Alma wrote:
What is that link supposed to prove?
It properly addresses your current & future responses, until such a time as you grow a pair.
I'm not holding my breath, as we've done this dance before & you remained a coward then too.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- LBGT Terrorism
LBGT TerrorismFollow
It properly addresses your current & future responses, until such a time as you grow a pair.
I'm not holding my breath, as we've done this dance before & you remained a coward then too.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
#178Almalieque,
Posted: Aug 25 2012 at 6:09 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) If you want to +1, just say so. No need to make up reasons. I almost had sympathy for you until I realized you don't even need premium to search.. You can't even understand the conversation at hand and it's basic questions. My guess is that you searched and found my explanation and it went over your head and was hoping for me to reiterate it in layman terms for the possibility of you understanding it.
Almalieque wrote:
Then we agree.
That's great, I guess. I think you fell a little short of fully thinking it through but I'm happy that you've decided that you agree with me.
Edited, Aug 25th 2012 7:21pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Alma wrote:
If you want to +1, just say so. No need to make up reasons. I almost had sympathy for you until I realized you don't even need premium to search.. You can't even understand the conversation at hand and it's basic questions. My guess is that you searched and found my explanation and it went over your head and was hoping for me to reiterate it in layman terms for the possibility of you understanding it.
If it gets an answer out of you, sure.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Omegavegeta wrote:
Alma wrote:
What is that link supposed to prove?
I'm not holding my breath, as we've done this dance before & you remained a coward then too.
I've been following this technology for over 20
For the record I got super bored a few weeks ago and re-read all alma's posts in both of the major DADT threads. I also did searches with varying content clues. I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text. If you, alma, have ever given a reason for your views on homosexuality on this website I am utterly unable to find it.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Friar Bijou wrote:
For the record I got super bored a few weeks ago and re-read all alma's posts in both of the major DADT threads. I also did searches with varying content clues. I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text. If you, alma, have ever given a reason for your views on homosexuality on this website I am utterly unable to find it.
All I ever remember him saying was that he wasn't going to discuss it because it wasn't relevant to whatever thread he was posting in.
Friar Bijou wrote:
I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text.
That's not gonna help your little vision problem.
Belkira wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
For the record I got super bored a few weeks ago and re-read all alma's posts in both of the major DADT threads. I also did searches with varying content clues. I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text. If you, alma, have ever given a reason for your views on homosexuality on this website I am utterly unable to find it.
All I ever remember him saying was that he wasn't going to discuss it because it wasn't relevant to whatever thread he was posting in.
BrownDuck wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text.
That's not gonna help your little vision problem.
ALSO: Fun fact: The quote in my sig is from the DADT thread.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Friar Bijou wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
For the record I got super bored a few weeks ago and re-read all alma's posts in both of the major DADT threads. I also did searches with varying content clues. I also am pretty diligent about reading every post; yes, even gbaji's and alma's walls o' text. If you, alma, have ever given a reason for your views on homosexuality on this website I am utterly unable to find it.
All I ever remember him saying was that he wasn't going to discuss it because it wasn't relevant to whatever thread he was posting in.
I know. I was sort of half-assed backing you up.
Quote:
Let's try this again. You asked me why I think it's WRONG for an 18 year old to marry a 50 year old. I said I believe it is WRONG for the SAME reasons why the law says its wrong for a 17 year old and a 50 year old to marry. It's wrong because there is no difference between someone who is 17 years, 11 months, 30 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes old and an 18 year old.
So.... no reason, then?
Look, if you can't articulate the reasoning behind a poorly thought out hyperbolic statement, it's okay to say so. You could have just said "it's no more wrong for an 18 year old to marry a man three times his/her age than it is for a 17 year old," to which I would have responded, "sure, but legally the 17 year old has to get parental consent in some states while the 18 year old is considered to be an adult." Your problem, then, seems to be with the arbitrary age of consent, to which I can only say (along with Joph, many times now) that there has to be SOME demarcation between needing parental guidance and having autonomy, and in the absence of universal objective maturity markers it's going to be somewhat arbitrary, like it or not.
It's a long leap from "I see no difference" to "this is wrong". "This is wrong" is a flat statement of fact, while "I see no difference" is a statement of opinion.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Using Alma's logic, no one is ever an adult. Because there's no difference between 17 and 18, 18 and 19, 19 and 20, 20 and 21, etc. So let's just cut out the middlemen and say there's no difference between a 10 year old and a 68 year old.
Nadenu wrote:
Using Alma's logic,
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Nadenu wrote:
and say there's no difference between a 10 year old and a 68 year old.
You're getting dangerously close to summoning some ancient forum users all "Bloody Mary" style.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
lolgaxe wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Using Alma's logic,
Ok, I see your point, but you know what I mean.
Jophiel wrote:
Guenny wrote:
Careful Joph, don't let him outsmart you with his word traps!
It's like I'm dancing with the
Fixed.
#192Almalieque,
Posted: Aug 26 2012 at 6:25 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I understand that leap, you're just avoiding my questions and intentionally creating a circular argument.
In all the time and posts you wasted saying that you've already stated your opinions and that they're too complex to fit in a single sentence you could've written your opinion a hundred times by now. Meanwhile nobody can remember or find that opinion anywhere.
Probably because you're too much of a coward to actually give your opinion on this and you're just hiding behind poor excuses and vague answers again.
Probably because you're too much of a coward to actually give your opinion on this and you're just hiding behind poor excuses and vague answers again.
#194Almalieque,
Posted: Aug 26 2012 at 6:53 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Or, that I was actively engaged in another topic that was irrelevant to his side argument in which engaging in would only muddy the conversation even more. Don't get me wrong, it's not "complex" at all, just for people like Omega V, who have a hard time understanding the current discussion that we were already having.
Alma wrote:
Or, that I was actively engaged in another topic that was irrelevant to his side argument in which engaging in would only muddy the conversation even more. Don't get me wrong, it's not "complex" at all, just for people like Omega V, who have a hard time understanding the current discussion that we were already having.
He answers random questions that I didn't even ask. Given the fact that my argument starts off with a series of questions, I see no reason why I want to transition to something that I know he wouldn't grasp.
Normally, I would transition now, since this argument is already dead, but given the fact that people are calling me a coward and a liar, I'll just let you figure it out yourselves or not. It's up to you, I don't care. It has already been provided at least twice and you not finding it or being too lazy to look for it, wont change that.
Once or if someone finds it or remembers it, I will then just say "I told you so". Me telling you is only fueling the belief that it never existed.
Still a coward, got it.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
#196Almalieque,
Posted: Aug 26 2012 at 9:18 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Speaking of being a coward, I'm still waiting on your answer how a 35 year old would hurt a 15 year old any more or less than another 15 year old, or another 35 year old for that matter, Mr. "I answered all of your questions".
tl;dr: more blabbering on with excuses to not post your opinion. We've got it, you're a coward.
Almalieque wrote:
I didn't fall short at all. That's all that's important. People like to pretend that marriage is this happily fair and equal union where everyone gets to marry who they want, except for homosexuals, because that's "nasty". Accepting the fact that there are blatant discrimination laws that aren't even "across the board", means that any argument to change any law for marriage acceptance can not solely be on "it's discrimination".
That's never been my argument so... I don't know. Congratulations on getting me to admit to the same position I've always had?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
It appears to be some dance on the "slippery slope" of homosexuality equating pedophilia and bestiality. Alma, you need a new hobby.
Wow. Relative to the amount of text entered, Alma seems to say even less than gbaji does.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
And once again I'm done here. Holy hell.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Recent Visitors: 224
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (224)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- LBGT Terrorism
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC