But conservatives have said that and keep saying that.  Give me specifics.  I think it's damaging to the Right's cause when we keep predicting doom about these sorts of things and then not much comes of it. 

I can speak with good authority that the repeal of DADT was a non-event.  Nobody cares about it and if anything, it's made light of.  When there's some sort of horseplay in the locker room or at work, the joke is "Hey, it's okay now.  New Army."

I think it was much ado about nothing. It's going on close to two years now and it just was never an issue to begin with in the military.  It was entirely hyped and inflated. 

And yes, I've had to put up with all the lectures from commanders on sexual harassment, none of which has anything to do with letting gays in the military.  I'm for women in the military, though not the integration of the Armor and Infantry branches. 

I asked on the other thread about this, but there were all sorts of horrid predictions on the conservative side about what would happen if DADT was repealed.  Nothing ended up happening.  Career soldiers were threatening not to reenlist if gays were allowed in the military.  (I never met a single person who ever said that or followed through)

So how will this be any different than the repeal of DADT?

Going to play devil's advocate here.  But conservatives predicted all sorts of terrible consequences if we repealed DADT in the military.  The result?  Nothing happened.  It didn't affect unit readiness, the ranks weren't suddenly flooded with flamboyant homosexuals, and had you not paid attention to the news, you would never have known there was a policy change in the military. 

I wonder if the same thing will happen with the Boy Scouts.  There will be a lot of huffing and puffing and doom mongering, and not much will come of it.  The Scouts will remain.  

Out of curiosity, do you call yourself a "denier" of Allah or Vishnu?

At some point natural law will assert itself and those who want to fight it will be in for a rude comeuppance

What makes you believe this?  And what would it look like?  I see no evidence of any progressive inroad into culture being reversed. 

I too have noticed a return to normalcy at the stores. There are whole racks of AR's and within a year, they'll probably be cheap enough for me to want to buy one. The smaller stores tend to have more anmo available mostly because the locals here in Georgia put draconian limits on quantity purchases. I think it will all be back to normal levels by the fall.

It's just a wonder to me that we haven't seen a hundred Bostons and Londons in the past 13 years. 

Is that you with the rifle Barkha?  Awesome AR!

I have a massive reservoir of useless information. I can remember incredibly useless and obscure historical facts about people, dates, battles, and statistics.  And I did really well in school at marshaling the mass of facts to writing and citing papers and research.  But then I am terrible when it comes to remembering steps to a process, formulas, or instructions. 

To say that Twitter is a place for serious discussion of moral issues or politics is comparable to saying Youtube video comment feeds are a place for intellectual discussion.  

I've always believed that the most insidious result of an all-encompassing government is that it snuffs out the survival instinct. It dulls your instinctual drive to provide your own food and housing, and worst of all, your own protection. I get called paranoid a lot for my ever expanding arsenal and ammo supply. And it really perplexes well off family that I carry a gun. I'm even more perplexed by people who don't carry a handgun on them in their daily business. It already potentially saved my life once and prevented an auto theft last year. There is either a refusal to believe or utter ignorance at work in people who go through life believing terrible, violent things could never happen to them because of who they are or where they live. Just call 911.

In all seriousness, I'm actually a little confused by it all.  I don't remember the finer points from Catholic school on the theology of it, but is the Pope really presenting anything new here?  Isn't he just reiterating the ancient Christian belief that Christ has redeemed everyone through his death, including non-Christians, and therefore we all must accept the fact that Jesus has done so? 

Or is the Pope suggesting that atheists too can go to heaven regardless of theological beliefs?  The "Righteous Non-believers?"  If he's suggesting this, isn't that sort of thinking self-defeating for a religion? 

Typical equivocating responses from these "community leaders."  All denials that this sort of savagery has any basis in Islam, when in fact the killers cited chapter and verse.  And the Prophet himself condoned the murder of infidels and specifically beheadings.  But dummies like Cameron, no doubt an expert on the Koran, assures us that he knows far more than the killers who have devoted their lives to savagery. 

I know who I'm calling to my defense if I die someday and end up before St. Peter. 

St. Salieri,

Have you ever read Paul Johnson's short biography on Napoleon?  Cemented my opinion forever that Napoleon was no more than a thug and tyrant.  I'm also reading Russia Against Napoleon about Emperor Alexander's foreign policy and smart scheming that lead to Napoleon's demise.