Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #328955 > unrolled thread
| Started by | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-10-27 21:55 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-10-28 00:18 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 403 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-27 21:55 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 15:16 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-27 22:16 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 15:32 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-27 22:36 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 15:45 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-27 23:21 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 20:07 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 00:34 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 17:41 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-28 01:49 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 17:56 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:47 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 08:50 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 13:36 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 10:50 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 14:22 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 11:48 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 17:13 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 14:21 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 00:57 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:49 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 08:52 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 16:06 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:17 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 09:53 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 14:07 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 13:37 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 10:46 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 04:36 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-28 00:48 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:01 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:04 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:44 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 08:47 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:27 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 02:35 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 20:06 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-29 05:11 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 10:11 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:39 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:11 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 12:28 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:30 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:49 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:25 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:52 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 17:01 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 13:23 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 12:05 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 11:30 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 20:37 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 17:20 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 21:53 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 01:18 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 01:58 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 02:32 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 05:16 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-30 09:04 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-30 09:42 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:03 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:27 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-30 13:28 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 15:32 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-30 09:06 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 20:25 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-30 14:16 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 16:50 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 17:48 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 10:29 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 07:43 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 12:23 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 09:48 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-30 09:48 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 11:28 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:08 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 13:19 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:30 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:47 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 17:52 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 13:55 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 03:53 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-31 06:05 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 08:49 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 16:28 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:54 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 17:02 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 11:14 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 13:19 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 10:44 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 18:03 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 11:21 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 20:34 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 16:46 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 08:50 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 10:06 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:41 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:29 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 16:36 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:56 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 13:57 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 20:35 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 03:51 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-30 06:07 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-30 09:32 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-30 14:38 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 09:57 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-30 15:02 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 10:15 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-30 10:08 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 12:33 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-30 10:04 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 10:18 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-30 15:32 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 00:59 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 01:18 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 01:33 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 01:41 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 02:07 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 21:57 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-31 10:12 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-05 13:06 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-05 13:08 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-05 12:54 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 10:42 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-30 21:56 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-31 18:02 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-31 14:35 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-31 22:56 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-31 12:03 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 11:10 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-02 11:56 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-02 15:38 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-02 15:38 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 11:11 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 23:44 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-31 02:22 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 13:49 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-31 09:05 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-31 20:21 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-31 18:48 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 02:45 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-01 03:10 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 04:17 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-01 21:34 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 10:45 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:47 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 16:16 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 00:53 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 19:48 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:27 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-03 08:52 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-03 08:50 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 15:37 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 17:55 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 19:27 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 17:05 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-03 15:46 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-03 13:37 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 17:04 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 09:06 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-03 09:09 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:25 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-03 00:34 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 01:09 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:41 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 20:54 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 21:51 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:07 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:24 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:38 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 21:49 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 08:46 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 10:16 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 20:51 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 19:49 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 10:44 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:39 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 14:49 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 16:13 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 01:07 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 19:52 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:27 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-03 07:37 +0000
@ronb is fucked in the head, big time. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-11-03 03:14 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-03 13:27 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:23 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 09:58 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 14:16 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 22:33 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 19:31 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:40 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-05 17:53 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:21 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 09:54 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 09:56 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 07:16 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 14:14 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 22:36 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 19:32 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:50 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-06 10:04 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-04 22:24 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 22:31 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-05 00:24 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 19:29 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 19:47 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:45 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 15:02 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 17:52 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 19:39 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 19:58 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 20:46 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 21:51 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 08:39 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 17:59 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 19:32 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 17:06 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 13:39 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 14:49 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-03 15:53 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-03 19:28 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 09:35 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 09:44 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 07:02 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 10:50 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 08:06 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 12:09 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 12:34 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 10:15 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-04 09:40 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 12:44 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 13:38 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-04 09:19 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-04 16:40 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere "vallor" <vallor@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 23:57 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-02 18:15 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 00:48 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-03 07:16 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-03 06:26 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:25 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:24 +0000
Women need choices, not enslavement. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-11-02 17:39 -0800
Re: Women need choices, not enslavement. Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-03 08:56 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-03 07:14 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-03 06:45 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:07 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere "JEDIDIAH" <nomad@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 06:47 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-04 06:45 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 15:01 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 06:42 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 15:00 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-04 10:11 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 22:29 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-04 18:55 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:46 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 07:42 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 14:19 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 15:35 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 22:34 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-05 00:26 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:35 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-05 17:53 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 19:34 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:51 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-05 07:17 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-05 09:23 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-04 22:45 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-04 19:37 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 21:25 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-05 12:58 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-05 17:39 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:38 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 22:37 +0000
Evolution and the RC church vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-06 00:23 +0000
Re: Evolution and the RC church vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-06 00:30 +0000
Re: Evolution and the RC church Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-05 19:47 -0500
Re: Evolution and the RC church ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 04:15 +0000
Re: Evolution and the RC church vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-06 04:36 +0000
Re: Evolution and the RC church Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-06 06:04 -0500
Re: Evolution and the RC church chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-06 07:05 -0600
Re: Evolution and the RC church Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-06 08:14 -0500
Re: Evolution and the RC church Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-06 10:57 -0500
Re: Evolution and the RC church Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-06 11:06 -0500
Re: Evolution and the RC church ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 01:16 +0000
Re: Evolution and the RC church GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-06 16:14 -0700
Re: Evolution and the RC church Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-06 16:47 -0700
Re: Evolution and the RC church Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 15:53 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-06 01:34 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-05 20:37 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-06 09:13 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-06 09:39 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-06 09:19 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-06 06:02 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 04:06 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 20:40 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-31 23:57 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 02:41 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-01 04:06 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 03:52 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-02 05:03 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 13:47 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-01 11:28 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 04:16 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-01 21:25 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-31 18:44 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 02:43 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-01 03:20 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 04:19 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-01 21:33 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-02 05:08 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 13:14 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-11-15 13:52 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-16 03:53 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-16 12:52 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-31 17:56 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-01 01:04 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-02 07:56 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 14:18 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 09:35 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-02 17:52 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 10:22 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-02 17:59 +0100
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:48 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 11:09 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 11:15 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:44 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 14:51 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 22:35 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 23:03 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 23:36 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 00:14 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 00:47 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:00 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:13 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:39 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:16 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:50 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 03:25 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 04:41 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 09:29 -0800
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 17:44 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 17:53 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:47 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 16:37 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:44 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 14:00 -0500
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 15:10 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 20:41 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 22:25 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 18:45 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 01:22 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-30 02:12 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 20:36 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-30 15:34 -0600
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 09:59 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-29 17:20 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 11:15 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 00:59 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 18:16 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 18:44 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 02:01 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 19:06 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 19:11 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 02:29 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 19:48 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:01 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 20:05 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:11 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 20:21 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:27 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 20:36 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:46 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 21:16 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 04:23 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 08:34 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 15:55 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:07 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 20:11 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:56 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:03 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 19:50 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:23 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 20:40 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 03:50 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 21:15 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 07:07 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:02 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:05 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 13:40 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 10:57 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 14:06 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 11:21 -0700
The Quran Peaceful? My ass Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 14:32 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 08:35 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 16:01 +0000
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 21:00 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 18:01 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 17:41 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 17:02 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-27 19:30 -0400
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 17:05 -0700
Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-28 00:18 +0000
Page 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s38.0tae11@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329767 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 10/29/15, 10:16 PM, in article fhsnvbc83.gjai@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>> See: now you feel the need to call me names because you not only >>> misrepresented the article (easy enough to do, you referred to it just based >>> on your memory) but when you were called out you behaved poorly. >>> >>> Now instead of just admitting your error you push a meta-debate circus and >>> sink to name calling. It is a poor showing from you. >>> >> >> Seriously, are you on crack? > > Good grief... you post with less to say than anyone else I know. You agree with that salon.com sicko that there is a distinction between pedophiles and child molestors. You are as sick as she is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fshngjd9.3fa@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329778 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 10/30/15, 10:03 AM, in article s38.0tae11@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>> On 10/29/15, 10:16 PM, in article fhsnvbc83.gjai@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>>> See: now you feel the need to call me names because you not only >>>>> misrepresented the article (easy enough to do, you referred to it just >>>>> based >>>>> on your memory) but when you were called out you behaved poorly. >>>>> >>>>> Now instead of just admitting your error you push a meta-debate circus and >>>>> sink to name calling. It is a poor showing from you. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Seriously, are you on crack? >>> >>> Good grief... you post with less to say than anyone else I know. >> >> You agree with that salon.com sicko that there is a distinction between >> pedophiles and child molestors. You are as sick as she is. >> > > Just some of your recent idiotic and/or dishonest claims: > OVERLOAD! C/P mode on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 13:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <usc0vwd2q3y0.u914gc2d05m6.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #329791 |
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:27:29 +0000 (UTC), owl wrote: > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> On 10/30/15, 10:03 AM, in article s38.0tae11@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>> On 10/29/15, 10:16 PM, in article fhsnvbc83.gjai@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> See: now you feel the need to call me names because you not only >>>>>> misrepresented the article (easy enough to do, you referred to it just >>>>>> based >>>>>> on your memory) but when you were called out you behaved poorly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now instead of just admitting your error you push a meta-debate circus and >>>>>> sink to name calling. It is a poor showing from you. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Seriously, are you on crack? >>>> >>>> Good grief... you post with less to say than anyone else I know. >>> >>> You agree with that salon.com sicko that there is a distinction between >>> pedophiles and child molestors. You are as sick as she is. >>> >> >> Just some of your recent idiotic and/or dishonest claims: >> > > OVERLOAD! C/P mode on. It's glue time! -- You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 15:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n10ggu$f1l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #329791 |
On 2015-10-30 1:27 PM, owl wrote: > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> On 10/30/15, 10:03 AM, in article s38.0tae11@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>> On 10/29/15, 10:16 PM, in article fhsnvbc83.gjai@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> See: now you feel the need to call me names because you not only >>>>>> misrepresented the article (easy enough to do, you referred to it just >>>>>> based >>>>>> on your memory) but when you were called out you behaved poorly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now instead of just admitting your error you push a meta-debate circus and >>>>>> sink to name calling. It is a poor showing from you. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Seriously, are you on crack? >>>> >>>> Good grief... you post with less to say than anyone else I know. >>> >>> You agree with that salon.com sicko that there is a distinction between >>> pedophiles and child molestors. You are as sick as she is. >>> >> >> Just some of your recent idiotic and/or dishonest claims: >> > > OVERLOAD! C/P mode on. ROFL. I was thinking the same thing. -- Charmed Tuna
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 09:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <oyjgsjbzoah2$.zgz0onamwnnh$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #329611 |
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 01:18:39 +0000 (UTC), owl wrote: > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> On 10/29/15, 2:53 PM, in article srjgd983.ajdf@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>> On 10/29/15, 1:37 PM, in article sfgbnch74.jg@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 10/29/15, 11:05 AM, in article >>>>>> prWdnSd3JYWe_a_LnZ2dnUU7-XGdnZ2d@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud" >>>>>> <cumulus@mist.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You're the one who is is the wannabe martyr. "Christians don't agree >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> me. Wah, wah! Government come in and force them to give me what I want >>>>>>>>> and make them agree with me!" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Get over yourself, crank. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You've earned my respect, ronb. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have to concur on that one. >>>>>>> Jed thinks the current mode that civilization is in is somehow modern? >>>>>>> Even the pedophiles are now demanding they have a right to screw your >>>>>>> children. >>>>>> >>>>>> You mean like it says in the Bible? >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/pedophilia.html> >>>>>> >>>>>> The Bible is a book that promotes pedophilia! But that has nothing to do >>>>>> with equality for gays! >>>>>> >>>>>>> And the pooch humpers also want their right to screw the pooch. The list >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> getting longer. Myself, I know the laws are still on the books against >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> stuff. >>>>>> >>>>>> In many states there are, unfortunately, no laws against bestiality! >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://wp.me/p3dI4z-1CH> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Bestiality Is Legal in the Same States That Ban Same-Sex >>>>>> Marriage >>>>>> ... >>>>>> The states which do not criminalize Bestiality, yet ban Same >>>>>> Sex Marriage are as follows: >>>>>> >>>>>> Kentucky; Montana; New Jersey; Nevada; Ohio; Texas; Virginia; West >>>>>> Virginia; and Wyoming (Note: New Jersey does permit Civil Unions.) >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> >>>>>> To be fair that is from 2013 and is now outdated: at the very least same >>>>>> sex >>>>>> marriage is no longer outlawed. The push by, largely, the religious right >>>>>> to >>>>>> control other people has been beaten in this area. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> salon.com recently published an article sympathetic to child molestors. >>>>> The Left is truly disgusting. >>>> >>>> I suspect you are misrepresenting the article but by all means do post a >>>> link. I do find this one which speaks of the topic but in no way shows any >>>> sympathy for child molesters or child molestation: >>>> >>>> <http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/> >>>> >>>> Maybe there is another though? >>>> >>> >>> http://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/the_pedophile_i_could_not_help_he_was_not_a_mo >>> nster_or_a_molester_the_system_destroyed_him_anyway/ >>> >> ----- >> But Jacob had not touched a child. >> ----- >> >> You claimed they were showing sympathy for "child molesters or child >> molestation" but there is not a word in that article where they do so. They >> do note he was reaching out to a child and arrested for it. And no claim is >> made that this should not have been the case. So it was not even defending >> possible child molestation. >> >> They even talk about programs to REDUCE child sexual abuse... actively >> working AGAINST the very thing you say they show sympathy for! >> > > Weasel words here: > > "There is a very important distinction between pedophiles and child > molesters." > > Followed later by: > > <quote> > I tell friends, colleagues, and strangers I meet (as I believe birthday > parties present an excellent opportunity to enlighten people on the > matter), when they fail to understand why I am sympathetic towards > pedophiles, ???How would you feel if you couldn???t ever have sex with > anyone? What if you also couldn???t look at the porn you liked because > it was illegal, and couldn???t confide in anyone for support???? By this > point, most people begin nodding their heads in agreement. > </quote> > > Yeah, right. > But you agree with her. You must be a perv. The cops should check > out your "daycare" business for sure. It doesn't surprise anyone that snit is a pervert. You should look up some of his views on incest. That one will really curl your skin. -- You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-29 20:25 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <S-6dnQvfoqevSK_LnZ2dnUU7-VudnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #329525 |
On 10/29/15 12:30, Snit wrote: > On 10/29/15, 11:05 AM, in article > prWdnSd3JYWe_a_LnZ2dnUU7-XGdnZ2d@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud"<cumulus@mist.com> > wrote: > >>>> You're the one who is is the wannabe martyr. "Christians don't agree with >>>> me. Wah, wah! Government come in and force them to give me what I want >>>> and make them agree with me!" >>>> >>>> Get over yourself, crank. >>> >>> You've earned my respect, ronb. >>> >>> >> I have to concur on that one. >> Jed thinks the current mode that civilization is in is somehow modern? >> Even the pedophiles are now demanding they have a right to screw your >> children. > > You mean like it says in the Bible? > > <http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/pedophilia.html> > > The Bible is a book that promotes pedophilia! But that has nothing to do > with equality for gays! I don't think it does: Matthew 18:6 But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. It seems to make a point. The old testament is a bit harder to read. > >> And the pooch humpers also want their right to screw the pooch. The list is >> getting longer. Myself, I know the laws are still on the books against that >> stuff. > > In many states there are, unfortunately, no laws against bestiality! > Here in Montana, beastiality will cost one $50,000 fine and 10 years in prison. Guess it was passed because of the many jokes about monatanans and sheep. "The sheep get nervous at the sound of a zipper." > <http://wp.me/p3dI4z-1CH> > ----- > Bestiality Is Legal in the Same States That Ban Same-Sex > Marriage Washington State is one of those that allow it. > ... > The states which do not criminalize Bestiality, yet ban Same > Sex Marriage are as follows: > > Kentucky; Montana; Montana does not allow bestiality. http://www.nbcmontana.com/blob/view/-/32343854/data/2/-/140rrh6z/-/AFFIDAVIT--Missoula-man-charged-with-having-sex-with-a-dog.pdf New Jersey; Nevada; Ohio; Texas; Virginia; West > Virginia; and Wyoming (Note: New Jersey does permit Civil Unions.) > ----- > > To be fair that is from 2013 and is now outdated: at the very least same sex > marriage is no longer outlawed. The push by, largely, the religious right to > control other people has been beaten in this area. > I don't have any position on people that consent. -- When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the bottom, and have a longer blanket."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 14:16 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <meednXJbX8atTa7LnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #329649 |
On 10/29/15 20:38, Snit wrote: > On 10/29/15, 7:25 PM, in article > S-6dnQvfoqevSK_LnZ2dnUU7-VudnZ2d@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud"<cumulus@mist.com> > wrote: > >> On 10/29/15 12:30, Snit wrote: >>> On 10/29/15, 11:05 AM, in article >>> prWdnSd3JYWe_a_LnZ2dnUU7-XGdnZ2d@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud"<cumulus@mist.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> You're the one who is is the wannabe martyr. "Christians don't agree with >>>>>> me. Wah, wah! Government come in and force them to give me what I want >>>>>> and make them agree with me!" >>>>>> >>>>>> Get over yourself, crank. >>>>> >>>>> You've earned my respect, ronb. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I have to concur on that one. >>>> Jed thinks the current mode that civilization is in is somehow modern? >>>> Even the pedophiles are now demanding they have a right to screw your >>>> children. >>> >>> You mean like it says in the Bible? >>> >>> <http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/pedophilia.html> >>> >>> The Bible is a book that promotes pedophilia! But that has nothing to do >>> with equality for gays! >> >> I don't think it does: >> >> Matthew 18:6 >> But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, >> it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his >> neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. >> >> It seems to make a point. The old testament is a bit harder to read. > > I certainly am not going to claim the Bible is consistent. It does promote > pedophilia, but that does not mean it also does not condemn it. With Matthew > 18:6, though, the King James version has it a bit different than your quote: > > But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, > it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, > and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. > > The sin is not defined in your version, and in the King James it speaks of > offending. Does that passage refer to pedophilia? I do not know... > Well, I think you hit the nail on the head there by mentioning King James. He was known as a pedophile, so it doesn't surprise me that he had it tossed out. > Either way, though, I am NOT suggesting most Christians think pedophilia is > acceptable behavior. > >>>> And the pooch humpers also want their right to screw the pooch. The list is >>>> getting longer. Myself, I know the laws are still on the books against that >>>> stuff. >>> >>> In many states there are, unfortunately, no laws against bestiality! >> >> Here in Montana, beastiality will cost one $50,000 fine and 10 years in >> prison. >> Guess it was passed because of the many jokes about monatanans and sheep. >> "The sheep get nervous at the sound of a zipper." > > :) > >>> <http://wp.me/p3dI4z-1CH> >>> ----- >>> Bestiality Is Legal in the Same States That Ban Same-Sex >>> Marriage >> >> Washington State is one of those that allow it. >> >>> ... >>> The states which do not criminalize Bestiality, yet ban Same >>> Sex Marriage are as follows: >>> >>> Kentucky; Montana; >> >> Montana does not allow bestiality. > > The article also lists Alabama which is no longer the case. > >> http://www.nbcmontana.com/blob/view/-/32343854/data/2/-/140rrh6z/-/AFFIDAVIT-- >> Missoula-man-charged-with-having-sex-with-a-dog.pdf > > Apparently a law about "deviant" sexual behavior... which can be interpreted > in many ways. Not worth looking up the law right now. It sure makes them very nervous when they try tho. Some guy in town got caught erecting a very tall wooden fence so that his neighbors couldn't see him screwing the pooch. His neighbors had a few videos of him doing it, and he was thrown in jail. > >>> New Jersey; Nevada; Ohio; Texas; Virginia; West >>> Virginia; and Wyoming (Note: New Jersey does permit Civil Unions.) >>> ----- >>> >>> To be fair that is from 2013 and is now outdated: at the very least same sex >>> marriage is no longer outlawed. The push by, largely, the religious right to >>> control other people has been beaten in this area. >> >> I don't have any position on people that consent. > > I do - I am fine with it. The one exception is incest, and I admit that is > largely an emotional reaction with a bit of a slippery slope logical fallacy > tossed in. > > > -- When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the bottom, and have a longer blanket."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-29 16:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n0u0ls$8e2$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #329513 |
On 2015-10-29 2:05 PM, GreyCloud wrote: > On 10/29/15 11:23, Charmed Tuna wrote: >> On 2015-10-29 1:01 PM, ronb wrote: >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 11:25:51 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: >>> >>>> On 2015-10-29, ronb<ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 10:11:08 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 2015-10-29, Melzzzzz<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:06:57 -0700 Snit >>>>>>> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 10/28/15, 7:35 PM, in article n0s0lf$bfl$1@dont-email.me, "ronb" >>>>>>>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:27:04 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ...I've always called fundies "American Talibani" or something >>>>>>>>>> comparable. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which really says more about your incessant anti-Christian >>>>>>>>> crankdom than anything else. When Christians start regularly >>>>>>>>> beheading non-Christians, bring it to my attention. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Right, because killing people in other ways (and a LOT more of >>>>>>>> them) >>>>>>>> is somehow not as bad. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I mean, really, is that the best you have? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I could not resist to not react on this. Crackpot. >>>>>> >>>>>> At this point, fundies in America are more about blunting social >>>>>> progress >>>>>> and trying to drag us backwards than obvious ethnic cleansing. >>>>>> >>>>>> They can't quite manage living in the modern world but don't >>>>>> have >>>>>> the >>>>>> balls to turn their back on it like more dedicated (and more >>>>>> harmless) >>>>>> groups that just keep to themselves. >>>>> >>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>> >>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They >>>> try >>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>> >>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>> >>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" You >>> mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >>> >>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're >>> speaking of >>> marriage among homosexuals. I happen to agree with that. Marriage, >>> specifically, is a contract between a man and a woman, its central >>> purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the man and woman part. >>> Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs out from >>> under >>> themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s ... but >>> we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. >>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >>> >>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. If they >>> obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) they >>> are fined or even jailed. Right to our religious beliefs have always >>> been >>> fundamental in country. By forcing men and women to directly oppose >>> their >>> beliefs -- by threats -- you are destroying their rights. Perhaps you >>> should look at it from the other side every now and then. >>> >>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>> (murder) and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't >>> believe in it to provide it. Again, who is being forced to do something >>> against their will here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the >>> Catholics?) >>> >>> No, because a company opposes providing abortion pills (some forms of >>> birth control destroys the fertilized egg) you turn reason on its head >>> and claim the employee is forced to accept their religious belief. What >>> is really happening is someone with a religious belief is being >>> forced to >>> betray that belief. Again who is the harmed party? The person who can >>> buy >>> birth control pills cheaply anywhere, or the company that is forced to >>> oppose their religion to supply them? It's got nothing to do with cost, >>> it has everyone to do with our atheistic government (with an agenda) >>> forcing their will on Christians. In the case of Hobby Lobby, even the >>> courts agreed that the government was taking their agenda too far. >>> >>> Of course none of this has anything to do with REAL persecution, like >>> what the Communist, atheistic governments did to Christians in the >>> Soviet >>> Union or Red China. Nor does it have anything at all to do with what >>> ISIS >>> is doing to Christians in Syria and Iraq today. That's not pretend >>> "persecution" (i.e., I don't get my way -- or the right to force someone >>> to give me what I want -- therefore I'm being "persecuted."). >>> >>>>> about what ISIS is doing to Christians. Beheading people vs >>>>> standing up >>>>> for your beliefs are completely different things. Or do you deny the >>>>> right of "fundies" to have their beliefs? By the way, I'm not a >>>>> "fundie" >>>>> -- I'm a Catholic, but you either believe in freedom of religion, or >>>>> you don't. Cranks don't. They believe their "religious" social mores >>>>> (which, >>>> >>>> Here we go with the faux martyrdom. >>>> >>>> You're such a martyr because someone doesn't buy into your >>>> bullshit >>>> and has the audacity to say so. Sorry honey but that's just free speech >>>> in action. If you can't handle it, an ISIS regime really is more your >>>> speed. >>>> >>>> [deletia] >>> >>> You're the one who is is the wannabe martyr. "Christians don't agree >>> with >>> me. Wah, wah! Government come in and force them to give me what I want >>> and make them agree with me!" >>> >>> Get over yourself, crank. >> >> You've earned my respect, ronb. >> >> > I have to concur on that one. > Jed thinks the current mode that civilization is in is somehow modern? > Even the pedophiles are now demanding they have a right to screw your > children. And the pooch humpers also want their right to screw the > pooch. The list is getting longer. Myself, I know the laws are still > on the books against that stuff. I simply can't stand the attacks on Christianity nowadays. Islam gets defended by left-wing idiots who believe that we're all bigots for pointing out things that are indeed happening and caused by Muslims (beheadings, rapes, public destruction, etc.) and always reminded that centuries ago, Christians might have killed a few sand rats. Regardless of how movies and the media might portray them today, those Muslims back in the day were no more moral or ethical than they are today. Rape of a non-Christian woman or girl was acceptable, as were the beheadings of "infidels." I would gladly have taken up arms to defend the Holy Land then (as I am sure that my ancestors did) and I would still do it today. -- Charmed Tuna
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-29 17:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n0u433$n17$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #329563 |
On 2015-10-29 5:32 PM, Snit wrote: > On 10/29/15, 1:50 PM, in article n0u0ls$8e2$2@dont-email.me, "Charmed Tuna" > <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > >>>> You've earned my respect, ronb. >>>> >>> I have to concur on that one. >>> Jed thinks the current mode that civilization is in is somehow modern? >>> Even the pedophiles are now demanding they have a right to screw your >>> children. And the pooch humpers also want their right to screw the >>> pooch. The list is getting longer. Myself, I know the laws are still >>> on the books against that stuff. >> >> I simply can't stand the attacks on Christianity nowadays. > > I am tired of the attacks BY Christians. Attacks against equality, demands > for special entitlements, etc. *I* am a Christian and my faith was much of what prompted me to give you a chance despite the fact that a lot of people were against you. I don't care gays getting into some sort of a union and I especially don't care if people decide to cut their balls off to become a woman, but the moment they try to force society to embrace them or even demand that people of my faith abandon their principles to favour them, I have a problem. While my faith asks me to turn the other cheek, such shit won't fly and I would be more than willing to break the teeth of any transsexual or homosexual who demands that I sacrifice my beliefs. >> Islam gets defended by left-wing idiots who believe that we're all bigots for >> pointing out things that are indeed happening and caused by Muslims >> (beheadings, rapes, public destruction, etc.) and always reminded that >> centuries ago, Christians might have killed a few sand rats. > > I speak of what happens now and in recent history. I speak of how NOW people > of both religions kill many and use their religion as an excuse or state it > is backed by their deity. I've stayed out of the argument for the most part because I respect your view and will continue to do so even if we disagree. >> Regardless of how movies and the media might portray them today, those Muslims >> back in the day were no more moral or ethical than they are today. Rape of a >> non-Christian woman or girl was acceptable, as were the beheadings of >> "infidels." I would gladly have taken up arms to defend the Holy Land then (as >> I am sure that my ancestors did) and I would still do it today. > > Look in the Bible and see what it says of dealing with outsiders. And look > at how Christians do - just read COLA from the last few days and see all the > talk about Muslims and the attacks against them from Christians. Gee, I wonder why people might be mad at Muslims! Turning Sweden into the rape capital of the world, prompting Austrian women to buy guns to defend themselves, demanding welfare all the while destroying public property and leaving their garbage all over the place, receiving hotel rooms and kicking people out of their apartments even if they've been there for years... THOSE INNOCENT MIGRANTS!! There's a reason Poland elected a Conservative government: it will close the borders to the sand rats before the people rise up and hang them by their testicles. The cowards within Germany might stand for their country being destroyed by this human filth, but the Polish don't and won't. -- Charmed Tuna
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-29 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D257A57D.61F21%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #329496 |
On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: ... >>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >> >> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >> their religious views on their employees. >> >> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. > > How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" Pushing religion into science classes, for one. > You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of > Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education likely leads to more death. > By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of > marriage among homosexuals. That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: > I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a > man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the > man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs > out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s > ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. > (I'll be arguing with everybody.) But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting that. > But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. > Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women > directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual > messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, but in general there is not. > If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) No support for your claim here. > they are fined or even jailed. Can you point to those who have been jailed? > Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By > forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you > are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side > every now and then. > > As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion > (murder) You are confusing two things here. > and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it > to provide it. Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and choose. That goes with the job. > Again, who is being forced to do something against their will > here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) What is an "abortionist"? But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. It is sickness. > No, because a company opposes providing abortion pills (some forms of > birth control destroys the fertilized egg) you turn reason on its head > and claim the employee is forced to accept their religious belief. What > is really happening is someone with a religious belief is being forced to > betray that belief. Nope. If you provide health insurance you do not get to pick and choose, or if you do you do not get the tax benefits for providing full health benefits. Why should these companies get benefits others do not? > Again who is the harmed party? Those who provide the benefits to these companies. Tax payers. All of us. > The person who can buy birth control pills cheaply anywhere, or the company > that is forced to oppose their religion to supply them? What company is forced to supply them? > It's got nothing to do with cost, it has everyone to do with our atheistic > government (with an agenda) forcing their will on Christians. In the case of > Hobby Lobby, even the courts agreed that the government was taking their > agenda too far. Hobby Lobby was clearly in the wrong: they wanted special entitlements. As far as the fake war on Christians you babble about - you sound EXACTLY like the Muslims you hate so much. That is the point. > Of course none of this has anything to do with REAL persecution, like > what the Communist, atheistic governments did to Christians in the Soviet > Union or Red China. Nor does it have anything at all to do with what ISIS > is doing to Christians in Syria and Iraq today. That's not pretend > "persecution" (i.e., I don't get my way -- or the right to force someone > to give me what I want -- therefore I'm being "persecuted."). Your war on Christians is fake persecution. Christians do not deserve special entitlements no matter how loudly they whine. Nor Muslims. >>> about what ISIS is doing to Christians. Beheading people vs standing up >>> for your beliefs are completely different things. Or do you deny the >>> right of "fundies" to have their beliefs? By the way, I'm not a >>> "fundie" >>> -- I'm a Catholic, but you either believe in freedom of religion, or >>> you don't. Cranks don't. They believe their "religious" social mores >>> (which, >> >> Here we go with the faux martyrdom. >> >> You're such a martyr because someone doesn't buy into your bullshit >> and has the audacity to say so. Sorry honey but that's just free speech >> in action. If you can't handle it, an ISIS regime really is more your >> speed. >> >> [deletia] > > You're the one who is is the wannabe martyr. "Christians don't agree with > me. Wah, wah! Government come in and force them to give me what I want > and make them agree with me!" > > Get over yourself, crank. Christians have NO more right to push their views than Muslims. You are basically arguing for Sharia law. Christian law is the same idea. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 07:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b729701a-4f49-480d-947e-e5413598f70a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #329506 |
On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" > <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... > >>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because > >>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking > >> > >> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try > >> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do > >> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage > >> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary > >> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into > >> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing > >> their religious views on their employees. > >> > >> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. > > > > How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" > > Pushing religion into science classes, for one. > > > You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of > > Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? > > Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound > like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists > are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as > directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education > likely leads to more death. > > > By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of > > marriage among homosexuals. > > That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. > But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: > > > I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a > > man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the > > man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs > > out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s > > ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. > > (I'll be arguing with everybody.) > > But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying > equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting > that. > > > But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. > > Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women > > directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual > > messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. > > I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may > be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, > but in general there is not. > > > If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) > > No support for your claim here. > > > they are fined or even jailed. > > Can you point to those who have been jailed? > > > Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By > > forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you > > are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side > > every now and then. > > > > As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion > > (murder) > > You are confusing two things here. > > > and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it > > to provide it. > > Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can > either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and > choose. That goes with the job. > > > Again, who is being forced to do something against their will > > here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) > > What is an "abortionist"? > > But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto > others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot > take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... > but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. > It is sickness. The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 12:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n105d6$cai$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #329732 |
On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" >> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> ... >>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>> >>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>> >>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>> >>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" >> >> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. >> >>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >> >> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound >> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists >> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as >> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education >> likely leads to more death. >> >>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of >>> marriage among homosexuals. >> >> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. >> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: >> >>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a >>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the >>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs >>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s >>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. >>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >> >> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying >> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting >> that. >> >>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. >> >> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may >> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, >> but in general there is not. >> >>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) >> >> No support for your claim here. >> >>> they are fined or even jailed. >> >> Can you point to those who have been jailed? >> >>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By >>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you >>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side >>> every now and then. >>> >>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>> (murder) >> >> You are confusing two things here. >> >>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it >>> to provide it. >> >> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can >> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and >> choose. That goes with the job. >> >>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will >>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) >> >> What is an "abortionist"? >> >> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto >> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot >> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... >> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. > > Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! >> It is sickness. > > The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind. Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is definitely a disease. -- Charmed Tuna
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 09:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f9ddb4ac-1249-464a-afc7-a5e290a8e0c4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #329753 |
On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 10:23:08 AM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote: > On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" > >> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> ... > >>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because > >>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking > >>>> > >>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try > >>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do > >>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage > >>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary > >>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into > >>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing > >>>> their religious views on their employees. > >>>> > >>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. > >>> > >>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" > >> > >> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. > >> > >>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of > >>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? > >> > >> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound > >> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists > >> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as > >> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education > >> likely leads to more death. > >> > >>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of > >>> marriage among homosexuals. > >> > >> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. > >> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: > >> > >>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a > >>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the > >>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs > >>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s > >>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. > >>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) > >> > >> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying > >> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting > >> that. > >> > >>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. > >>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women > >>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual > >>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. > >> > >> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may > >> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, > >> but in general there is not. > >> > >>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) > >> > >> No support for your claim here. > >> > >>> they are fined or even jailed. > >> > >> Can you point to those who have been jailed? > >> > >>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By > >>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you > >>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side > >>> every now and then. > >>> > >>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion > >>> (murder) > >> > >> You are confusing two things here. > >> > >>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it > >>> to provide it. > >> > >> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can > >> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and > >> choose. That goes with the job. > >> > >>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will > >>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) > >> > >> What is an "abortionist"? > >> > >> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto > >> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot > >> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... > >> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. > > > > Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. > > Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! > > >> It is sickness. > > > > The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind. > > Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a > corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is > definitely a disease. You're missing my point. The people you encountered weren't merely liberal, they were far left loons who cannot tolerate dissenting opinion and they used the ol' PC hammer on you. Snit is a good example of it, there are a number of occasions where he seems to expect those on the right to simply agree with some far left loon idea he's glommed on to and he's used the PC hammer instead of rational debate. People like these give decent, hard working and honest liberals a bad name. Don't confuse the two.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 09:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D258ED89.62156%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #329753 |
On 10/30/15, 9:23 AM, in article n105d6$cai$2@dont-email.me, "Charmed Tuna" <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" >>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>>> >>>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >>>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>>> >>>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>>> >>>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" >>> >>> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. >>> >>>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >>> >>> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound >>> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists >>> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as >>> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education >>> likely leads to more death. >>> >>>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of >>>> marriage among homosexuals. >>> >>> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. >>> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: >>> >>>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between >>>> a >>>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the >>>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their >>>> legs >>>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early >>>> 1930s >>>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) >>>> here. >>>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >>> >>> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying >>> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting >>> that. >>> >>>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. >>> >>> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may >>> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, >>> but in general there is not. >>> >>>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) >>> >>> No support for your claim here. >>> >>>> they are fined or even jailed. >>> >>> Can you point to those who have been jailed? >>> >>>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By >>>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you >>>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other >>>> side >>>> every now and then. >>>> >>>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>>> (murder) >>> >>> You are confusing two things here. >>> >>>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in >>>> it >>>> to provide it. >>> >>> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can >>> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and >>> choose. That goes with the job. >>> >>>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will >>>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) >>> >>> What is an "abortionist"? >>> >>> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto >>> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot >>> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... >>> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. >> >> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we >> all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. >> women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. >> men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this >> 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death >> because *they* are married. > > Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! He is making a generalization that is not true though. >>> It is sickness. >> >> The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing >> and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push >> that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a >> disease, it's people like you they have in mind. > > Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a > corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is > definitely a disease. Hate speech? No. But at least with vaccinations it is not only an unsupported claim, the person who first really pushed the idea and even published a "study" claiming it has been completely discredited. I think even he has admitted he faked the data. Even if not, and even if one study did suggest it, one should look at the whole of the data and not just one study. There is NO evidence vaccinations are tied to autism. But saying so is not "hate speech". That is silly. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1f3e22a5-6aa5-4006-9196-2b79bd1b4414@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #329771 |
On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 10:49:04 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 10/30/15, 9:23 AM, in article n105d6$cai$2@dont-email.me, "Charmed Tuna" > <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > > > On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" > >>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> ... > >>>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because > >>>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking > >>>>> > >>>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try > >>>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do > >>>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage > >>>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary > >>>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into > >>>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing > >>>>> their religious views on their employees. > >>>>> > >>>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. > >>>> > >>>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" > >>> > >>> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. > >>> > >>>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of > >>>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? > >>> > >>> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound > >>> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists > >>> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as > >>> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education > >>> likely leads to more death. > >>> > >>>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of > >>>> marriage among homosexuals. > >>> > >>> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. > >>> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: > >>> > >>>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between > >>>> a > >>>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the > >>>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their > >>>> legs > >>>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early > >>>> 1930s > >>>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) > >>>> here. > >>>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) > >>> > >>> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying > >>> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting > >>> that. > >>> > >>>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. > >>>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women > >>>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual > >>>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. > >>> > >>> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may > >>> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, > >>> but in general there is not. > >>> > >>>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) > >>> > >>> No support for your claim here. > >>> > >>>> they are fined or even jailed. > >>> > >>> Can you point to those who have been jailed? > >>> > >>>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By > >>>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you > >>>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other > >>>> side > >>>> every now and then. > >>>> > >>>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion > >>>> (murder) > >>> > >>> You are confusing two things here. > >>> > >>>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in > >>>> it > >>>> to provide it. > >>> > >>> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can > >>> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and > >>> choose. That goes with the job. > >>> > >>>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will > >>>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) > >>> > >>> What is an "abortionist"? > >>> > >>> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto > >>> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot > >>> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... > >>> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. > >> > >> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we > >> all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. > >> women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. > >> men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this > >> 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death > >> because *they* are married. > > > > Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! > > He is making a generalization that is not true though. Please. While Christians definitely perform FGM, it's not nearly as pervasive as it is in the Muslim world. As to the stoning? Show me where modern Christians are down with that. Or what about the cutting off of hands for robbery? I'm all eyes, Snit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfghue0.ap@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329753 |
Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" >>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>>> >>>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >>>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>>> >>>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>>> >>>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" >>> >>> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. >>> >>>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >>> >>> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound >>> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists >>> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as >>> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education >>> likely leads to more death. >>> >>>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of >>>> marriage among homosexuals. >>> >>> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. >>> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: >>> >>>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a >>>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the >>>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs >>>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s >>>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. >>>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >>> >>> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying >>> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting >>> that. >>> >>>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. >>> >>> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may >>> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, >>> but in general there is not. >>> >>>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) >>> >>> No support for your claim here. >>> >>>> they are fined or even jailed. >>> >>> Can you point to those who have been jailed? >>> >>>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By >>>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you >>>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side >>>> every now and then. >>>> >>>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>>> (murder) >>> >>> You are confusing two things here. >>> >>>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it >>>> to provide it. >>> >>> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can >>> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and >>> choose. That goes with the job. >>> >>>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will >>>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) >>> >>> What is an "abortionist"? >>> >>> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto >>> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot >>> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... >>> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. >> >> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. > > Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! > >>> It is sickness. >> >> The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind. > > Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a > corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is > definitely a disease. > Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC the other day said that the phrase "hard worker" is racist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 13:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n108n7$r2h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #329782 |
On 2015-10-30 1:08 PM, owl wrote: > Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >> On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" >>>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> ... >>>>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>>>> >>>>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >>>>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>>>> >>>>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>>>> >>>>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" >>>> >>>> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. >>>> >>>>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>>>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >>>> >>>> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound >>>> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists >>>> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as >>>> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education >>>> likely leads to more death. >>>> >>>>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of >>>>> marriage among homosexuals. >>>> >>>> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. >>>> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: >>>> >>>>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a >>>>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the >>>>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs >>>>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s >>>>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. >>>>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >>>> >>>> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying >>>> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting >>>> that. >>>> >>>>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>>>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>>>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>>>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. >>>> >>>> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may >>>> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, >>>> but in general there is not. >>>> >>>>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) >>>> >>>> No support for your claim here. >>>> >>>>> they are fined or even jailed. >>>> >>>> Can you point to those who have been jailed? >>>> >>>>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By >>>>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you >>>>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side >>>>> every now and then. >>>>> >>>>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>>>> (murder) >>>> >>>> You are confusing two things here. >>>> >>>>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it >>>>> to provide it. >>>> >>>> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can >>>> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and >>>> choose. That goes with the job. >>>> >>>>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will >>>>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) >>>> >>>> What is an "abortionist"? >>>> >>>> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto >>>> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot >>>> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... >>>> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. >>> >>> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. >> >> Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! >> >>>> It is sickness. >>> >>> The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind. >> >> Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a >> corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is >> definitely a disease. >> > > Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC the other day said that the phrase > "hard worker" is racist. MTV informed me, last week, that Halloween was racist. -- Charmed Tuna
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgfheng983.a02@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329787 |
Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > On 2015-10-30 1:08 PM, owl wrote: >> Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >>> On 2015-10-30 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:29:30 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/15, 10:01 AM, in article n0tjcj$4lt$3@dont-email.me, "ronb" >>>>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>>>>> You're a crank on this subject. You speak in the abstract and because >>>>>>>> produce the facts. I don't have to speak in the abstract when talking >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Facts? They sabotage educational standards in many states. They try >>>>>>> to deny equal rights to certain parties EVERYWHERE. They actually do >>>>>>> KILL some people they disagree with badly enough. They try to sabotage >>>>>>> medical care because organizations providing it have a contrary >>>>>>> political point of view. They want to inject their religion into >>>>>>> government and public education. They advocate corporations imposing >>>>>>> their religious views on their employees. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They aren't beheading people but they aren't harmless either. >>>>>> >>>>>> How do "fundies" "sabotage educational standards in many states?" >>>>> >>>>> Pushing religion into science classes, for one. >>>>> >>>>>> You mean by insisting that their children are not force fed the religion of >>>>>> Evolutionism, or that they are not forced to deny their Creator? >>>>> >>>>> Evolution is not a religion. When you say absurd things like that you sound >>>>> like the Muslims you hate so much. See: Christians and Muslims extremists >>>>> are much the same in many ways. But, sure, doing that is not as bad as >>>>> directly killing people, though in the long run denying science education >>>>> likely leads to more death. >>>>> >>>>>> By denying equal rights to certain parties -- I assume you're speaking of >>>>>> marriage among homosexuals. >>>>> >>>>> That is one area. Sure. And it is utterly indefensible to deny equal rights. >>>>> But fundamentalists do that. Note, below, where YOU do: >>>>> >>>>>> I happen to agree with that. Marriage, specifically, is a contract between a >>>>>> man and a woman, its central purpose is procreation (families) -- hence the >>>>>> man and woman part. Protestants (including the "fundie" branch) cut their legs >>>>>> out from under themselves when they accepted birth control in the early 1930s >>>>>> ... but we're going far afield here (especially for a Linux newsgroup) here. >>>>>> (I'll be arguing with everybody.) >>>>> >>>>> But you show how you agree with Muslim fundamentalists. OK. Still, denying >>>>> equality to marriage is not as bad as killing. I have no problem granting >>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>>> But, what the heck. Let's talk about denying rights and those who do it. >>>>>> Homosexual activists are now demanding that businessmen and women >>>>>> directly oppose their beliefs by printing teeshirts with pro-homosexual >>>>>> messages, or by making cakes for homosexual "marriages," etc. >>>>> >>>>> I disagree with this, too. A business has a right to be bigoted. There may >>>>> be cases where the bigotry is so wide spread their is a role for government, >>>>> but in general there is not. >>>>> >>>>>> If they obey the unlawful dictates of judges (who think the can make law) >>>>> >>>>> No support for your claim here. >>>>> >>>>>> they are fined or even jailed. >>>>> >>>>> Can you point to those who have been jailed? >>>>> >>>>>> Right to our religious beliefs have always been fundamental in country. By >>>>>> forcing men and women to directly oppose their beliefs -- by threats -- you >>>>>> are destroying their rights. Perhaps you should look at it from the other side >>>>>> every now and then. >>>>>> >>>>>> As for sabotaging medical care ... what you're talking about is abortion >>>>>> (murder) >>>>> >>>>> You are confusing two things here. >>>>> >>>>>> and birth control -- and the government forcing those who don't believe in it >>>>>> to provide it. >>>>> >>>>> Who is being forced? If you have a job to provide medical care you can >>>>> either provide it or quit, but you have an obligation to not pick and >>>>> choose. That goes with the job. >>>>> >>>>>> Again, who is being forced to do something against their will >>>>>> here. The abortionists or the "fundies?" (Or the Catholics?) >>>>> >>>>> What is an "abortionist"? >>>>> >>>>> But on that issue you have the Christian right pushing their views onto >>>>> others, literally giving women fewer rights than dead bodies. You cannot >>>>> take an organ from a dead body to save another life without permission... >>>>> but the Christian right wants to tell women how to handle their OWN bodies. >>>> >>>> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death because *they* are married. >>> >>> Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! >>> >>>>> It is sickness. >>>> >>>> The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a disease, it's people like you they have in mind. >>> >>> Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a >>> corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is >>> definitely a disease. >>> >> >> Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC the other day said that the phrase >> "hard worker" is racist. > > MTV informed me, last week, that Halloween was racist. > I heard something today about "Israeli soldier" Halloween costumes are being protested by some left-wing group.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfghneu9v.a@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329794 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 10/30/15, 10:30 AM, in article sgfheng983.a02@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>>>> Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a >>>>> corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is >>>>> definitely a disease. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC the other day said that the phrase >>>> "hard worker" is racist. >>> >>> MTV informed me, last week, that Halloween was racist. >>> >> >> I heard something today about "Israeli soldier" Halloween costumes >> are being protested by some left-wing group. > > I am keeping things simple this year and doing a Conservative Halloween. The > first kid who comes to the door will get all the candy and I am trusting it > will trickle down to all the other kids in a fair way. > I guess the rest of the kids who come to your door will just wind up in the basement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 17:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fshgj40af.ep@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #329782 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 10/30/15, 10:08 AM, in article sfghue0.ap@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>>> Muslim women have it *so* much better in this respect, don't they? And as we >>>> all know, because of how "much the same" Christians and Muslims are, U.S. >>>> women have their genitalia mutilated and, then, when the hypocritical U.S. >>>> men spot a veil drop they pounce! They take turns gang raping this >>>> 'protected' woman with faulty plumbing only to later stone her to death >>>> because *they* are married. >>> >>> Beautifully said. We Christians are horrible, horrible people! >>> >>>>> It is sickness. >>>> >>>> The thing that is "sickness" here is your blatant, hypocritical politicizing >>>> and bogus false equivalencies as you overlook all kinds of realities to push >>>> that sick, dishonest agenda. When people mistakenly say liberalism is a >>>> disease, it's people like you they have in mind. >>> >>> Liberals, yesterday, told me that my saying that vaccines and a >>> corrupted agriculture have contributed to autism is hate speech. It is >>> definitely a disease. >>> >> >> Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC the other day said that the phrase >> "hard worker" is racist. > > I suspect you will NEVER support this, either. And you already have shown > you have no issue with misrepresenting the media. > > Owl: > ----- > salon.com recently published an article sympathetic to child > molestors. The Left is truly disgusting. > ----- > You lie about the article AND who has backed the view. > > In looking to see where you got your claim I did find a biased article from > mediaite.com which mischaracterizes a video they show: > > <http://mediaite.com/a/vhvtg> > > I am going to guess you saw this and your functional illiteracy is leading > you to say stupid things again. Note, I am not even defending what Melissa > Harris Perry said, at least based on the snippet it was completely out of > context and odd, but the article misrepresents what she said. And so do you > (and you misrepresent what the article says... it is like a sick, right wing > game of "telephone" to see who can misrepresent the world the most!) > Photos of slaves on the wall, whining about "privilege" ... implying that whitey can't use the phrase "hard worker" just because when she hears that phrase it reminds her of the autographed photo she has on her office wall of the last dindu that broke a sweat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web