Total posts: 5,875
-->
@keithprosser
You are right that is what I believe -
I know. You have no logical reason for believing that.
I didn't intend anyone should think I believed anything else.
No, you only tried to get others to believe that was the reason the bible's authors didn't make that claim. They did NOT make that claim. So your idea about why they didn't make that claim is speculation about something nonexistent. Then trying to place that around the necks of the authors was dishonest.
Its like me claiming that you didn't claim to have any kids because everyone would have seen that your kid was ugly. And then claiming that THAT was the reason you didn't claim to have any kids.
How do you know why I didn't do what I in fact did not do? How do you know why the authors didn't make a claim they in fact, did not make??
Dishonest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
"Day Break" was very good. And you're right, the less you know going in, the more you'll enjoy the show. It's one of those shows that leave you bummed when it ends.
Touching the Void was gripping story telling. You cared what happened and felt exhausted at the end. I forgot I was watching a movie.
I like political drama like West Wing, Mayor, and Madam Secretary, but liberal bias always seem to creep in and spoil those shows
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
How?
I believe if the gospellers had claimed jesus cured all the lepers people of the time would know it wasn't true.
You also believe this is the reason they did not make that claim. That, my anti-christian friend, is dishonest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Your answer to q#1 was high. The idea is that homosexual men have repressed hatred for their mothers.
Your answers in q#3, Does every attractive person of the
opposite sex turn you on? Yes 7
...has tension with q#7. Do you ever feel attracted to people of
the same sex? 1
It idea is that if every attractive person of the opposite sex turns you on, the attractiveness of people of the opposite sex should turn you on too. Thus you are denying the attraction you feel.
Your answer in q#12, Were your parents ever mean to you? 7, conflicts with your answer in q#14, Have you ever thought that your parents hated you? 1
The idea is that if you think your parents were mean to you, even if only sometimes, a score of 1 on q#14 is not the truth. This is consistent with the idea that you are repressing how you feel.
On q#16, Have you ever been uncertain as to whether or not you are homosexual? Your scored yourself the lowest. 1
But on q#18, Have you ever enjoyed your bowel movements? You again scored yourself the lowest.
The idea is that homosexuals unconsciously associate the anus with pleasure, and thus often report they enjoy their bowel movements. You may not see it at first, but q#16 asks,
A¹. Have you ever been uncertain as to whether or not you are homosexual?
Hidden inside this question is this question,
A². Have you ever been uncertain as to whether [you are] not homosexual?
The idea being that a man with homosexual tendencies, being more tuned to homosexuality, will more likely interpret q#16 as A², the second way.
I don't know how to score it. Am I gay based on the test?
According to the test, you have latent and repressed homosexual tendencies due to early difficulties with your mother or a mother figure. And that if you ever did act out your homosexuality, you would more likely enjoy being a catcher, and not a pitcher.
Please, before anyone starts insulting me, this is not my test and I do not agree with it. I am not expressing my opinions about wylted. He asked, I answered.
No offense wylted.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
So you believe if Jesus had cured everyone with leprosy in 33 bc, we would not have leprosy today?
But any story about eradicating leprosy won't be credble if there is still leprosy around.
Why? If Jesus cured all lepers today, why could someone not become sick a few days later?
Do you see your dishonesty? You take a hypothetical question, give a hypothetical answer, and use that salad of hypotheticals as if it actually describes what happened.
So dishonest.
Created:
Posted in:
Anyone with any appreciation of human history knows that there will be another world war. I think it will be the US and China. Just like in WWII, Russia will flip flop. So the outcome will depend on India.
But it will be bad for the world. Very, very bad. The aggressor will have the advantage. It will not take years like WWI & Ii. I hope I'm gone by then.
But America should sort out the South China Sea situation now when it can still beat China, not wait till China is too strong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@blamonkey
If you really wanted to change people's minds and you aren't just trying to piss people off,....
False dichotomy. Are there really no other options? Very few people are "pissed off". The immature and insecure ones may be, but I don't really care.
...then I would imagine that this should be the method that you use.
And again we come to the place we always come to with liberals. " You should do/think/feel the way I do."
On the other hand, if you only want to troll and "trigger the libtards," then keep on doing what you are doing sir.
You seem triggered. Are you a libtard? I don't care about triggering anyone, whoever libtards are.
Perhaps you even aspire to make as many people annoyed/bitter as possible. If this is the case, I feel immense sympathy for you.
Your capacity for empathy is impressive. And now that you've told us how wonderful you are in comparison to me, perhaps you will go back to your life where you think racist tripe from Spike Lee is reality.
Have a good day.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Still mad at me because I dis-agreed with you about airmax being a bad moderator months ago? lol.
Sorry, I don't remember you.
I have no clue who disgusted even is lol.
OK.
Thanks RM, I meant Vagabond, whose account is also active. Sorry Lunatic, but for me all the names are so similar.....vagabond, disgusted, lunatic. Sorry that your name was "on" my lips.
I wonder if both disgusted and vagabond can log on?
Created:
Posted in:
This is probably the greatest post to ever grace DDO. It was so duckilishious. I felt it needed to be here on Dart.
Thett3, who is here now, has been laying low and has not rewarded us with anything this awesome so far. Read it in awe, and enjoy!
Finally, A Duck I Can Respect
thett3
10/3/2014 1:46:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I just witnessed the exploits of a duck that I have no doubt would hand my @ss to me in a fight.
I was celebrating Friday by feeding the ducks at a park. Anyone who's fed ducks a lot will know that sometimes they'll fight. Well, these two ducks were preparing to fight (ducks fight mostly by grabbing each others necks or heads with their bills)--doing the standard posturing, taking jabs at each other. It seemed a pretty evenly matched fight--you can file that under "most wrong predictions ever".
Something I've never seen before happened, just as the two were about to go at it and make feathers fly, from out of nowhere another duck came running to attack duck B, who will forever be known as badasss duck. Does Badasss duck care that it's now two on one? HELL NO. He's ready to kick some asss, so he does it.
Badasss duck ducks and the other duck TRIPS OVER HIS NECK. Then in one smooth motion, he grabs his original opponents neck with his bill and slams his head into the ground and starts shaking him. The other duck gets up in a daze of confusion only to, impossibly, see badasss ducks bill of justice coming after him and they have a three way pecking match before the other two ducks run away like cowards.
A high speed duck chase through to pond then develops as badasss duck chases the cowards across the pond for at least a minute, nipping at their tails until he finally catches one and holds his head underwater for at least 30 seconds before releasing him and coming back to shore a conquering hero.
I've never seen such a performance. I dumped out my entire bag of feed at badasss ducks feet.
I have no doubts that this duck is a reincarnated pirate, or perhaps a ninja. There's simply no other explanation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow.
Thett3, props man, the ball is in your court. o√L,
Created:
Posted in:
Untrue. And repeating it won't change it. A small, sterile, brain dead 36 year old human female is a woman.Adulthood is based on physical size, reproductive capability and brain function.
(IFF) the embryo is a human with the full rights and privileges of an individual human, (THEN) the mother should be held accountable for alcohol and or drug abuse and or excessive physical activity and or malnutrition that contribute to miscarriage.
Yeah, we agree doofus. She should be.
(IFF) the embryo is a human with the full rights and privileges of an individual human, (THEN) the death of an embryo is manslaughter.
Only if the death is due to the action or inaction of someone. Not every death.
If your child dies or is disfigured because of neglect and or irresponsible behavior, you are guilty of a crime.
I agree. What is your point?
If children die or are disfigured as a direct result of parental neglect and or abuse, this is a crime and not "natural causes".
Still, not every death is due to a direct result of parental neglect and or abuse.
And if you want to differ suddenly to "the law", you might notice that abortion does not meet the legal definition of murder.
Am I reading you the law? There was a time killing a black man did not meet the legal definition of murder. So what? The question here is, " Is it murder?" Not, "does the current law call it murder?"
The embryo is human in the same way that your appendix or a cancer tumor is human.
That is clearly untrue, and repetition will not make it true. A baby is not a part of the mother.
There are examples of humans with different genes in different parts of their bodies.
Please give us an example Dr. Science.
Cancer tumors have mutated cells.
Cancer cells have the same genes.
An embryo is not an individual human being.
What does "individual" mean? And so what? The embryo is a human being.
If I asked you the difference between humans and other mammals, how might you answer that without referring to human functionality?
Genetics.
Please explain how your opinion on the matter is based on science?
It isn't opinion, it is science. The mother and baby are genetically different. Two different people.
The mother and the appendix are fully distinguishable.
Not genetically.
The mother and the cancerous tumor are fully distinguishable.
Not genetically.
The brain and the stomach are fully distinguishable.
Not genetically.
The fact remains that the embryo is not an independent human being.
So? It is still a human being.
If it cannot exist without the mother, it is part of the mother.
Illogical. This is just something you are saying. Your opinion not based on sound reasoning. Medicine is getting better and better at keeping babies alive without the mother. Some babies are even conceived outside the mothers body.
However, I'm not entirely convinced that giving unsolicited medical advice to strangers
I don't give unsolicited medical advice to strangers. Why would you think I do? Are you confused?
...is obviously much better than spending your time and energy attempting to prevent CHILDREN from being abused and neglected.
How I choose to spend my time is not your business, and I don't care what you think of of my choices.
Certainly killing sperm kills the future human beings.
Untrue. Sperm cells are not human beings. There is no future human being.
Certainly condoms and birth control and plan-b kills the future human being.
NP jasper, without conception, there is no future human being. Thus a condom does not kill anyone. Please learn science.
Where do you draw the line...
Well before stupidity.
...and how do you prioritize your focus?
I stay within science and morality.
do you understand that women are often coerced, plied with false promises, and yes, sometimes even forced to have sex?
Sometimes billy-bob. Only sometimes. And rarely. You talk as if every pregnancy is due to rape.
And we do not kill people based on future statistics.
Yes you do. You kill prisoners based on predicted outcome.
No sir. We kill prisoners based past criminal behavior.
You kill soldiers based on predicted outcome.
No sir. We kill soldiers based on current behavior. If he changes his behavior, he is not killed but becomes a prisinor of war.
You kill immigrants based on predicted outcome.
Lie. We do not kill immigrants. We send them home.
You kill alcoholics based on predicted outcome.
Lie. We do not kill alcoholics, we sober them up with a 12 point plan.
Cutting healthcare benefits kills children base on future statistics.
Illogical. It doesn't follow. But funny you can connect health care benefit to future child deaths but cannot connect embryos to future adults. Other people's money is not yours. Money for health care doesn't grow on trees. You're a liberal, so you think you have a right to other people's money.
Contrary to what you might believe, not all psycho liberals are homosexual....
I didn't say they were. And "psycho liberals" is your phrase, not mine.
Killing embryos ends people?
The people those embryos would have become, yes.
This is provably false.
OK. Prove it.
Killing all embryos ends people.
And killing some embryos ends some people. So?
Nobody on the planet has ever proposed killing all embryos.
So? I did not say someone did. Are you confused?
Nobody wants to end people.
>>shrug<< I don't know what you're talking about. I did not say someone wanted to "end" people, or that I was "fighting" against them. You are confused. Very confused.
You're fighting your own imaginary boogeyman.
Right now, my own "imaginary boogeyman" seems to be in your imagination.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Its a disguised test for homosexual tendencies.
Only questions 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, and 20 are pertinent. The others are controls.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Exactly!
No proof, just an accusation, and someone has to be unreasonably searched.
Few are noticing that bsh1 requesting this power is as problematic as him having that power.
The real issue here is not privacy, but a mod whose fascist streak has been corrupted by a little power.
Created:
Posted in:
There are many humans who never develop normal brain and/or body functionality.
Adulthood is based on age, not physical development. If the embryo had lived, it would certainly become an adult human being.
This has everything to do with the question of treating embryos as individual humans. If you are going to consider embryos individual humans with full human rights, then you must do so in all cases, not just cherry pick "abortion".
Please don't be silly. In abortions, there is a killer, in miscarriages, there is no killer. Logic is your friend.
If an embryo dies because of neglectful or irresponsible behavior, then the responsible party must be charged with a crime.
That is the law right now.
(IFF) an embryo has the same rights as an individual human (THEN)every dead embryo is a crime and must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Untrue. Not every dead human is a crime. People die of natural causes all the time. Logic really is your friend.
Your buying a car argument is spurious because it equavocates on the definitions of "car" and "human". Go to the Ford Motor co. and destroy a unfinished car on the production line and see if you will only be charged with harming a mass of metal.
Why is the mother not also charged with assault?
It is not a crime to assault yourself.
But your argument is that the baby is not human, the mother certainly is human. Your argument is illogical. The baby is not the mother, and the mother is not the baby. They have different genes, different blood, different body parts. So make up your mind. If the mother is human, and the baby is part of her, then the baby is human. If the baby is not part of her, your argument fails.
An embryo is always a human being. You calling it something else is just semantics.
An embryo is incapable of even the most basic human functions and are 100% dependent on the mother alone.
That has nothing to do with it being a human being.
An embryo is a non-essential component of the mother.
That is an arbitrary judgment resting on no scientific knowledge. The mother and the baby are genetically different and are fully distinguishable that way.
Saving every human being on earth that has already been born is much more realistic than trying to save every unborn embryo.
Perhaps, but...
1. I am in no way obligated to prioritize what you think is relialistic.
2. Only what I am able to do is realistic.
Do you really think we are in imminent danger of becoming extinct because of abortions?????????????
No. But I'm not so ignorant as to think that embryos aren't human beings in early development. I know killing the embryo kills the future human being.
Do you realize that you are attempting to force single mothers to raise children who are statistically very likely to grow up to be criminals?
I've asked you not to be stupid. No one forced single women into sex. And we do not kill people based on future statistics. Only racists and fascists advocate that evil.
If all the psycho liberals turn transgender and homosexual and abort their embryos - THEY WILL DIE OUT.
If they are homosexual, how will they have embryos? Anyway, embryos are not homosexuals, they are people. Killing embryos ends people, not just homosexuals.
YOu should be jumping for joy.
I'm sure you have some silly liberal reason for saying so but really, I'm not interested in what you think I should be doing.
You just keep pumping out perfectly good little conservatives and you will soon rule the planet.
When you run out of intelligent things to say, please let me know so I stop wasting my time. Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
It amazes me that there are people who think an accusation alone would a warrant a search of someone's PMs.
It reminds me of the quote,
Fascism will not come by jack booted thugs kicking down your door, but by govt functionaries with clipboards telling you this is for your own good. (Paraphrased)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
This is not the correct forum to advance your idea of the sacredness of cows. Please take you cow protection moos to the philosophy forum.
Black and white cow bad
Orange man bad
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
It'll be quite impressive if you can go down that far and still remain literate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
1. Would a human embryo become a human adult if it lived?
1. This is unknowable.
Untrue. If it lived, it certainly would have become a human adult.
Billions of embryos are miscarried naturally. Do you propose charging these women with manslaughter or criminal child abuse?
This has nothing to do with my question and is an off topic strawman.
2. Is there any time along that development when it isn't human?
2. A human embryo becomes an individual human when it is born. Just like a chicken. A chicken embryo is not a chicken until it hatches.
I asked you if there was any time along the development when it isn't human. If the embryo isn't human, what is it?
3. If I deliberately kill a two week old embryo in the womb without harming the mother but without her consent, what should I be charged with?
3. Assault.
Why is the mother not also charged with assault?
Your example is the same as saying, "if I removed a woman's appendix without otherwise harming the woman, what should I be charged with". The answer is assault.
Nonsense. The woman's appendix is part of her body, you claim the baby is not. You even say the baby isn't human. Your position here is illogical, irrational, and inconsistent.
4. If you had been "discarded" as an embryo, would that have killed you?
4. This is unknowable. Your hypothesis is untestable. Perhaps there would be someone very similar, if not identical to me doing the exact same things that I do. Perhaps not.
Lol. I think I can leave this bit of silliness up for the Gentle Readers to enjoy.
Our disagreement seems to hinge on the idea that the embryo must be protected at all costs simply because it may at some point become an individual human being.
No. An embryo is always a human being. You calling it something else is just semantics.
Why don't you try saving every human being on earth that has already been born?
Because that is outside my ability.
Perhaps after you've saved every actual human being from pain and suffering and disease and death, then you can start desperately trying to save all the embryos.
If I was to subscribe to your irrational and inconsistent worldview, maybe I would try that. What I will do, is try to save all the unborn babies I can. Despite your completely ridiculous answer to #4, if we don't save the embryos, there won't be any people to save.
Every human is a person at the moment of conception. The only difference being how many cells compose us. This is what is consistent with science and common sense.
See how easy it is when you don't have to contort yourself into illogical pretzels?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No slick. You don't get to dodge my questions and just keep having yours answered.
This will be a conversation and not an interrogation. I am not subject to you, and I don't owe you answers.
Answer my questions.
Created:
Posted in:
Mike, can you not see what bsh1 is doing? This is becoming like Animal Farm.
I don't recall Napoleon the pig ever inviting feedback like this or tolerating harsh criticism.
Just the kind of thing Napoleon would say. Maybe its been too long since you've read the book. Mike is the reason this thread is up, not you. And reading the book would probably help him see what you're actually doing.
Besides, I think you mean "like 1984."
No, Napoleon, I mean Animal Farm.
There aren't a lot of privacy issues going on in Animal Farm. Just a lot of weirdly Soviet livestock...
This isn't about privacy. As Drafterman said, there isn't a problem. You manufactured one to grab power. This is about overreach and fakery.
You will try again, to be sure. This site will never be safe as long as you are head mod.
Created:
Posted in:
A society willing to exchange their freedom for safety deserves neither,
What freedom are we losing by keeping Abdul in his country? Do you read what you post?
I hope I never see the day when we are as safe as you would prefer.
Sure. You think the deaths are worth it for immigration. But you can't say why. You can only spout liberal platitudes.
Actually, you didn't answer
Actually, I did. You asked what country. I said any place that treats women as cattle. You note that Saudi Arabia is such a place, and stupidly ask again if Saudi Arabia is such a place. Again, are you trying to be obtuse?
Saudi Arabia is an ally f the US. So what? Am I the govt? Am I pushing the govt line?
And I did not say "no immigrants", please don't lie
Of course, you didn't say that!
Then it was dishonest to say so.
You are more than willing to allow 100 immigrants of the world entry into the US. Its very generous of you! You're a regular immigrant advocate!
You seem to be operating under some silly assumption that you cannot explain. Why do we have to let immigrants in? Can you say? Or are you going to just pretend your assumptions are true and we have to take your word for it?
It looks like we've arrived at that part of the conversation where ideas are no longer discussed, so I bid you adieu.
Lol. Look over the convoy. You dodged every question of mine. You never explained why we need immigrants or why its so important that its worth the death of our citizens
Your liberal lame arguments got no play here, so you're running. Go ahead, your argument was vacuous PC liberal talking points.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Just like a liberal, you can't answer my questions.
I have a logical worldview, so I don't have to dodge questions. I can answer yours, though I shouldn't.
1. Would a human sperm become a human adult if it lived?
No. A sperm is not a person. But an embryo is.
2. Is there any time along that development when it isn't human?
It is never human, but an embryo is.
3. If you deliberately damage any part of another human being you will be charged with assault.
You lie. The mother is not charged with anything if she kills the baby.
4. If you had been "discarded" as a sperm, would that have killed you?
I was never a sperm. I was an embryo.
It would help you to learn some science.
Created:
Posted in:
So the simple accusation will be enough for a mod to read someone's PM? Does that seem reasonable?
Mike, can you not see what bsh1 is doing? This is becoming like Animal Farm. Wake up man!
I have this question, is there any way to tell if bsh1 has the ability already? If no, then he could already be reading PMs now right?
I'm beginning to see that maybe this site was too good to be true. Something stinks in Denmark. bsh1's desire to have the authority to read PM's has me considering whether I want to stay here.
The guy is bad news Mike. What is going on? It's like you have been mesmerized or something. No, I'm no longer sure Dart is a safe place for me.
This is so obviously wrong, I find it difficult to believe Mike is not the one instigating it. bsh1 is way too power hungry. I've got to go think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
I wouldn't put any labels on it. It isn't something a person can be "cured" of or de-convinced of anyway.
Its nice to be able to talk about it without anyone calling anyone else a bigot or homophobe.
Created:
Posted in:
Color me surprised. I guess the harikrish question was just too sensitive huh?That said, lunatic and disgusted are not the same person, and are not multi-accounts.
Question:
If you were removed as Mod, would you remain a member of Dart?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you believe it is murder for fertility clinics to discard human embryos?
What I believe is immaterial.
Since you said "believe", you must be asking a moral question and not a legal one. The answer is easy.
1. Would a human embryo become a human adult if it lived?
2. Is there any time along that development when it isn't human?
3. If I deliberately kill a two week old embryo in the womb without harming the mother but without her consent, what should I be charged with?
4. If you had been "discarded" as an embryo, would that have killed you?
See? Easy, unless if truth is a problem for you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
You think this is a flame war?
With one person saying, "I love you anyway" and the other saying, "I deeply regret saying this" ? And only one other person being insulting?
But it is an honor. A small one, but honor is honor eh?
Created:
Posted in:
Fetus is not a boy scout.
Fetus is not a gregarious individual.
Sperm is alive and has no legs.
Egg is alive and has no hair.
So what? Anyone can put any silly condition on fetuses, eggs, and sperm. So what?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Yet people today can "remember" events thousands of years ago. History is continuous slick. If you asked a person in the 6th century BCE about his great grand father, he would not have given you a blank look. The same history weaves through all of time.There was no one alive in the 6th century BCE to 'remember' events of thousands of years earlier.
...and scholars are virtually unanimous that the Book of Joshua holds little historical value.
The book of Joshua is only 1/66th of the bible. Please don't lapse into your dishonest ways. And your claim of "virtually unanimous" is quite untrue. While many historians may not be Christian, they acknowledge that the customs and places listed in Joshua are accurately historical.
It is no sin to hold the views you have about the bible, but trying to bend reality to fit your narrative is dishonest.
Created:
Posted in:
Right. So no measures should be taken? Is not 95% safety better than 40% safety even if 100% is impossible? Safety cannot be guaranteed but it can be improved.In spite of propaganda to the contrary, there are no absolute measures. No matter what you do, you cannot guarantee safety.
So either Saudi Arabia needs to be added to your 'no immigrants' spiel...
Please stop being silly. You asked and I answered. If a country fits the answer, then its in. I do not need to list the countries one by one.
And I did not say "no immigrants", please don't lie.
Perhaps you could calm yourself and try again with less vitriol.
I am calm, notice that unlike you, I'm not lying. Disagreement with you is not vitriol. Address the argument, not the man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
If you can find that out you will get a prize. I don't think even Deb knows. Its one of the great mysteries. What is it about religious groups that so consumes this dweeb?why would it matter about any religious group?
I think it boils down to mental issues. Look at his posts. It's obvious that Deb thinks on a different plane. I don't think we will ever know.
Created:
Posted in:
Imagine the silliness of this idea.
Supposed Americans historians wanted to supplant myths and legends for American history? What will they do with all the people who remember actual history? Does anyone believe that the history of an entire nation can be replaced with myths and legends by Priests?
This is a ludicrous attempt to blame and tarnish theists. It's typical anti- theist silliness, making claims that prove to be absolute nonsense upon examination.
Later archeological studies have verified that the bible has real history. There are many historical things, people, and places we know of today only because of the bible's record.
Keith thinks these things not for any logical reason, but because that is his bias. It is totally illogical. All his subsequent arguments, based on his first biased assumption, are illogical.
Created:
Posted in:
I notice you guys have been cleaning up the member list. Good work.
But I also notice that both of bully's accounts, disgusted and lunatic, are active. Does he have a special arrangement to have multi-accounts?
I also see that Harikrish's account is no longer closed. Could he log in now if he tried?
Otherwise, how are you holding up boss? Hope you are well.
Created:
Posted in:
You admitting here that you're not actually interacting is enough.
I do not need to "interact" with you, so there is nothing to "admit". As a liberal, you may think interaction is your right, you geniuses think everything you want is a right. You will learn.
I also noticed you're trying to dodge me by not including my name in your "replies."
As opposed to not posting, or blocking you? I don't think you know what "dodge" means.
You really need to stop being such a pussy.
And then who would you send your vaguely homo pleas for "interaction" to? Can the class say, "projection"?
I thought it could.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Raltar
The way I understood it, elite debaters would still be able to debate anyone, even regular debaters. It would be use of the elite board that would be exclusive, not elite members. So the regular board would not be "losing" the best debaters.The problem I see with setting up a separate "elite" category, is that when you take the competent and serious debaters out of the pool with the "regular" folks, then the net IQ of the pool drops dramatically. New users won't be able to find anyone worthwhile to debate in the "regular" pool, and because they lack an opportunity to display their skills, they won't be able to get into the "elite" group either. Over time, this would stagnate both groups.
The real problem will be people who vote along party lines regardless of argument quality. A sliding scale on vote points may help this, but only partially.
Created:
Posted in:
Lol.
Ok, Stephen plays Stephen better, but I was close don't you think Gentle Reader? I even got the all caps right.
Is tossing someone supposed to be this easy?
:::Face palm::: - again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
This is the same mentality and tactic as the racist.I'm tired of the games...its time for our government to be occupied by individuals who are not quite so fearful.
I'm tired of the games...its time for our government to be occupied by individuals who are not quite so inferior.
Both of you assume your conclusion in your premise.
The last thing the American government needs is more people like you, who view common sense as fear. Can you not see the chaos and death that mindset has already wrought?
The liberal way used to be OK, but the world changed. It's time you guys woke up and smelled the kebab.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I wonder if that has anything to do with you NOT being the run the mill liberal?I like American culture.
Created:
Posted in:
Ho! You know stiff necked can mean stubborn? Where have you been hiding this insight?He also called the Hebrews a "stiff necked people" that is to say stubborn, I assume.
I'm going to play Stephen here.
The text doesn't say stubborn! Stop lying! You want to change scripture. STIFF NECKED PEOPLE he called them. Who are you to contradict Almighty God?
How did they turn their heads? The story makes no sense! And what about Ruth? And How did Solomon build a temple? And who was Abner?
Hahahahaha! You really love that stick don't you?
Clown.
:::Face palm:::
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Here is something that just occurred to me. You said you think revulsion at the homosexual act may be innate, that is, biological. If this is true, why do you think we developed that trait? To clarify my qusetion, what do you think evolution was trying to do (or prohibit) by making us repulsed by homosexuality?
Created:
Posted in:
That would be indulging you, not tossing you. I do not indulge trolls.Or you could actually toss me by responding to WHY the evidence isn't evidence.
Only the uneducated, not knowing what it is, think that they can fake an education.
Huh?
Lol. Exactly.
That's all you have to do AI.
If you think I am AI, your begging me to interact with you becomes highly suspicious no?
You can beg. All you will get is tossing. You will understand that I do not have to do what you want, no matter how long it takes to seep into your liberal noggin.
Created:
Posted in:
The only culture liberals hate, is American culture.
- Ann Coulter
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FaustianJustice
And we 'ship in' many hundreds of thousands that don't, never will, and serve America to its ends.
So what? The terrorists are worth the risk? The ones that won't have a right? It would be discrimination if they aren't let in? This is an insane argument. I'm talking about the ones that do commit acts of crime and terror. They are not justified by the ones that don't.
Neither is stupidity. And that is why the world is rejecting your inane argument. Some moron mows through a holiday crowd, killing 80 innocents, some idiots burst into an office, killing 12 innocents, and you charge the people saying that such people should not be let into the country with fear mongering. Are you stupid?Fear is such a devalued coin, I am surprised you keep trying to spend it.
Immigrants disproportionately commit crime in general. They mostly leave it to te natives.So what? That is still MORE crime. Why do we need it? Because a burglar will not steal as much as your kid, he deserves to be in your house? It's worth it keeping him dry from the rain? What? The argument that immigrants commit crime less is offensively stupid. Immigrants should not commit crimes AT ALL, and the lives of my citizens are NOT worth the risk.
Lie. Pull the records of 37,000,000 immigrants and tell me you will find no rapes, assaults, fraud, robberies, or other crime. And we are talking illegal immigrants too slick. You know you want them all.And if there were more than 37,000,000 million legal immigrants in the US that didn't do anything illegal, you can keep your ....what?
But to your question, We get to keep our hard earned money. We get to keep our nice culture, our women get to keep their security.
Clearly, if God is being 'driven out', the thing that makes the most sense is to show how wrong everyone else is by doing his will.
Says the anti-theist hypocrite. Are you aware you live in a society? You hate people doing His will. You oppose people doing His will. You misrepresent His will.
Arbitrary benchmark is arbitrary.
Stop being stupid. Were a country sets it's immigration level is always arbitrary slick. There is really no reason to import 3rd world killers into the country, and certainly not in such numbers.
You can run if you want, but you can't change the topic.
I agree. And I have no desire to.
Then you should stop trying to.
do we make money? The answer is yes. Keep them coming in.
We reject that mindset. We don't think immigration, or the money and or votes you liberals get from exploiting it, is worth one American life.
Please choose wisely.
We choose life. We choose America. We choose common sense. We choose culture and family.
Choosing votes and money is not wise. They have countries. Let them stay there. We owe them nothing.
Created: