|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:28 am
lordstar etchedspirit divineseraph Christians go to hevaen, right? Let's kill all of them so they get to Jesus faster! Yay genocide! Yay God's work! uh...no On another note...A fetus is still living whether it is born or not, it's still alive and it's still a lifeyes but the argument is what to do with a parasite and technically that’s what a fetus is. Jeez! With that logic we could justify the abortion of millions just because we're "overcrowded". And while I'm at it, the world is NOT over crowded. If it's crowded where you live... MOVE!!! (crowded = 1500 people. Per square inch. XP)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:56 am
Who are you to say who can or cannot live? Are you God? Do you give out souls to human beings? Can you be absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, positive that a fetus DOESN'T have a soul? Can you prove to me, or anyone, exactly WHEN we recieve our souls??
I don't answer to you! You are nobody! To think that because "I Am Man" that means you can do what you want? You think that because we are created in God's image, that we have even a fraction of his power? Are you able to know the future? How about what someone else is thinking?
Do you have the ability to save someone from eternal damnation WITHOUT Him?
OF COURSE NOT!!!
There's a reason God made the Ten commandments. A reason he wrote his wishes down for us to find!! He wants to prevent us from being total idiots!! Satan wanted to be like God and look what happened to him!! Look in Revelation to see what WILL happen to him!!
The more we try to be like God, without accepting Him into our lives, the further we get from Him and the closer we get to being SATAN!!! You want to be Satan? You want to burn in hell for all eternity? ETERNITY IS A LONG ******** TIME!!! AND YOUR NEVER GONNA GET OUT!!! GOOD LUCK TRYING!!!
*sigh* I don't envy you. ANY of you.
I pity you.
You who think you have the right to decide who can or cannot live. I pity you because you are blind. Blind to the ways of God. To the ways of THE Savior. I know what will happen to you who think you are like The Most High.
From this point on, I will cry. For you are not immune to eternal damnation until you recieve Christ.
From his moment on, I will cry for your eternal soul.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:21 am
Aquiella [...]From his moment on, I will cry for your eternal soul. Do please calm down. I understand that you're...exercised about this topic, but, really, all caps? It's just not necessary. I don't think anyone here is claiming to be God, or to possess any of God's authority; cut us a little slack, huh? Rather than simply shout about our apparent failings (I seem to recall an aphorism about motes and eyes that would be relevant here), why don't you tell us what your position on abortion actually is? Do you want to outlaw it in all cases? Do you merely want to make the current laws more restrictive? Are you open to compromise, or is your position more absolutist? I'm just trying to help you contribute something more productive than your unfiltered outrage to this discussion. That's not to say that there isn't a lot of that flying around here already (for example, I don't actually know what divineseraph and -xXGodslayer_RaiXx- are arguing about at this point given that they both recognize the necessity of some degree of legalized abortion; near as I can tell it has something to do with where the abortion debate fits into the Big Picture), but there's no reason for you to add to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:47 am
Sorry. I get upset when people think that they can choose who is right and who is wrong.
I believe that abortion is wrong. No matter what. Yes this presents new problems, but at least your not destroying a life/potential life! (depending on your view)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:57 am
Aquiella I believe that abortion is wrong. No matter what. Yes this presents new problems, but at least your not destroying a life/potential life! (depending on your view) Okay, what about when a pregnancy puts a womans life at risk? Or, to take a small step down in moral immediacy, what about in cases of pregnancy by rape? And then there's that issue that we live in pluralistic society in which reasonable people differ over at what stage of fetal development it is morally acceptable to terminate a pregnancy. Given that, is it legitimate to legislate your more restrictive beliefs on the rest of society, or is it necessary to compromise?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:37 pm
divineseraph lordstar divineseraph You would need a pretty good explanation for how legalizing marijuana would aid the economy. However, it WOULD be related because it is an ATTEMPT at a solution to the PROBLEM AT HAND. If you said "I think we need to swim in salt water, because salt water is healthy", this would NOT be related. Although healthy people may provide to an economy, the reasoning was to aid HEALTH, not the ECONOMY. With the example here, the problem is abortion. You suggest that we focus on other things. This avoids the issue of abortion to focus on other issues- which can happen equally and at the same time without a logical conflict. therefore, they are unrelated and serve no purpose together. For example. We should focus on abortion or starving children. AvS -A , +S= Logical. +A , -S= Logical. -A , -S= Illogical. +A , +S = Logical. Focusing on the last one, this means that they can BOTH occur at the same time without logically contradicting eachother. They can also focus on either or and still be logical, but it is not illogical to work on both at once either. Therefore, one does not negate the other, and bringing one up does not effect the other in any way, from a logical standpoint. I never said we should focus on other things now then how can an economy function without workers lets say the health issue is some massive plegue relevent...I think so On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:47 pm
Aquiella lordstar etchedspirit divineseraph Christians go to hevaen, right? Let's kill all of them so they get to Jesus faster! Yay genocide! Yay God's work! uh...no On another note...A fetus is still living whether it is born or not, it's still alive and it's still a lifeyes but the argument is what to do with a parasite and technically that’s what a fetus is. Jeez! With that logic we could justify the abortion of millions just because we're "overcrowded". And while I'm at it, the world is NOT over crowded. If it's crowded where you live... MOVE!!! (crowded = 1500 people. Per square inch. XP) square mile right? anyway I don't see your logic, however, I do see the point you are trying to make and it seems to be a bit of a stretch perhaps our world is not crowded in terms of people but when you factor in land use there really isn't much dirt left the question to ask is what sort of quality of life will a child have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:55 pm
Aquiella Sorry. I get upset when people think that they can choose who is right and who is wrong. Is that not what you have just done choose who is right and who is wrong by affirming your belief
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:25 pm
-xXGodslayer_RaiXx- divineseraph -xXGodslayer_RaiXx- Laws come from mores (pronouced moor-ehs) which are apart of social norms. They are the morals. And some of them are apart of law. To put it simply laws sinply make sure that society is tame. With laws or social order society would fall apart. Even with these laws society is still falling apart (though for some its hard to see) because people in our society adhere to the folkways or informal social norms. The same person I was talking about brought up another good point. Quote: To put it quite plainly: I think both sides need to shut up about "promoting" their views. Decisions are to be made by consensus in a democracy... not by campaigning. We should have popular votes with no fanfare... the outcomes should be based completely on personal beliefs should regulate legal matters surrounding the issue. They should be revisited in court when questioned, overturned when found in conflict with other pre-existing laws and those laws changed legitimately if a majority are in agreement. But it's a very private and potentially traumatic matter that's being made into an ideological circus by those who have never experienced any part of the matter firsthand. Why do so many people care about this enough to fight over it... even hate people over it, when it's never once personally affected them? We need to regain some perspective. It isn't our duty to police or make judgements about the morals of others. It's our duty to enforce morality in ourselves and do what we think is right. ie. if you're pro-choice: you vote that way, you make decisions about your own life and family accordingly. if you're pro-life: you vote that way, you make decisions about your own life and family accordingly. Beyond that, it's none of your ***** business. But again, thosel aws are based on moral values. If we are to pass laws so that NO morality is compromised, then there are no laws. What about those who are pure anarchists? We have to take them into account, too. And abortion has never personally affected me? Well, the holocaust never personally affected you. Who are you to point fingers at hitler? Abortion affects lifers the same way the holocaust affects any non-nazi. We see the slaughter of millions, over nothing but convenience and money, and we are disgusted. Actually it did affect me. My grandfather fled from Germany with his brother and mum during that time. If he didn't flee German he would hav been put in the death camps and the chances of him escaping would have been slim. If he didn't flee then I wouldn't be sitting here talking to you. Therefore because of my German heritage and because my grandfather escaped Hitler's nasty little clutches I do have the right to say that Hitler was a horrid horrid man and that he was a disgrace to all of the fatherland. And in all honesty I am curious as to what an anarchy would look like. Everyone has said it's horrid with no order. But life with order is horrid. We live in a free country where we kill those who kill others. I mean what's up with that? So why is it considered bad if no one has been in one? "Don't knock it till you try it" Well, ironically, had hitler never existed, your grandfather would have never left and you may very well NOT be here. Perhaps you should be thankful that Hitler pushed history in favor of you existing. Not to say that hitler was a good person, just noting the time paradoxes. Anyway, more on the subject... Say I lost a brother or sister to abortion. Does this give me the right to fight against it? Or how about those who survive late-term abortions and end up disfigured? Can they fight against abortion now that they are human beings? Just how hurt do you have to be by a genocide before you can protest it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:32 pm
lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph You would need a pretty good explanation for how legalizing marijuana would aid the economy. However, it WOULD be related because it is an ATTEMPT at a solution to the PROBLEM AT HAND. If you said "I think we need to swim in salt water, because salt water is healthy", this would NOT be related. Although healthy people may provide to an economy, the reasoning was to aid HEALTH, not the ECONOMY. With the example here, the problem is abortion. You suggest that we focus on other things. This avoids the issue of abortion to focus on other issues- which can happen equally and at the same time without a logical conflict. therefore, they are unrelated and serve no purpose together. For example. We should focus on abortion or starving children. AvS -A , +S= Logical. +A , -S= Logical. -A , -S= Illogical. +A , +S = Logical. Focusing on the last one, this means that they can BOTH occur at the same time without logically contradicting eachother. They can also focus on either or and still be logical, but it is not illogical to work on both at once either. Therefore, one does not negate the other, and bringing one up does not effect the other in any way, from a logical standpoint. I never said we should focus on other things now then how can an economy function without workers lets say the health issue is some massive plegue relevent...I think so On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:35 pm
divineseraph lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph You would need a pretty good explanation for how legalizing marijuana would aid the economy. However, it WOULD be related because it is an ATTEMPT at a solution to the PROBLEM AT HAND. If you said "I think we need to swim in salt water, because salt water is healthy", this would NOT be related. Although healthy people may provide to an economy, the reasoning was to aid HEALTH, not the ECONOMY. With the example here, the problem is abortion. You suggest that we focus on other things. This avoids the issue of abortion to focus on other issues- which can happen equally and at the same time without a logical conflict. therefore, they are unrelated and serve no purpose together. For example. We should focus on abortion or starving children. AvS -A , +S= Logical. +A , -S= Logical. -A , -S= Illogical. +A , +S = Logical. Focusing on the last one, this means that they can BOTH occur at the same time without logically contradicting eachother. They can also focus on either or and still be logical, but it is not illogical to work on both at once either. Therefore, one does not negate the other, and bringing one up does not effect the other in any way, from a logical standpoint. I never said we should focus on other things now then how can an economy function without workers lets say the health issue is some massive plegue relevent...I think so On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here. oh wow I slipped on one word...is that all you have to say really you talk big but make about as much sense as coating a pinecone with peanut butter and hanging it in a tree If you are done ranting now lets try to stay on topic and just so I don't confuse you again I will refrain from giving any more examples of what straying from the topic would be focus...focus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:37 pm
lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph You would need a pretty good explanation for how legalizing marijuana would aid the economy. However, it WOULD be related because it is an ATTEMPT at a solution to the PROBLEM AT HAND. If you said "I think we need to swim in salt water, because salt water is healthy", this would NOT be related. Although healthy people may provide to an economy, the reasoning was to aid HEALTH, not the ECONOMY. With the example here, the problem is abortion. You suggest that we focus on other things. This avoids the issue of abortion to focus on other issues- which can happen equally and at the same time without a logical conflict. therefore, they are unrelated and serve no purpose together. For example. We should focus on abortion or starving children. AvS -A , +S= Logical. +A , -S= Logical. -A , -S= Illogical. +A , +S = Logical. Focusing on the last one, this means that they can BOTH occur at the same time without logically contradicting eachother. They can also focus on either or and still be logical, but it is not illogical to work on both at once either. Therefore, one does not negate the other, and bringing one up does not effect the other in any way, from a logical standpoint. I never said we should focus on other things now then how can an economy function without workers lets say the health issue is some massive plegue relevent...I think so On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here. oh wow I slipped on one word...is that all you have to say really you talk big but make about as much sense as coating a pinecone with peanut butter and hanging it in a tree If you are done ranting now lets try to stay on topic and just so I don't confuse you again I will refrain from giving any more examples of what straying from the topic would be focus...focus What are you, 10? Or did you recieve a horrible, horrible head injury? Your pinecone analogy is weak, something a 6th grade would use as a response due to a lack of a clever insult. "Yeah, well you're so stupid you're... like a dog who... eats a baloon because he thinks it's a ball but it's really not!" Now make a point already, your lack of intellect and logic is getting boring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:51 pm
divineseraph lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here. oh wow I slipped on one word...is that all you have to say really you talk big but make about as much sense as coating a pinecone with peanut butter and hanging it in a tree If you are done ranting now lets try to stay on topic and just so I don't confuse you again I will refrain from giving any more examples of what straying from the topic would be focus...focus What are you, 10? Or did you recieve a horrible, horrible head injury? Your pinecone analogy is weak, something a 6th grade would use as a response due to a lack of a clever insult. "Yeah, well you're so stupid you're... like a dog who... eats a baloon because he thinks it's a ball but it's really not!" Now make a point already, your lack of intellect and logic is getting boring. obviously you have never coated a pinecone with peanut butter. why would anyone do such a thing...because it's funny. Watching crazy critters jump or hang off the string is good times. My comment was in no way an insult as I was only commenting on why I thought you were responding. I feel that you only respond for your own amusement as apparently it is fun to be a jerk (with whatever sense you make...a lot or a little it matters not) I have made my point many times so if you haven’t caught on by now we really have no reason to continue our conversation This has nothing to do with how intelligent either of us are...or how we perceive the other but rather our communication styles conflict as a matter of fact I have yet to attack you personally (perceived or not) when I asked what you were on I also asked you to try again meaning that I thought much better of you and that you are far more capable of explaining your thoughts and staying on topic then you did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:53 pm
lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph On what discussion? Abortion or communism? On abortion, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. As for communism, who said anything about no workers? In fact, in my system ALL people would be workers, and would trade their work hours directly for goods. Rather than a set number of goods, ALL goods would be theirs for the taking, having they produced goods of their own which would be taken by others. There would be no money, no way to extort or have a monopoly. The only way to "take over" would be to forcefully...well, force the workers to work... for what they were lready getting, then setting up a new system of money in which they would be the only owners... therefore still owning but dust and sand. I said nothing about communism what are you on m8 take your meds and try again plz Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here. oh wow I slipped on one word...is that all you have to say really you talk big but make about as much sense as coating a pinecone with peanut butter and hanging it in a tree If you are done ranting now lets try to stay on topic and just so I don't confuse you again I will refrain from giving any more examples of what straying from the topic would be focus...focus What are you, 10? Or did you recieve a horrible, horrible head injury? Your pinecone analogy is weak, something a 6th grade would use as a response due to a lack of a clever insult. "Yeah, well you're so stupid you're... like a dog who... eats a baloon because he thinks it's a ball but it's really not!" Now make a point already, your lack of intellect and logic is getting boring. obviously you have never coated a pinecone with peanut butter. why would anyone do such a thing...because it's funny. Watching crazy critters jump or hang off the string is good times. My comment was in no way an insult as I was only commenting on why I thought you were responding. I feel that you only respond for your own amusement as apparently it is fun to be a jerk (with whatever sense you make...a lot or a little it matters not) I have made my point many times so if you haven’t caught on by now we really have no reason to continue our conversation This has nothing to do with how intelligent either of us are...or how we perceive the other but rather our communication styles conflict as a matter of fact I have yet to attack you personally (perceived or not) when I asked what you were on I also asked you to try again meaning that I thought much better of you and that you are far more capable of explaining your thoughts and staying on topic then you did. To quote Rocco's Modern Life- Wow. You're an idiot. For the last time, make a point relevent to anything. Stop pussyfooting around because you're out of viable points. "Why would anyone do such a thing"... My god kid, learn to focus that minimalistic scattering of braincells. Stop talking about pinecones, squirrels, the economy without a workforce, conversational styles or whatever bullshit you're using to butcher a red herring. (It's so absurd I'm not sure it even falls under a logical fallacy, it completely leaves the realm of logic.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:26 am
divineseraph lordstar divineseraph lordstar divineseraph Wow, you say I'm on something... Please explain how your complete lack of logic is in any way relevent to anything regarding either abortion or communism or ANYTHING your mind somehow stapled haphazardly to that post. Let's go over this analytically so you know what I'm talking about here. I'll try and go slow for you. I explain to you how logic works, and how an argument must relate to the subject in order to be valid. You reply with a question regarding workers, an economy and a horrible butchery of the word plague, with no context whatsoever. Since I had mentioned communism before, I took that to be about communism, since the workforce and plagues is unrelated to abortion, and thus I will not consider it in my discussion. You perform a terrible attempt at an Ad Hominem as you slip further into mediocre typing habits. Which leads us here. oh wow I slipped on one word...is that all you have to say really you talk big but make about as much sense as coating a pinecone with peanut butter and hanging it in a tree If you are done ranting now lets try to stay on topic and just so I don't confuse you again I will refrain from giving any more examples of what straying from the topic would be focus...focus What are you, 10? Or did you recieve a horrible, horrible head injury? Your pinecone analogy is weak, something a 6th grade would use as a response due to a lack of a clever insult. "Yeah, well you're so stupid you're... like a dog who... eats a baloon because he thinks it's a ball but it's really not!" Now make a point already, your lack of intellect and logic is getting boring. obviously you have never coated a pinecone with peanut butter. why would anyone do such a thing...because it's funny. Watching crazy critters jump or hang off the string is good times. My comment was in no way an insult as I was only commenting on why I thought you were responding. I feel that you only respond for your own amusement as apparently it is fun to be a jerk (with whatever sense you make...a lot or a little it matters not) I have made my point many times so if you haven’t caught on by now we really have no reason to continue our conversation This has nothing to do with how intelligent either of us are...or how we perceive the other but rather our communication styles conflict as a matter of fact I have yet to attack you personally (perceived or not) when I asked what you were on I also asked you to try again meaning that I thought much better of you and that you are far more capable of explaining your thoughts and staying on topic then you did. To quote Rocco's Modern Life- Wow. You're an idiot. For the last time, make a point relevent to anything. Stop pussyfooting around because you're out of viable points. "Why would anyone do such a thing"... My god kid, learn to focus that minimalistic scattering of braincells. Stop talking about pinecones, squirrels, the economy without a workforce, conversational styles or whatever bullshit you're using to butcher a red herring. (It's so absurd I'm not sure it even falls under a logical fallacy, it completely leaves the realm of logic.) if you are done ranting perhaps we can return to the topic as I tried to do in my last post...I am still waiting for you to make your next point
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
