Total posts: 5,875
-->
@disgusted
I know you're a racist, but supporting conservative people and positions does not make a person black. You're a racist so you see "black men" under every rock.
But if I were black, that would mean you are obsessed and chasing a black man around, even to different boards. What would your racist friends think?
Hey! Maybe that is part of the reason you chase me around, you think I'm black. Lol. Your stalking is like when the Klan would follow the black men around. I learn more about you everyday.
And don't be dumb and deny stalking, everyone reads your many posts to me all over the board when I have not addressed you. Everyone can see you stalking. That is how some of us knew you had been banned, there was suddenly no stalker.
You are so sad. I wish a family member of yours would see your internet OCD behavior and insist on some help for you.
Created:
Posted in:
Or cults such as the Branch Dravidians and Heaven's Gate try to resemble the Early Church. As the early church preceded, I find that to be more logical. But you needed the "guilt by association", so hence the slick wordage.Acts 5 indicates the early church resembled millenarian cults such as the Branch Dravidians and Heaven's Gate.
Human psychology has changed less in 2000 years than migt be supposed.But not you. You're the new man. Humanitarian and progressive. Nothing like the early church who are just like the Branch Dravidians and Heaven's Gate cults.
Lol. What makes you funny is not your clumsiness, but that you think you are so graceful.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
...that seems to go against EVERYTHING jesus is teaching here.
At II Chronicles 1:12, God promised Solomon:
See? He called your explanation silly and instantly jumped to yet another passage. Answer this one and he will just grafitti yet another passage. You are well meaning and young. Even your Lord Jesus was not always pleasant with everyone.
Some people get the word, and some people get the whip.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
That was my first post homer, my argument could not have changed. You've just realized the fallacy in your argument.Firstly, you've changed your argument, likely to save face from failing to recognise the way I was using colour (i.e. not in regards to skin colour).
Even if there is genetic admixture (i.e. racemixing) involved, would you not agree that certain populations, that grew up in certain environments, express certain characteristics? For example, do you think it is purely coincidental that a particular Kenyan tribe is completely saturating the Olympic marathon scene?
That has nothing to do with race. Your analogy was illogical.
If these Kenyans were to start breeding with Asians, do these Kenyan genetics suddenly disappear because they are no longer "pure?"
There is no such thing as "Kenyan genetics" homer. And no one has argued that genes disappear, but that pure "races" have disappeared. Try to keep up.
Does not this bred child have Kenyan and Asian genetics?
Again, there is no such thing as "Asian genetics". Asia has many different "races". But to the point, that child cannot be called " pure bred", regardless of your silly analogy claiming that different hues of say, red are still red.
Again, if we call various colours red, despite not all of them being pure, why do we treat various types of humans as being all the same race, even if not all of them being pure?
No one made any argument on how people are treated. That is just your dishonesty kicking in. The point was and is, they are not "pure". That is a fact, even if society treats them as one race or the other.
...but this is the alternative to denying racial reality.
No one except the man between your ears has denied " racial reality". You just have a poor grasp of genetics. Races in humanity are not even a scientific concept. No one is saying variations don't exist. We are saying those variations mean that no one is genetically homogenous anymore.
Thus your analogy fails. It lacks logic. In vernacular, it was dumb.
Created:
Posted in:
A question cannot be a lie. Everyone knows you were banned. Several people spoke about it. Do not feel ashamed of being banned, be ashamed of the behavior that caused you to be banned.....again.
Did you hear? Castin is now a mod. Wasn't that good for the board? Take care and remember, doing the same dumb thing over and over is the definition of stupidity.
Change your behavior if you want different results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
He would deny any hate for theists in general, and any hate for the religion board too, but we know better. You are correct though that his worldview does explain his beliefs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
But that is just it. We can't....we can do better than people that have and will continue to just defer to bsh1.
The whole thing has been turned over to bsh1, and he has locked the door from within. Are the consequences of a fight to break the door and drag him out worth it to you?
He is a progressive liberal, as such, his morality is based on what he personally likes. That means to him, people who do not share his socio-political views are not just wrong, they are immoral.
He honestly believes he is doing the moral and just thing when he asserts his personal desire. For him, what he desires is indistinguishable from what is moral.
You are free to do what you want, but the better part of valor is discretion. Grin and bare it. It could be worse.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
My impression of whiteflame is positive and has always been so. That is all I can judge by. Until he shows me something different, I will continue to view him positively.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
And you were wrong in doing so.I was using colour as an analogy to race....
Many hues of red are still considered red, that is not the case with race. Any dilution means a person can no longer be considered pure. Your analogy suffered from the fallacy of false equivalency.
Lol. OK. How are your knees?Please don't post with knee-jerk reactions, in the future, and actually attempt to read the comments before you post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
What the mod team needs is diversity of philosophy at the highest level.
Well, we know that is never going to happen. This is America. Bsh1 is liberal and gay. His idea of diversity of philosophy will encompass only views that approve of his, as his lifestyle is also his politics.
But let's be fair. Your idea of diversity of philosophy would probably be similarly limited. For example, PGA2.0 would be an excellent choice for a level headed, honest mod who would ensure diversity of philosophy because he is a real theist (sorry virt) But if you were head mod, would you be able to stomach a conservative theist on your team?
The best we can hope for is moderate atheists like virt and Castin who will not be out and out anti-theists. Your diversity of philosophy differs from bsh1 only in that it falls in a different place, it likely isn't larger or more diverse.
bsh1 is removable, but at a cost I am currently unwilling to pay. So living with him seems to be the pragmatic option. The best thing to do then is to say and do the things that will make him better (or at least less awful) he has shown movement. That deserves concession on our part. We can fold, or play the hand we've been dealt.
I want to continue playing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I can vouch for Casting that she can and will speak up when she disagrees. She has this really impressive way of being tolerant and empathetic without being a pushover or timid.Castin is extremely unlikely to disagree with you...
The only other person on this site equally worthy of being mod would be white flame.
Created:
Posted in:
False equivalence. Color does not equate to race
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Excellent choice.
Castin is great. Glad she accepted.
Things are steadily getting better. Bummed that I have nothing really to complain about.
Good luck Cas!
Created:
Posted in:
Yeah no one else on that thread voted for pro... except for three other people. Vote 2,3 and 5 were all on pro... please stop lying.
What thread is THAT thread? Conflate much?
The Gentle Reader can look at THE debate and see for themselves.
Keep hand picking other debates where you awarded points to a theist because the atheist forfeited.
This convo is silly. I have a life and I'm sure you've been contracted to "vote" on some threads. Let's both go take care of our business.
Created:
Posted in:
"The idea is stupid." Why?
Because its made from ignorance.
Right now, the US can't even win or hold Afghanistan or Iraq."
The US didn't try.
Oh yes they did. You really need to know your subject better before you comment on it.
If it takes a year, then so be it.
So then, for most of the countries, America will not have the advantage of surprise. And what do you think the rest of the world will be doing in that year?
I think an increase in military spending and more troops can help maintain control until ever single African gets Americanized enough to the point that they don't want to secede.
Lol. America has only about 2 million soldiers. That is not enough to hold south Africa, or Nigeria, or Egypt. Then we come to size. Congo is larger than Europe. The larger the territory, the more soldiers needed to hold it.
Africa is bound to want the same eventually.
And America is not able to hold them until that eventuality comes.
If the Africans don't get oppressed, then they would want to stay within the US.
And I guess they will not think swarms of US soldiers invading their sovereign country and subjugating them as oppression, right?
You view African as if they are children.
Created:
Posted in:
And every other voter decided a tie, but our ringer had his reason for awarding votes. It was a forfeit, but the guy was there! Lol.
Dude, go ahead and collect whatever it is people pay you for your votes. Doesn't hurt me. Your ringing isn't as invisible as you think.
Created:
Posted in:
Well, what I posted was for him.
The time for edifying the Gentle Reader will come.
Created:
Posted in:
True.
This is an excellent time for a lesson.
Go ahead, give him something you think will be edifying. You will see why sometimes edification is not correct or appropriate.
Go ahead. Show me wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
I voted against the side that didn’t post anything
Neither side posted anything Gomer. And you were the only one who voted for one side.
- unless both sides forfeit every round.
That is exactly what happened liar. You even noted it was a full forfeit. Yet you voted for your client. Please, stop embarrassing yourself.
Ringer busted.
Created:
Opinion for opinion.
So, you intentionally posted an unfounded opinion.
So did you genius.
The difference is that mo admitted his was opinion. You either think your opinion is fact, or cannot distinguish your opinion from fact. Eitherv way, you are confused.
Created:
Posted in:
A full forfeit. Neither party posted a single word. You awarded every point to your client.
Every other voter called it a tie. The ringer, like a classy hitman, always fulfills his contract.
...it looks great.
It may look great, but it stinks. Next time there is a full ff, tie the score genius.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
OK. You're as pure as the driven snow.
You so underestimated the gentle reader, that you thought no one would notice you were a ringer.
Created:
Posted in:
When you realize, on your next vacation, that you made that decision to go, it'll come to you.
Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
- Euripides
Created:
Posted in:
You protest and insult a little too strongly for a guy with a wall of links in his favor. I checked your links, and found not only are you a ringer, you are a liar.
Throwing a conduct vote to a non-atheist while giving majority points to the atheist is not a "vote for" homer. But that is understandable, atheists need the cheat. Your position is poor and illogical as it is.
We also see who always votes in tandem with you. I have never called for any restrictions on you. Even with your cabal, theist and conservative debates have done well. Imagine how it would if the voting was fair?
Created:
Posted in:
That makes you a mindless clown.
Fitting, as you post mindless nonsense.
Created:
Posted in:
Do you deny being a moron?
I made a thread about educating bullies, who in fact are morons.
Do you deny being a moron?
Created:
Posted in:
You look very sad in that mask.
Lol. You look positively happy in that........what is that? Yeah, you're a stable person.
By the way, I use to know a moron who also thought that my avatar was me. His name was moron hari, do you know him?
Maybe you realised how retarded you look when you rant without sources.
If you think that's a rant, you don't know me. But I did realize you are retarded, you don't just look it.
If only you had posted a source...
For what? What needs a source? You posted no source either.
Created:
Posted in:
Later, it will apologize, and claim to be a libertarian. But the outrage will always be sjw snowflake.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
When I'm ready for you to start thinking, I'll post one.
Created:
Posted in:
When you repeat a mistake, it is not a mistake anymore: it is a decision.
- Paolo Coehlo
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YeshuaBought
Yep. No longer a snowflake, but still a troll.
Created:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
No reason why you shouldn't. And in fact, that is what many people do now. And then they all go, "Holy cow! The news IS fake!"
Created:
The polls that mattered mirrored the sentiment. The majority of the voting population did not vote for Trump.
Was it by a difference of 20% or more? Cause that is what the polls said. There are very funny compilation videos of all the pundits pontificating about how Trump couldn't win, even Obama in a SNL skit. And then ends with election night as state after state fell to Trump, as the fake news pretended to be journalists. It was delishious.
The fake polls were still fake slick. Trump won fair and square with the rules of the election. You should have cried about the electoral college before Trump trumped you.
Its no wonder as to why the 'victory' margin of the opposition would be misconstrued, the polls in outcome got it right, the polls in percentage got it wrong.
Polls came with an error factor. What was it on election night? The polls had to be fake slick. There simply were not that many random people claiming to vote for Hillery.
I am sure the take away for you will be grossly different that what the results should mean.
Because I can add, and have not been crippled by irrational Trump hate.
Created:
Posted in:
Reasons:
1. Ringer voting
2. Silly debate topics
3. Unfair vote moderation (has recently been better)
That's it.
Created:
Posted in:
I wonder if YeshuaBoughtwill get more traction now as a far right racist than as a far left sjw pinko?
Created:
I'm familiar with Asperger. Thanks
Created:
Posted in:
They have a host of murderous morons saying they aren't human and are trying to kill him.
Just like how blacks were treated in the 1800's. And I would have tried to help them too had I lived back then.
Created:
Posted in:
I answer the questions you ask homer. If you meant to get answers to other questions, you should have asked those.
Created:
-->
@dustryder
There were no such polls dolly. They were fabricated lies.
To clarify, are you questioning the existence of the polls, or what the polls said?
Do you think the polls represented real people saying they would vote for Hillery?
Think man. The controversy was the made up one that Trump had overstepped his authority. Only liberals were screaming and gnashing teeth.
To clarify, are you saying there was no controversy at all or are you saying that there was a controversy but the basis of the controversy was fake?
I'm saying whenever the fake news shoves you a fake story, you view it as a controversy. The only people in a tizzy are Trump hating liberals. Normal people just carry on as liberals and their fake news run around like chickens with the heads cut off.
Posted by sjw liberal snowflakes who find Trump's breathing to be "controversial". And then picked up by the fake news media, and viola, you liberals have a "controversy" you can use to denigrate Trump. Fake.
Well, let's examine one of my examples a little closer. For example, the access hollywood tapes. Did Trump utter the phrase "Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
I don't know and I don't care. I want my president to lower taxes, keep terrorists out of the country, stabilize the economy, and appoint sensible judges. I don't waste time with tabloid rags.
If he did, was this phrase controversial? Why or why not?
No one in my circles took notice of it. We were enjoying our tax returns and noticing the strong economy.
"Some people" find ANYTHING that is negative about Trump interesting. The fake news knows this.
But this doesn't mean that they are non-issues.
It doesn't mean they were issues either.
Perhaps you just find news in general uninteresting.
Fake news yes.
For example, why is Trump's nepotism a non-issue?
The better question is, "why is it an issue to you?"
Actually before that, perhaps it should be asked if you believe Trump engaged in nepotism or not.
Placing family into positions in private companies is considered normal and expected. I am grooming my eldest daughter right now to take over my business
Common sense and being free of the irrational hatred of Trump.
I didn't intend to discuss that with you, but let's go ahead. What basis do you have to believe that Trumps explanation is genuine?
I don't care. As my brain is not frazzled by irrational Trump hate, I don't pour over silly, petty things looking for controversies. I have a life.
Apart from that, would you agree or disagree that Trump has had a history of making insensitive remarks or actions?
"Insensitive" is a liberal code word. Trump is exactly the same as he has always been, and we elected him. We are sensitive to jobs, safety, and a good economy.
At the very least moreso than a typical leader of a 1st world country
We thank God each day that Trump is not a typical leader of a 1st world country. That is what we dumped when we canned Obama and is crooked would be successor.
Created:
Posted in:
No Einstein. But you must be invited to surrender before it is possible to refuse to surrender.
More hairsplitting. Engaging in war is a de-facto request for your opponent to surrender.
Unless I'm asked, I cannot refuse. Believing strongly in stupidity does not make it sensible.
So what? Did you ask me for justifications for Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, or just perfectly justifiable reasons for going to war?
Ok, so we are in agreement.
Only in that you must be a weed smoker. Only MJ makes a person think this poorly.
How utterly splendid.
Most people are thrilled to think I agree with them. But alas, I never agree with morons.
Created:
Posted in:
Because I cannot save everyone, so I save the most innocent, the most defenseless, the most in need.
Created:
Posted in:
The allies were not asked to surrender, and as such, could not have refused. This is typical liberal illogic.
Wait, do you think you must be invited to surrender before it is possible to surrender?
No Einstein. But you must be invited to surrender before it is possible to refuse to surrender.
Duh.
These justifications would not seem to apply to Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan.
So what? Did you ask me for justifications for Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, or just perfectly justifiable reasons for going to war?
Really, are you trying to be stupid?
Created:
Posted in:
It is incorrect. I did not say, "Saving every human being on earth that has already been born is much more realistic than trying to save every unborn embryo." You said it. I would never say anything that stupid.
So is it fair to say you believe that saving every unborn embryo is much more realistic than trying to save every post-natal human being?
Not only is it unfair, it is stupid. Is that what you are aiming for? Neither one is realistic jasper. Everyone cannot be saved, no matter what your liberal mind tells you.
So is it fair to say that you have no logical basis for this belief?
No, that is stupid too. What belief would that be?
So is it fair to say that you refuse to present any logical basis for this belief....
What belief? Do you even know?
..even though you vaguely and stridently insist that it is perfectly logical?
"It" what?
You've entered the stupid zone. This is where I get off.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
(IFF) Japan extended the war by refusing to surrender (THEN) by the same measure, the allies extended the war by refusing to surrender.
The allies were not asked to surrender, and as such, could not have refused. This is typical liberal illogic.
Created: