[quote=@Legend] It's not false. [/quote] It is. It doesn't shrink the frontal lobe. [quote=@whizzball1] A: Which is why, of course, we have to seek God's guidance before we do something. B: It's common sense to pass laws that keep people from doing that which hurts others. If the government is also going to pass laws that prevent people from hurting themselves, I'm going to support them. C: I believe there is, but I likely wouldn't be able to argue that. D: I see what you mean, but it's slightly exaggerated (although I'm sure that's not purposeful). Sure, we'll go around warning people about their sin, but we're not going to shun them (that's what I'm understanding from "acting as if you're doing something horrid") or get angry or anything of the sort. God calls us to be considerate, and that means a moderation of firmness and gentleness. E: Although ignorance is no excuse, I have no idea whether the information was false. It was from a .gov website with citations. Although, the "5x as much" was not from the .gov website; it was from another which had no references, so I wasn't sure if I could trust it, but I was running out of time. [/quote] A) Remind me again when the last time you were told something by him was, outside of your view of a book? B) Then you should be in support of making it so that they CAN stop them from hurting themselves, because when it's illegal it's more likely for kids, the time when it's actually dangerous, to use them. C) Mm. D) It was exaggerated for impact, yes. Though the more literalist, say, Westboro, it isn't much of an exaggeration for. See, if that were all it were, I'd be fine with it. But most aren't that way. And with me being the way I am about personal freedom, I get angry easily about things going beyond voicing a view. E) Alright. I apologize for getting so angry. I had assumed that you were working off of information you heavily trusted, rather than some you hadn't verified. What .gov was it, if you know? The time of it's publishing would heavily affect the results.