…and this is a 
Colorado killer identified
Category:
Posted on: December 10, 2007 6:09 PM, by PZ Myers
We can all breathe a sigh of relief. The gunman who killed four people at evangelical churces in Colorado was not a buddhist atheist Jew evilutionist. He was a deranged disgruntled former member.
The gunman believed to have killed four people at a megachurch and a missionary training school had been thrown out of the school about three years ago and had been sending hate mail to the program, police said in court papers Monday.
The gunman was identified as Matthew Murray, 24, who was home-schooled by his family and raised in what a friend said was a deeply religious Christian household. Murray's father is a neurologist and a prominent multiple-sclerosis researcher.
I suppose they could blame it all on the fact his father was a scientist, still.
Comments
So, it was an unhinged, home-schooled fundy. Why can't these people just kill themselves rather than take innocent lives?
Posted by: Dan | December 10, 2007 6:17 PM
Isn't "deranged" presumed by the fact of his membership?
Posted by: Warren | December 10, 2007 6:20 PM
@PZ :
Despite being a rather fundie sort of guy, love your blog
and science(especially astronomy) too much.
Sorry for being a apologetic, but Christians like these and
the false-witness bearing guys at the DI,AiG,etc are way more detrimental to our religion that the attacks of any freethinker.
That said, the guy, a clear murderer, deserves nothing but hatred and contempt from all sorts of people
Posted by: astrolieber | December 10, 2007 6:20 PM
He was a former church member AND he was homeschooled?
I wonder how they're going to spin this one on Conservapedia.
Posted by: Ryan | December 10, 2007 6:24 PM
Sorry, but I don't think I'll be breathing a sigh of relief over this, anymore than it is a relief that Afghani suicide bombers tend to be Muslim. My opinion on one's religion doesn't have much to do with how I view their horrific actions and deaths.
Posted by: aweb | December 10, 2007 6:27 PM
"I wonder how they're going to spin this one on Conservapedia."
Former. He left the church and see what happened? And he probably wasn't even an atheist, just left the church. Imagine how deranged and dangerous atheists must be then!
Posted by: craig | December 10, 2007 6:28 PM
@ Astrolieber
What happened to forgiveness? As a potential criminal defendant, he deserves his presumption of innocence and his day in court.
Posted by: Matt | December 10, 2007 6:29 PM
Then fundie you are not.
Ok, I knew the Scotsman would show up but not this early. Why would a freethinker be detrimental?
Now you sound like a fundie, so much for love and forgiveness.
Posted by: Uber | December 10, 2007 6:33 PM
Phew. I was really worried that somebody may have been hurt until I read that.
[Offscreen mumbling.]
What? Four people?
Uh, God works in mysterious ways.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 10, 2007 6:33 PM
From the Yahoo News article: " "I was just expecting for the next gunshot to be coming through my car. Miraculously -- by the grace of God -- it did not," she told ABC's "Good Morning America." "
So using the same logic, by the grace of God the next bullet went through someone's head? Graceful...
Posted by: Johnboy | December 10, 2007 6:35 PM
I believe he's dead so what people wish for him doesn't really matter. Also, being dead, he doesn't get the presumption (which isn't an actual fact, but a starting place) of innocence because we don't try people when they're dead.
Or was this rhetorical?
Posted by: Moses | December 10, 2007 6:36 PM
Matt wrote:"As a potential criminal defendant, he deserves his presumption of innocence and his day in court."
What, did somebody arrest his corpse?
(The shooter was killed, Matt.)
Posted by: SIamang | December 10, 2007 6:37 PM
Sorry for being a apologetic, but Christians like these and
the false-witness bearing guys at the DI,AiG,etc are way more detrimental to our religion
Your whole project is false witness.
That said, the guy, a clear murderer, deserves nothing but hatred and contempt from all sorts of people.
Wow, so Christian of you.
Posted by: truth machine | December 10, 2007 6:39 PM
Why would a freethinker be detrimental?
Uber, Astrolieber said "attacks
by a freethinker", not "a freethinker".
Please, pack etiquette calls for them to start limping before we single them out for destruction.
Posted by: Graculus | December 10, 2007 6:48 PM
If you want to know how a man could be inspired to kill because of his religious beliefs, try this article from the Vancouver Sun.
http://tinyurl.com/3996sm
Convicted of 6 deaths, charged with 20 more and once claimed to have done 49.
In correspondence while in custody, he wrote that "I know I was brought into this world to be hear today to change this world of there evil ways. They even want to dis-re-guard the ten command-ments from the time that Moses in his day brought in power which still is in existence today."
He seems to have favoured the parts of the Bible that condemned fornication, rather than the commandment about killing.
Posted by: JohnnieCanuck | December 10, 2007 6:48 PM
Those of you who think there's a correlation between faith and violence per se are incorrect. I'm glad he was not an atheist, too; however, I hardly think he killed because of his religion. (Although that happens, too, sometimes: 911, Jim Jones.) Mental illness is no respecter of ideology, though--and cases like these are never idologically driven.
Posted by: jeff | December 10, 2007 6:50 PM
Isn't this the place with the paramilitary guns'n'camoflage for jesus youth group?
Posted by: AlanWCan | December 10, 2007 6:54 PM
If those folks would have just prayed a little harder!
Posted by: SC | December 10, 2007 6:55 PM
and cases like these are never idologically driven
Well, I wouldn't say never, but I agree this case so far looks like the work of an angry loony.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 10, 2007 6:56 PM
Gunman credits the Holy Spirit for the killings:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/10/colorado.shootings/index.html
Posted by: Ryan | December 10, 2007 6:56 PM
Some early headlines stated "Colo. Church Gunman 'Hated Christians'" link
Nothing new here: People on the scene and in the media jumping to uninformed conclusions. That being said, it is still a tragedy, no matter the motives of the shooter or the beliefs of his victims.
Posted by: kevin | December 10, 2007 6:58 PM
@#16
As the bumper sticker says - Athiests don't car bomb.
On another note... Did you catch the interview with the security guard who shot this guy? Aside from the usual babble about her bullet being guided by the divine rifling of god, she mentioned that she is a member of the church and was at the end of a three day fast.
What?
I think it's great that they get their muscle from within the flock. I care not if religious folks think periodic self-starvation makes god like them better. But they let these things happen at the same time? Their security guards are both armed and potentially delusional from a multiple day fast.
Aside from what seems like an obvious safety issue here, I would expect most religious traditions to have taboos against working (at least work that potentially involves taking life) during periods of religious aceticism. But I guess that's why Ted Haggard runs the megachurch and I just teach social science.
Posted by: dcwp | December 10, 2007 7:04 PM
Re: "hatred and contempt"
Sympathy for the victims and their families is a given in cases like this. But without taking anything away from their grief and loss, it seems to me it's possible to still want to understand other aspects of the situation.
I have many times wondered about the mental illness plea in murder trials. I mean, no matter what else is going on, the moment someone commits a murder they probably automatically qualify as more than a little tweaked.
Certainly this kid was SERIOUSLY disturbed.
But in any case where innocent people end up dead, it sucks the air out of the impulse to feel compassion for the killer. I mean, you're not allowed to say that a murderer might be having some problems.
But ... jeez. Be interesting to know what in his background led to this. I wish there was some way we could objectively research what "deeply religious" Christian homeschooling actually does to kids.
Obviously in this case it didn't turn out a saint. Be nice to know why not. "He went bad" (or "He was possessed by Satan") just isn't enough.
If he WASN'T mentally ill, if there's a readily-accessible path to where he got that could be traveled by other young people, it sure would help to know what it was, so it could be blocked off.
Every time something like this happens, I can't help but feel sorry for the parents. They must go through hell -- you almost wish there was a support group for Parents of Teenaged Gunmen.
Still ... I wonder what this kid's home life was like.
Posted by: Hank Fox | December 10, 2007 7:15 PM
SC said: If those folks would have just prayed a little harder!
You may have a point. Maybe they were just bush league pray-ers, not focused enough to control the actions of a crazed ... um, fellow pray-er?
After all, when's the last time you heard of a mass shooting in a benedictine monastery? They have proper, professional pray-ers there.
Oh dang: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20020611/ai_n12626430
Posted by: Miss Tick | December 10, 2007 7:16 PM
"I pray, dear Jesus, hear my plea--
And please kill them, instead of me."
Posted by: Cuttlefish, OM | December 10, 2007 7:16 PM
Another case where God is getting all the credit and none of the blame...
This afternoon a church representative thanked God that He had given them the foresight to arrange for an armed security specialist to be on duty during the services and thus saving hundreds of lives.
Of course, that's little consolation for the family of the two daughters were gunned down before the man was stopped, but then, I guess God can't be everywhere at once... er...
Posted by: tacitus | December 10, 2007 7:21 PM
"Mental illness is no respecter of ideology, though--and cases like these are never ideologically driven."
However, Jeff, adding religion to mental illness- discounting for the moment that religiosity itself is indicative of such illness- is akin to putting gasoline on the fire. Religion can be- and often is- used to justify the deviant thought processes of mental illness, justifying deluded ideas and behavior and preventing the individual from seeking psychiatric help.
Posted by: raindogzilla | December 10, 2007 7:28 PM
Just makes ya wonder, though - the article I read said that he was killed by one of the church's armed security guards. I find it difficult to imagine a church that needs armed security guards. I'd be kind of scared to go there if I were a religious type.
Posted by: Alison | December 10, 2007 7:30 PM
I totally want this job (God). A xian goes wild (which god knew about ahead of time and could have prevented), shoots a bunch of other xians (ditto), but god comes out good because he helped the xian guard shoot the wild xian (thus breaking a commandment). God gets through it all with good press. WTF? I totally want this job. Exactly what are the qualifications? Sadism? Wanton cruelty? Lazy and/or apathetic? I'm there! Hire me!
Posted by: homer | December 10, 2007 7:31 PM
Alison wrote; "Just makes ya wonder, though - the article I read said that he was killed by one of the church's armed security guards. I find it difficult to imagine a church that needs armed security guards. I'd be kind of scared to go there if I were a religious type."
One account I read said that the security guard was put there that morning in response to the shootings at their youth group place outside Denver 12 hours before. If true that was a good decision.
Posted by: shiftlessbum | December 10, 2007 7:39 PM
Neener Neener, God loved me more than those 4 people...
Posted by: Jessie Gingrich | December 10, 2007 7:43 PM
shiftlessbum: couldn't agree more. If there is any danger to a true believer's mortal body, the logical thing to do is to boost the weaponry of the xtians so that any incoming assailants can be killed as quickly as possible. With xtian love, of course.
Posted by: Steve in MI | December 10, 2007 7:46 PM
Sneer at her all you want, the fact is that she saved many lives yesterday. She kept calm under a great deal of stress, and she wasn't afraid to carry a weapon to protect other people.
-jcr
Posted by: John C. Randolph | December 10, 2007 7:55 PM
So, if this is, in fact, a "Christian nation" as the gurgling loons like to say it is, if god told this nutcase to gun down these people, they should see him as a hero, right?
Posted by: Dan | December 10, 2007 8:01 PM
Steve in MI
While I am always willing to giggle at the inanities and foolishness of religious people, I think that in this case your response to my post is over the top. I don't want them to control our government or dictate our cultural values and would very much like to see them stay the hell out of my life. But snarky comments about the tragedy are not appreciated. I know you don't give a shit what I think, but that is precisely why I am writing this.
Irrespective of what we may think of the religious or what our opinions on guns might be, if the account I read is true, hiring an armed guard hours after a fatal shooting at a place directly tied to the church was prudent and in this case extremely lucky. My heart goes out to the families of the kids (and they were all young) who were killed.
Posted by: shiftlessbum | December 10, 2007 8:03 PM
She's the next media Superstar! Leno, O'Reilly, Jon Stewart!
I can't wait for the Guns & Ammo cover: "God Helps Those Who Arm Themselves."
In Our Glorious Future, all good Christians will pack heat!
Posted by: Hank Fox | December 10, 2007 8:08 PM
Dan #1: I think they do, you just don't hear as much about it.
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 10, 2007 8:08 PM
Raindogzilla is correct, in my opinion. That said, I'd like to take this moment to posit something: there are Christians and atheists alike who use tragedies to make ideological hay. I am confident that I have more in common with respectful Christians and respectful atheists, than I do with the disrespectful of either stripe. Please note that I mean "respectful" idiosyncratically and situationally; however, I really hope that all of us on the non-theological side will try to squelch indecent urges to make points off of Christians involved in tragedies like this--which are, after all, not ideological at all.
Posted by: jeff | December 10, 2007 8:20 PM
The ghoulish snideness and sneering of some of those on this thread is disgraceful. Village atheism. Philistine atheism.
Posted by: Colugo | December 10, 2007 8:22 PM
Whew, I'm sure glad it wasn't an atheist Jew this time around.
I am a member of the Liberty Forums, it attracts many Jew haters (yes, Jew haters). I participate on the forum in order to humiliate them whenever possible. They have speculated that Murray is a Jooooish name (a lot of Joooos are named Murray, and Joooo haters don't seem to care that Murray in most cases is the first name).
Of course, Matthew was a biblical Jooooish disciple of a Jesus or something like that. And even if it is proved that Matthew Murray is not a religious Jew, the morons on the Liberty Forum will still say he must have Jooooish blood.
Posted by: The Atheist Jew | December 10, 2007 8:23 PM
Called it on the first thread. The shooter was going to be either a Moslem, Jew, scientist, atheist, Xian, or something else. Duh.
Thank Cthulhu it was one of theirs. But really these murderers are just loons and belong in their own category.
One always dislikes playing the your side has more loons than ours game. But if he had been an atheist or biologist, the fundies would be screaming, "satan and his atheist hordes are taking over the world" card for the next decade. Nevermind, that atheists don't believe in satan either. Nothing in fundie land has to actually be true or make any sense.
Speaking of truth and making sense, they will spin him as an atheist anyway.
So they get Seung Cho and the Colorada shooter. The atheists are stuck with the Finnish guy. The Omaha one is apparently awaiting assignment.
Posted by: raven | December 10, 2007 8:23 PM
"Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in thee:
While the bombers thunder past
Shelter me from burn and blast;
And though I know all men are brothers
Let the fallout fall on others."
--Tom Lehrer
It is a good thing that there was an armed security guard there to stop the formerly religious person. It doesn't mean that everybody should be armed. Or, more to the point, people who have guns around the house should know that they've quintupled their odds of killing a family member. Or someone coming to their door. Or a neighbour.
Posted by: Monado | December 10, 2007 8:24 PM
That is a no brainer. They will claim he was gay.
Posted by: raven | December 10, 2007 8:26 PM
It never even crossed my mind that this fellow could have been an atheist. It's Springs. Colorado Springs is a hotbed of fundamentalism and if you ask me I daresay somebody who can drop to his knees and "undo the damage" of snuffing out people's lives is much more likely to do so. Compare that to an atheist who can never undo the damage, can never be forgiven, and for whom the rest of eternity (1-100 years prior to non-function) will consist of living in, what amounts to, a metal and brick hole.
It astounds me that when somebody who consistently backslides rededicates himself to the faith, good Christians don't do the person a favor and put a bullet in his head. They promptly drop to their knees and ask for forgiveness and have sent one more soul to heaven which may not have gone otherwise. In fact, considering how pointless and worthless life is compared to forever, I daresay any Christians who don't do such a thing are immoral.
Posted by: Tatarize | December 10, 2007 8:29 PM
"So, it was an unhinged, home-schooled fundy. Why can't these people just kill themselves rather than take innocent lives?"
You won't find more hateful and ugly sentiments on the typical white supremacist boards than you find in this thread. Several innocent people were gunned down by a man who was in all likelihood mentally ill. And the reaction of the PZ's brownshirts is equal parts "how funny!" and "stupid Xians got what they deserved." Scumbags.
Posted by: sd | December 10, 2007 8:29 PM
Let me at least dream about this. I pack a Magnum to Midnight Mass, and when that gunman stands up two pews ahead of me and turns around, I blow his fucken face off. BLAM BLAM. Thank you, Lord, for that satisfying thought!
Posted by: IronyBroad | December 10, 2007 8:31 PM
Once again, and more simply, let me state: the relevant difference is between boorish and narcissistic creeps who jump at the news of tragedy to promote ideology, and the rest of us. In other words, at times like these, the world divides not into the religious and the atheistic, but rather into the tasteless and the civilized. I'm very sorry to see that the latter include Pharyngula regulars.
Posted by: jeff | December 10, 2007 8:35 PM
#45
Apparently irony and sarcasm are hard to understand via the written, electronic format.
And you cannot possibly believe that if this Murray fellow turned out to be Muslim that the rabid Xtian strain in this country wouldn't be howling for internment camps and extraordinary rendition of anyone with any connections to the Middle East or Muslim.
It is a sad and tragic episode in our culture, just as EVERY OTHER violent act is. I am not blaming religion, but as Carlin said, 'the more devout a person claims to be, the more negotiable they seem to feel those commandments of theirs are.'
My deepest sympathies go out to the families of the deceased and to the family of the shooter. I'm sure this is a shock to them as well and they are left in the worst position of all. They will be reviled for what their son/brother has done and will be offered none of the sympathy that the other families will receive.
Posted by: flame821 | December 10, 2007 8:38 PM
Mr. Randolph, are you determined to be an idiot?
Yes, the guard did a good thing. But it's STILL questionable for her to have been armed after a three day fast.
Twits like you give gun rights advocates a bad name.
Posted by: gwangung | December 10, 2007 8:39 PM
sd you miss the point. The stupid Xtians are always mewling about how the evil atheists will attack and kill them and eat their innards for being True Believers(TM). Whenever something like this happens (as it seems to quite regularly in your country...maybe letting any loonie buy a gun really isn't all that smart hmmm?), there's a barrage of "See, the atheists in our schools teach our children evolution, therefore they go on killing sprees." So, what you're reading here is the response to that: I'm sure this story will now slink away, same as the Virginia Tech shooting as soon as it's clear the gunman was a deranged Xtian of some stripe or other. There's a very quick knee jerk "shooter must have been a hateful atheist/muslim/something else and that's what led to this" mentality that magically transforms into "Oh, he was a disturbed individual" as soon as it (more often than not) turns out to be one of their own. So sd, get a fucking grip.
Posted by: AlanWCan | December 10, 2007 8:42 PM
Probably a lot like this:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/12/atheist-killers.html
Posted by: Norman Doering | December 10, 2007 8:43 PM
[score points off tragedy] = [unethical + cruel behaviour] .'. [stop]
Posted by: jeff | December 10, 2007 8:43 PM
This kid didn't leave the church (24 yo a kid? I guess compared to me it is). He was booted out. This was a revenge killing.
And if they were going to have armed guards, they should have been guards on their game, as others here have said. I am old school. If you put out protection, make sure your guards are on their best game. Couldn't someone who was rested, fed, and alert available? This situation could have been a lot worse, and not just because of the gunman. I hope other groups learn from this. I hope the police will learn--if this guy was sending notes, why weren't there cops at the other congregations?
Posted by: Rjaye | December 10, 2007 8:59 PM
Please, let's everyone observe the mandatory "wailing and rending of garments" period before discussing any ancillary issues with regards to this shooting.
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 10, 2007 8:59 PM
Would it be bad if I said I was home schooled in a deeply Christian family? I'm always quite pissed at characters like this, because they make the rest of us (normal) home schoolers look bad.
Posted by: Mike Easter | December 10, 2007 9:01 PM
>>I can't wait for the Guns & Ammo cover: "God Helps Those Who >>Arm Themselves."
Why wait. The advertisements from the WorldNetDaily article on the shooting include:
>>Read the story of how a Christian responded to an armed >>terrorist attack on his worship service!
>>And see the DVD about the famous St. James Massacre
>>When it's time to shoot back - Get 'Armed Response,' the >>guide to firearms, self-defense
>>Perfect gift for pistol-packin' mama - 'Stayin' Alive' >>shows guns are indeed for girls
>>"Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense"
Posted by: Michael | December 10, 2007 9:02 PM
The female guard who shot the 'shooter' gives credit to God.
"I give the credit to God. And I say that very humbly. God was with me and the whole time I was behind cover -- this has got to be God, because of the firepower that [the gunman] had vs. what I had -- was God. I did not run away and I didn't think for a minute to run away, I just knew that I was given the assignment to end this before it got too much worse. I just prayed for the Holy Spirit to guide me."
Discuss....
Posted by: ChrisKG | December 10, 2007 9:02 PM
For the last 24 hours I was wondering whether:
(A) the murderer was a nonbeliever, in which case I would learn that from the fundie blogs, or
(B) the murderer was a fundie, in which case I would learn it here.
We can always count on you to point when bad things in the news were caused by fundies.
Posted by: Decidenator | December 10, 2007 9:11 PM
The female guard who shot the 'shooter' gives credit to God.
Good trigger control, belike.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | December 10, 2007 9:13 PM
PZ, the story already blames anti-Christians
Posted by: Robster, FCD | December 10, 2007 9:15 PM
I quote this from the following from the yahoo news article:
"Murray's father is a neurologist and a leading multiple-sclerosis researcher."
"A neighbor, .... describing the whole family as "very, very religious."
How the hell can a neurologist and "leading MS researcher be extremely religious? Seriously, what the hell is wrong with these misguided people. To have accomplished yourself and applied your mind to the levels that this man has, and then be described as religious, it's unbelievable. Seriously, what can be wrong in this man's brain cells, that keeps him religious? Furthermore, this poison destroyed his town, his son, and all of these unfortunate gullible people.
I can understand ignorant morons being religious, but a neurologist and scientific researcher who is religious is just not fathomable. If he can't think rationally about religion, then one wonders how he approaches science.
Posted by: Helioprogenus | December 10, 2007 9:16 PM
ChrisKG/57: Words fail me.
Posted by: Steve in MI | December 10, 2007 9:27 PM
It's fortunate that an armed security guard was present and responded appropriately. I'm also glad that it wasn't a stomach-turningly narcissistic, grand-standing predatory opportunist with a chip on its shoulder, ideological blinders the size of dinner plates, and the extraordinary ability to talk out of its ass despite said orifice being plugged with its neck. That wouldn't have helped matters any.
Posted by: Azkyroth | December 10, 2007 9:37 PM
PZ, the story already blames anti-Christians
Posted by: Robster, FCD | December 10, 2007 9:37 PM
"I find it difficult to imagine a church that needs armed security guards."
With the kind of money they handle, it's probably a necessity. Donations, gift shop sales, church cafes, non-meth purchases from male non-prostitutes...
With all the money-changing in the temple, you need a guard in case some long-haired hippy freak tries to come in and mess things up.
Posted by: Jon H | December 10, 2007 9:40 PM
ChrisKG/57: Words fail me.
Posted by: Steve in MI | December 10, 2007 9:27 PM
Steve,
Does this mean that God is culpable and may be guilty of manslaughter or at least negligent homicide? I know it could be self defense, but that only applies if you use the minimum force necessary to stop someone, surely God could stop him without using a gun, right?
Posted by: ChrisKG | December 10, 2007 9:45 PM
I've looked the thread over, and I don't see anyone calling the killings "funny", and there is definitely no one claiming that the victims deserved what they got. I think I'll reserve the title "scumbag" for people like you who make false accusations.
Posted by: PZ Myers | December 10, 2007 9:47 PM
If he can't think rationally about religion, then one wonders how he approaches science.
He probably approaches it very well. Just because you know who created something doesn't mean you can't be interested in how it works.
Posted by: NatureSelectedMe | December 10, 2007 9:51 PM
Since his initial assumptions are already incorrect, then who knows how much irrationality sneaks through his work. He's starting from the point of a believer already, so does he then assume miracles take place when he can't explain them? For example, perhaps a patient he's treating suddenly gets well with no medically sound reason. Does this mean he suspends his science and assumes it's a miraculous representation of his faith? Seriously, if you're starting your initial conditions on faith already, then you can't think logically. Well, some perhaps can suspend this belief, but in general, few can think logically.
Posted by: Helioprogenus | December 10, 2007 9:57 PM
Well, some perhaps can suspend this belief, but in general, few can think logically.
Well there you go, he might be one of the few. You don't have to think rationally every minute of the day, do you?
Posted by: NatureSelectedMe | December 10, 2007 10:04 PM
#68
He is probably very good at compartmentalizing his thoughts/beliefs. I work at a hospital and I've worked with MSF, I have seen extremely religious people who 'shut that part off' when dealing with the task at hand. Be that pathology, surgery or just the daily grunt work of medicine.
These same people (who use the scientific method on a daily basis) will immediately thank their *insert deity here* for everything that has happened that day. And many of them will attest to the accuracy (if not infallibility) of their own specific religious text(s), tweaking it to fit into what they feel is a workable relationship between religion / science/ life.
I personally find it rather silly, but many of these people come from tight knit communities where NOT believing is as dangerous as believing in the 'wrong' thing. So maybe it is a (social) survival mechanism of some sort?
Posted by: flame821 | December 10, 2007 10:16 PM
Behold a moron: "I was just expecting for the next gunshot to be coming through my car. Miraculously -- by the grace of God -- it did not," she told ABC's "Good Morning America."
This person believes that they are further up the scale of God's grace than the victims. Wonderful.
Posted by: Roger Scott | December 10, 2007 10:43 PM
Look!
A stupid filter.
http://www.tfot.info/news/1065/stupidfilter-time-to-fight-back-the-imbeciles.html
Posted by: Steve_C | December 10, 2007 10:52 PM
@ #72. Yes, how unfortunately typical of the xtians. "God spared me." all the while forgetting that others died. It makes mu stomach churn hearing comments like that. It leads me to believe that god is one cold hearted bastard to who delights in killing some while making others believe their "chosen".
Posted by: firemancarl | December 10, 2007 11:04 PM
Roger Scott: I hope that you will reconsider the wisdom of saying things like that. I think that humanistic thinkers would try to avoid adding pointless insult to injury. Anyway, I think Dr. Myers is yukking it up, too...so, you're in pretty well-known company, for what that's worth.
(As for me: I just wish you'd be nicer. Seriously.)
Posted by: jeff | December 10, 2007 11:05 PM
Laughing and the goofy stuff people say isn't being mean.
No one put a gun to their head...
oh wait. Well not to make them say the stupid things.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 10, 2007 11:18 PM
Hey SD, fuck you. Over the course of this thread, you'll undoubtedly encounter several cogent and reasonable responses to your comment. This isn't one of them.
I'm sick and tired of you fucking concern trolls. I've no more patience for you. I'm done.
Over a hundred thousand people die every day, globally. Nearly all of those are as innocent and undeserving as those who died in this tragedy. The tiny fraction that are the remaining are the unavoidable results of living in a chaotic universe.
This is one of the preventable, and thus all the more repulsive, majority. No one here is applauding this tragedy, and you obviously aren't either. On other issues we disagree, but this is not one of those.
But if you truly deplored preventable, tragic deaths, you would not be spending your time perusing the blogs of those with whom you generally disagree so you can drop hit-and-run indictments. Those who actually do things about the issues they care about have far less time to waste than you.
So kindly take your unjustified, holier-than-thou comments and shove 'em. Then do something meaningful with your concern.
Let the more reasonable responses commence.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 10, 2007 11:25 PM
It is a tragedy. Period.
The guy was angry and unstable. Period.
He was in all likelyhood a theist. Big deal.
Posted by: Uber | December 10, 2007 11:29 PM
BTW, SD...
I don't know if you noticed, but pretty much every time Something Bad happens to People Who Aren't Them, a sizable percentage of wingnuts praise it as God's judgement on sinners or some such, and if it's human-caused, try to use it as ammunition to smear their political opponents by association. You want to talk about callousness? You want to talk about hateful and ugly sentiments? You want to talk about the kind of brain damage it takes to make someone equate expressing relief that this tragedy, as horrible as it was, didn't play out in such a way that the wingnuts could readily hijack it and fly it into the towers of their political opponents' reputation, with "laughing at it?"
The fact that you apparently care more about making digs at us than about opposing the people to whom every needless death, every suffering child, every city torn to pieces is nothing more than ammunition completely guts your claims to any kind of moral supremacy. Or any kind of morality. You and your kind are beneath contempt.
I second Brownian's recommendation.
Posted by: Azkyroth | December 10, 2007 11:39 PM
To those who are so indignant and derisive about the woman who said that "by the grace of God" she wasn't killed:
Imagine that you were caught up in a terribly tragedy in which several people died. Afterwards, you exclaim "I am so happy to be alive!" or "Thankfully, I wasn't killed!" Does this mean that you are gloating about those who did not survive?
I can guess what your counter-argument will be: in her mind God decided who lived and who died, so unlike an atheist who thinks it was just bad luck, she thinks that her buddy God had them die in her stead. Or something. Gimme a break.
You are grasping for any excuse to heighten your loathing of these people. That's where ingroup-outgroup thinking has taken you: a simple, culturally appropriate (for a theist) expression of relief after the threat of violent death is given a strained interpretation as something exceedingly sinister; yet another reason to hate these deluded Bad Guys even more.
So maybe a lot of the fundies are worse when it comes to discussing tragedies like this. So why not try to be far better than them?
Don't call me a concern troll. If you must, just call me a troll. But you know damn well that I am not a troll. I have commented on various ScienceBlogs blogs for about a year, and even if you think my views are wrong as hell you have to give them more credit than that.
Posted by: Colugo | December 11, 2007 12:00 AM
Hey chill out people.
If an atheist gunman, 10 fundie trolls would show up.
If a Xian gunman, 10 fundie trolls would show up.
If a UFO alien gunman, 10 fundie trolls would show up.
Nothing happened, 10 fundie trolls would show up.
I think these people are on automatic pilot and it isn't a very advanced model.
Posted by: raven | December 11, 2007 12:03 AM
"I believe he's dead so what people wish for him doesn't really matter. Also, being dead, he doesn't get the presumption (which isn't an actual fact, but a starting place) of innocence because we don't try people when they're dead."
How do we deal with this as a society. Well, I guess since he was killed in the act we know he was guilty, but what if it had happned some other way and the person was dead, does that make them automatically guilty?
Posted by: thadd | December 11, 2007 12:25 AM
And something to keep in mind is that church shootings aren't so uncommon.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=church+shooting+&btnG=Google+Search
This one made the news because it happened at an infamous church. And under those circumstances, (speaking of callousness) how many Christians are painting this entire church with the Gay Brush? We'll be hearing "the penalties of sin" often enough before this is over.
Even worse, how about Christians condemning the victims for acting in whatever way they did during the shooting, and denouncing the entire church group? Oh look, here's one now!
http://thegrateful.org/articles/2007/12/10/calling-new-life-church-in-colorado-springs-to-repent
And I quote: "Repent, New Life, and mourn your failure to do your Master's will."
And so forth. Name some jerk response to this event and you'll find Christians channelling it from God, and denouncing or demanding on His Behalf.
Posted by: John | December 11, 2007 12:29 AM
What the hell are you talking about?
Posted by: Azkyroth | December 11, 2007 12:30 AM
#44 Tatarize wrote:
"It astounds me that when somebody who consistently backslides rededicates himself to the faith, good Christians don't do the person a favor and put a bullet in his head."
I daresay it's not likely to undo the damage to your brain. Perhaps atheism really is a form of mental illness.
#61 Helioprogenus wrote:
"I can understand ignorant morons being religious, but a neurologist and scientific researcher who is religious is just not fathomable."
Not fathomable by very, very small minds. Perhaps athiesm is a form of cognitive deficiency. I'd be totally disingenuous if I said I'm shocked by the monumental stupidity among atheists. It's actually quite predictable. Your brain would probably explode if you realized how many people in the sciences are also theists. My father was a professor in Chemistry and a born-again Christian. He died when I was young, but in his 13 years of teaching, he devoted a lot of time to speaking to high-school students through the state high-school science association, encouraging them to study science. I'm sure he did far more to advance the cause of science than you and your fellow travellers, who appear to be full of condescension and arrogance.
BTW, for what it's worth, New Life has had bomb and death threats in the past, so armed guards are nothing new. It has nothing to do with the money they handle. Now I'll just wait for someone to claim they deserved the threats.