DNA set is NOT the only requirement for life. An embryo is not sentient. It cannot think, feel pain, communicate, be emotional, interact with the world around it…There are no indicators there that the tissue involved is a human life. 

That’s why the abortion date is set at viability. You know, facts and common sense. If you choose to forego that and believe something else, more power to you. But leave the rest of us to act how we believe. 

 Actually it is you that is viewing the unborn child as something that has no right to live and is something less than human. Your beliefs do not make this so. Only when you dehumanize the unborn child into something less than a human can you try and justify killing it because you want to.

It’s Exodus 21:22, and for centuries it has been translated to say that if two men fighting strike a woman and she loses the pregnancy BUT NO HARM FOLLOWS that only a fine must be paid.  But of course the evangelicals can’t have that, so since 1995 the NASB has changed the translation to say “gives birth prematurely but no harm follows.”  Y’all didn’t like what the Bible had to say about fetuses, so you changed it.

. . . and to extend this bullshit logic, some very nice children who died last night, if they hadn’t “accepted Jesus”, are this very moment being tortured in hell (for infinity) by a “loving” God.

This is so disgusting. I have no more words for it.

According to this guys god, those people deserved to die. They were idol worshiping a graven imiage. If his god was real, he would have sent to gunman.

So if you think that abortion is murder, what should the legal punishment be? 

How long will these women, who are over taxed possibly single mothers, scared teenagers, rape victims, victims of domestic violence ( http://www.redbookmag.com/love-sex/advice/reproductive-control ), mothers with high risk pregnancies, mothers who do not want or cannot afford to carry a doomed pregnancy to term etc have to spend in jail? What if she has had more then one abortion, should she get capital punishment as well?

What about the back ally abortions gone wrong, would you have them sent to jail hospitals or kept under guard while they fight infection, pain and death?

Murder is a legal definition.

The King James version says “her fruit depart from her.”  The “no harm follows” refers to no injury to the woman herself.  The “fruit depart from her” has been referred to as a miscarriage in many versions of the Bible.  You’ll see a list here: 
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/03/22/mischief-follows-in-partisan-bible-translations/

Just admit it.  Christians re-wrote a passage that was inconsistent with their propaganda.

So the killer turns out to be a Christian “Heavily involved in his local church”  http://global.christianpost.com/news/james-holmes-colorado-shooter-described-as-normal-christian-boy-amid-mental-health-investigation-photo-78623/ 

Normal Christian Boy, and they wonder why we are scared of religious people.

…And the AB C branch of the Propaganda Ministry IMMEDIATELY blamed the actions of a 24-year-old college drop-out on a 52-year-old member of the Denver TEA Party… You kids should stop throwing stones from inside that glass house of yours.

A higher value, you mean he don’t already sell his blessing to the highest bidder?

Another theist that REINFORCES my atheism! 

The bible is nasty and immoral and so is anyone who follows it.  If you want to get angry about the termination of pregnancies then you need to take that up with your ‘god’.  He kills most of the potential babies anyway.

Oh, and how can you say that abortion is evil yet still worship a god that wants disobedient children to be stoned to death, sends a bear to kill some kids making fun of a bald guy, kills all the first born boys in a family if their parents didn’t smear some lamb’s blood on their door, and downs a bunch of babies and kids in a flood just because he felt he screwed up creating the world the first time.  Your ‘god’ is a complete  egomaniacal LUNATIC.  There is NOTHING worth worship there. 

A woman choosing to have an abortion is not committing  murder since the fetus is not yet an independently
living being.  It’s not yet a person, it’s only maybe a POTENTIAL
human.  In fact, most abortions happen when the fetus is not much more
than a clump of cell.  The woman, herself, IS already an independently functioning human being and is NOT an incubator.  She has a right to chose whether she wants to carry a pregnancy to term.

Everyone knows the Christian platitude  “Love the sinner; hate the sin.”  It’s one of my most disliked Christian platitudes.  This guy’s comments caused me to think of that, and I came up with “Respect the fool, but rage against the foolishness.”  I imagine that Christians would hate it since they consider the atheists the fools.  If you search Google for my new platitude, all you get are religious quotes about fools and foolishness.  Not sure here… just throwing it out there.

At the most it’s only a fucking POTENTIAL human being.  The woman, however, already IS a fully independent, living human being.  Her rights, her health and life take precedence.  Woman are people, NOT incubators.

If YOU don’t want an abortion, that’s fine, don’t have one. 

Calling a developing baby a “clump of cells” that only has a potential for life is a fiction used to justify killing it becuase the mother wants to. It is a fallacy.

If  I understand your logic, I should not worship  God because of your interpretation of certain passages of the Old Testament, yet you think it is morally okay to kill unborn children because you believe them to be nothing more than a clump of cells.  No thank you.

Except that there’s no such thing as “natural causes” in a theistic universe.  EVERYTHING is god’s will.  He controls every cellular division, every tectonic shift.  Every miscarriage, every case of cerebral palsy, every cleft palate, every automobile accident.  In the context of the supernatural, where a god is in command of every event, these are deliberate components of his design.

WTF? Did he suggest that if someone else had a gun they could have stopped this? Perhaps if they were some calm-under-all-circumstances expertly trained marksman in just the right position in the theatre. More likely if there were more shooters, good or evil, in the audience all hell would have broken loose where one or more might have shot Holmes and in doing so caused a lot of collateral damage, as some like to call it, and now with all that shooting going on would have confused each other for the bad guy with the result being the number of deaths being an order of magnitude higher.

This is life not CSI.

Not so, I just don’t agree that a woman’s right to convenience trumps a baby’s right to live.  The right to life supersedes any right the woman would have to end it unless her live is in jeopardy then the right of both of them to live comes into play.

Numbers 5, read it.

God says to abort fetuses conceived out of wedlock by having a priest give a woman a special potion that causes miscarriage and makes the woman sterile.

God was punishing “human beings” for sins they had no complicity in. If you really wanted to apply God’s rules, that’d mean you’d force people having sex out of wedlock to abort their babies. Still incredibly fucked up (like forcing women to carry pregnancies to term no matter the circumstances), but it’s actually Biblical, if you think that’s a virtue.

Anyway, regarding your “clump of cells=human” bit, nope. It has the potential to become something that’s conscious, but until it is, whatever. If you put sperm on the ground next to an egg, it’d be the exact same materials. Then they touch, now they’re magically human and deserve full rights? Shouldn’t jacking off be a crime then? Shouldn’t having surgeries the damage or destroy viable eggs be a sin? They’re each potentially half a human! Who are you (but the owner of the body they’re growing in) to decide what to do with your own DNA?

That clump of cancer cells in your heart is mostly human too, just genetically different from your normal cells in a way that’ll make it kill you. But nope, since the DNA isn’t exactly yours, you can’t decide what to do with it, you have to let it kill you; surgery to remove it or chemicals to treat it would be murder of a fellow human being that depends on you for life.

My point is, DNA isn’t fucking magic. Potential is not biologically relevant to life.

Every copy of your DNA has potential to be a full human now that we can implant cells with foreign DNA and de-differentiate them.

So now what, you’re going to sue someone for destroying one of your cells by bumping your arm? That’ll be “murder” to you? Scratching your own fucking head would be mass suicide.

Going into the sun and mutating some of your cells with UV? Now you’re not allowed to scratch yourself, because some of the DNA no longer matches yours and is therefore a separate human being that depends on you for existence. If you let them die, we’re going to have to test you for intent or jail you for reckless endangerment.

That’s the situation to compare this shit to, not murder; giving specific cells way too many rights just for having different DNA is stupid beyond belief.

 If you really want to get into  a theological discussion of the Bible, I am more than willing and ready to do so, but from your comments, I believe it would be a complete waste of time. Suffice it say your limited understanding and warped view of Biblical teaching is flat wrong.

No, I understand just fine about the bible, how it’s taught and how it’s twisted and interpreted to fit people’s agenda.  I grew up in a very religious Southern Baptist household.  I went to Sunday school, sunday service, church training, Sunday evening services, Wednesday potluck, Thursday visitation, Saturday cleanup; almost anytime the church was open…I was THERE.  I even went to crappy xian schools until 7th grade.  My parents helped to START a church.  My mom did the Sunday bulletin, my dad was on the building committee, finance committee, a deacon, and even led the music.  So, I have a VERY clear idea of Biblical teaching and I know how evil it all really is.

And forcing women to endure a pregnancy they don’t want for YOUR reasons is right?  It’s disgusting that you think women are nothing more than baby factories. 

 http://www.thisismyabortion.com/

 So by your definition, the baby is not a human being until it is viable?  So would you agree that all abortions done after that point are murder?

I don’t dehumanize woman by calling them baby factories or incubators- you have done that.  I know what a pregnant woman is- she is a mother.

What gives society (not me) the right to ban abortion is that society has the obligation to protect the vulnerable and innocent who cannot protect themselves. This is who I speak out to protect.

 Here is another picture of an abortion at 7 weeks.  Apparently the one you posted was taken before the jar was taken into the other room to identify the body parts to make sure that none were missed.  You do know that this is a part of the procedure don’t you?

Oh, and one more thing…I’m DONE with you.  So, when I don’t reply to you again, don’t think it’s a ‘victory’.  You’re one troll on an internet sea of trolls and I’ve wasted enough time with you.

 Don’t pretend to know what I don’t  to protect children that are already born. Your assumption is wrong not only for me but for most pro life advocates.  But if it makes you feel better about your point of view that killing a child in the womb is justified because all born children are not taken care of, then go for it.

Once upon a time a there was a man from the land of Obtuse, where all their laws and “morals”  were based on an ancient book about a invisible mighty “Being” and his family dynasty, and these beings commandments and laws.  These laws were interpreted and handed down by self selected people who governed over the Obtusians. This man felt that these people were not Obtusian enough and declared that they were not ‘true Obtusians’ and set out to find a place where he could convince others of the true way to be Obtuse. 

He came across a place where people worked to live their lives based upon logic, reason, kindness to others and the scientific method. Well”this can’t be right” he exclaimed to himself, “I can change these people to the right way as I interpret the Holy Book”. Thus he spent his days on the corner being laughed at for his ramblings. But he was lucky because the people of the land only tried to listen to what he had to say, ask for proof of his claims, and then make up their own minds. Back home in the land of the invisible mighty ‘Being” and the Holy Book, many before him had been burned alive or stoned to death for believing in a different type of  Obtusianism.

We all know how this fractured fairy tale ends.

I don’t know why people keep feeding him. Especially when it comes to abortion

Lol, well, I was in a mood today and just lost my temper with him.

Yeah, except how come that’s not the rule in any other situation when someone else wants/needs to use my body to live?

In every other situation, another person has no (legal) claim on the use of my body – even if they need it to live, even if they are my child, and even if I had originally agreed to let them use my body only later changing my mind. This is true even if my reason for wanting to refuse use of my body is a really, really, selfish, crappy, terrible reason.

So, even if I we assume that you are correct about fetuses being people and about women having reasons of (mere) “convenience” to get abortions (both of which I think are false, but let’s stick a pin in that) – why is it that your special rules only apply to pregnant women?

If fetuses are independent people – not a part of a pregnant woman’s body – why do they have special rights to someone else’s body that no other human being (even newborn children) have???

Why do parents have anybdutybto care for their children. If a mother left her child alone in an apartment and it starved to death she would be charged with murder because she has a duty legally and morally to care for her child. This is the same reason that a mother has the moral and legal duty to protect her child in her womb. It is her child. It is not like someone else placed their child in her womb. She participated in creating the child and therefore placed the child in its vulnerable position to be totally depended on her for survival. Because they are vulnerable they have the right to be protected and the woman has the obligation to protect them.

I think maybe you should pray before some kills you!!!

“Then”

Just two brief questions to the gun lobby today: 
http://andreasmoser.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/aurora-questions-gun-lobby/

 I asked him this once, and also explained that in Texas, it’s a capital offense to murder a child younger than six years old. It’s also a capital offense to hire a person to murder somebody. So, even though the woman getting the abortion isn’t actually performing the procedure (in surgical abortion) she’s still paying somebody else to do it. So, if it’s really murder, then that two capital offenses. According to Texas state law, if abortion is murder, than women who get abortions should get the death penalty. He never answered me either.

  “All viability does is determine when one human can live outside of the body of another human.”

Exactly. Good we have it clear that the fetus is living inside the body of another human. This is not an artificial line. It is the same line drawn in all other situations where one person’s life is dependent on using another person’s body.

Please, can you give actual arguments and stop just asserting things like,”You reading of the Bible is flawed,” that argument simply isn’t true.” Give reasons, facts and evidence to support your claims.

 I hate the “free will” argument. What about the free will of those who did not want to be shot? The gunman was clearly allowed to violate their free will, but god can’t violate the gunman’s free will so these people would live? I know you’re not actually arguing this point of view, but just hearing it annoys me.

 I just read it. It does not say the Jewish rabbis are opposed to abortion. It gives a history of how Jewish law formed around abortion, with some arguments from both sides, but it ends the article generally on the side that abortion is permissible because the welfare of the mother supersedes the welfare of the fetus. In fact, it states that last bit over and over and over again. It even says the “mental anguish” counts as harm to the mother sufficient for obtaining permission to get an abortion.

Anyone walking on two feet looks like they are performing feats of gymnastics to those who still drag their knuckles on the ground.

Of course. Beats me that anyone is even remotely surprised by anything these nutcases say anymore. They Know that barring “God’s” intervention, Obama has the election sewn up already & they’ll “Literally” jump on ANYTHING (tragedies included) as a way to get some votes/support from their fundie followers. Oh my, it’s breaking my heart.

He was probably relying on a cached thought: “contradicting conservative Christian claims = atheist, atheists = wrong”. A fairly common bias we all fall prey to.

Yeah, you’re just doding my question & pretending that there is no difference between “my body” and “not my body” (which there always has been for most people, and there definitely is legally).

You say that parents have a (legal) duty (read: obligation) to care for their children. This is true when it comes to providing things that are not my physical body. HOWEVER, this legal duty and obligation does NOT extend to the use of the parent’s/parents’ body/bodies in any other situation.

For instance, I am in no way obligated to breast feed my child, donate an organ to them, or even to hug them. This is so even if my child needs those things in order to live. I am NOT obligated to provide my body as a form of care in any other situation. Why are there special rules of pregnant women???? Why do I suddenly become obligated to provide my body because I am pregnant?

Yes, because wanting to responsibly care for the children you already have is a matter of “convenience”. Because wanting to not get fired from your job is  “convenient”. Because wanting to escape an abusive relationship or household is just “convenient”.

Sure, you’re not trivializing the reasons women have abortions by calling them “convenient”. Because we all know that women who have abortions are just selfish wenches who can’t accept god’s plan for them to be in a super-shi**y/unjust situation because it’s “inconvenient” for them.

Reading comprehension fail!

And knowing any EU country has less gun deaths is completely useless to analise the present tragedy. As freemage said: there’s simple no way to know where the next random loon will turn a theater in a carnage scene.

Now, if you’re talking about common crime gun deaths, that’s another thing…

They should be punished, not rehabilitated, but they should also get the chance to accept Jesus and be forgiven, presumably so they can be rewarded in heaven. In their view, how is that punishment?

I’m not sure what you mean – it’s not like convicting, sentencing, appeals, and the whole process leading to execution isn’t a long, slow, drawn-out process that gives the killer plenty of time to do the same thing.