[Johny Joe Hold]

It is frustrating how few people who call themselves "Christian" read the Bible. The Bible says clearly man is to reign over beasts. (Psalms 50:10-11)

When the beast is a threat to humans, like a lion, God meant for man to kill it. That is exactly what Dr. Wally Palmer, a Dentist from right north of us here in Freehold did.

Not only did Wally kill the 15 year old Cecil, but he used minimal force, a bow and arrow. It was so minimal the old crippled lion ran quite a ways before dropping dead.

That dangerous Cecil was a TV favorite and now protestors have closed Wally's dental office. READ THE BIBLE CRANKY PROTESTORS.

[Witch Hammer]

This story made my day! The slaying of this feral, flea-bitten brute can only please the Lord, and what pleases Jesus pleases me.

[Samuel Levenson]

What else are the beasts of the field good for? I traveled to Alaska recently and was introduced to Caribou meat. I'll never go back to bacon again.

[alooneymormon]

Proverbs 12:10 "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."

This "man" disgusts me. If he found and killed that animal with his bare hands I would be less disgusted. POS.

[Didymus Much]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

Proverbs 12:10 "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."...

Learn to read before you go trying to find something in the Bible that would condemn this guy, please.

[Samuel Levenson]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

Proverbs 12:10 "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."

This "man" disgusts me. If he found and killed that animal with his bare hands I would be less disgusted. POS.

You idiot. Read it again. "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast..." As in, a beast he owns. The phrase doesn't contain an indefinite article: i.e., "a beast"; it contains the possessive pronoun: i.e., "his beast" . For this verse to apply to that man-eating lion, you would be implying that he owns the beast. You're not implying that, are you?

[alooneymormon]

Originally Posted by Didymus Much

Learn to read before you go trying to find something in the Bible that would condemn this guy, please.

Whats your point? He has no regard for the beasts on this earth. Burn in hell, big bad hunter boy, you POS....(not you Didymus, I mean Dr Dickless)

[alooneymormon]

Originally Posted by Samuel Levenson

You idiot. Read it again. "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast..." As in, a beast he owns. The phrase doesn't contain an indefinite article: i.e., "a beast"; it contains the possessive pronoun: i.e., "his beast" . For this verse to apply to that man-eating lion, you would be implying that he owns the beast. You're not implying that, are you?

Um.....what?

[Samuel Levenson]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

Um.....what?

Same thing Didymus said, but with more big words. Doesn't your liberal fag-enabling school teach English anymore? The Bible doesn't say we have to regard the creatures of this earth, other than the commandment to subdue and rule over them, and to regard the lives of the ones we own. This man subdued that lion, so he's justified by the Bible. Checkmate, atheist!

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

Proverbs 12:10 "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."
This "man" disgusts me. If he found and killed that animal with his bare hands I would be less disgusted. POS.

He could have been mauled or killed by this vicious animal. It was only through his own bravery and God's protection he is alive today.

[Alvin Moss]

We rarely see lions in these parts, but if we did, we would shoot them. You can't have lions running around loose.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Lions are vicious killers, especially of Christians.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

That dangerous Cecil was a TV favorite and now protestors have closed Wally's dental office.

So, not only are these tree-hugging hippies causing financial distress to a man who killed a ravening beast in self defense*, they are also risking the oral health of his patients.

* Also, the people who were with him at the time could have been eaten by the lion and if that had happened then everyone would have blamed the good dentist for not killing it. Christians just can't win, whatever they do!

[Nobar King]

Dr. Wally Palmer, the hunter-dentist, is a job-creator. That's all there is to it. People should be praising him! Think of all of the jobs that are lost when a doctor is forced to close his office. Is that what you want?

[alooneymormon]

Originally Posted by Joanna Lytton-Vasey

So, not only are these tree-hugging hippies causing financial distress to a man who killed a ravening beast in self defense*, they are also risking the oral health of his patients.

* Also, the people who were with him at the time could have been eaten by the lion and if that had happened then everyone would have blamed the good dentist for not killing it. Christians just can't win, whatever they do!

With all due respect Ms Lytton-Vasey, the lion was lured out of a protected sanctuary, was shot with an arrow and tracked over several days as it slowly weakened and bled to death until he shot him. At what point was the "brave" doctor in danger?

[Samuel Levenson]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

With all due respect Ms Lytton-Vasey, the lion was lured out of a protected sanctuary...

Animal sanctuaries are an invention of the devil. The only Biblical animal sanctuary was the first one- the Garden of Eden. Eve screwed that up for everyone so God kicked them out. Ever since the devil, and his minions, the hippies, have been making cheap knock-offs. Satan wants people to go back to worshipping trees and rocks instead of their Creator! The devil even calls them "sanctuaries" in mockery of True Christian™ churches. The devil's mockery knows no bounds.

That lion was shouldn't have been in a so-called sanctuary to begin with.

[Witch Hammer]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

With all due respect Ms Lytton-Vasey, the lion was lured out of a protected sanctuary, was shot with an arrow and tracked over several days as it slowly weakened and bled to death until he shot him. At what point was the "brave" doctor in danger?

At what point wasn't the good doctor in danger? That savage animal could have attacked, and horribly mauled or killed him, at any point during the hunt...there is nothing more dangerous than a scared, cornered or wounded beast.

I just thank Jesus that Dr. Palmer escaped with his life.

[alooneymormon]

Originally Posted by Witch Hammer

At what point wasn't the good doctor in danger? That savage animal could have attacked, and horribly mauled or killed him, at any point during the hunt...there is nothing more dangerous than a scared, cornered or wounded beast.

I just thank Jesus that Dr. Palmer escaped with his life.

That is a sickening video. Killing- just for the "fun" of it.
I was hoping Lord Nonutz was really attacked, like the title stated.....

[Witch Hammer]

Originally Posted by alooneymormon

That is a sickening video. Killing- just for the "fun" of it.
I was hoping Lord Nonutz was really attacked, like the title stated.....

You disapprove? That large group of men with the high powered hunting rifles were obviously in imminent mortal danger from that rogue beast, just as Dr. Palmer was. Clearly they shot the wretch in self defense, but certainly would have been justified for shooting it just because they didn't like the look on it's face. Genesis 1:26

[alooneymormon]

Yes, Mr Hammer, I strongly disapprove of killing defenseless animals without reason.
Did God really give man domain over the animal kingdom to destroy it? Or to protect and respect it?