Soheran wrote:I want her to get the Republican nomination so badly. It would be so much fun.
And it doesn't matter to me. I can safely follow the year of nonsence and mud-throwing from my little flat in the Netherlands

Advertisement
by Herrebrugh » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:28 am
Soheran wrote:I want her to get the Republican nomination so badly. It would be so much fun.


by Farnhamia » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:29 am

by Soheran » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:30 am
Herrebrugh wrote:And it doesn't matter to me. I can safely follow the year of nonsence and mud-throwing from my little flat in the Netherlands

by New England and The Maritimes » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:30 am
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Some people's opinions are based on rational observations, others base theirs on imaginative thinking. The reality-based community ought not to waste it's time refuting delusions.
by Herrebrugh » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:31 am
by Herrebrugh » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:32 am
Soheran wrote:Herrebrugh wrote:And it doesn't matter to me. I can safely follow the year of nonsence and mud-throwing from my little flat in the Netherlands
Well, if the Tea Party drives us into fiscal and financial disaster, it will probably hurt you too... but, yeah, I'm pretty jealous of people who don't have to worry (as much) about the Republican Party.


by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:36 am
Apollonesia wrote:Dyakovo wrote:1a: Prove your "God" exists.
1b: I thought your magical sky faerie was supposed to have created everything...
2: Prove homosexuality is a "sexual disfunction"...
3: Why should anyone one care about your religion's idea of sin?
4: That's nice... No-one cares.
5: Why not? Not all churches are homophobic.
6: No, it wouldn't. There is no right to discriminate.
1a & b.![]()
2. I already received a link to a psychologist's opinion. I don't need another. Nice try.
3. No reason.
4. Cute. Umad?
5. Pro-Gay church? How strange.

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:37 am
New England and The Maritimes wrote:
Asking the religious right to prove anything will get you nowhere. Unlike homosexuals, these bigots choose to be religious, they choose to interpret their religion in a manner that calls for denying human rights to those it dislikes, and they choose to hate others for not agreeing with them.
They deny it up and down, but they're all spiteful little worms deep inside. Religion is, to them, something to prove they are special, and better than others. It's an exclusionary tool to provide them a group of people to look down upon. That's the only reason they cling so tightly to their faith, so they can tell themselves they're great because they're part of their religion. Their self-esteem issues let them think they have no redeeming qualities, but they so desperately want to be "better" than someone else, so they maintain this spiteful outlook on the world, and to make sure nobody thinks badly of them, they claim to do so out of "love."
In the method these people use it, religion is a disease. It's a virus and a plague on society in the hands of the religious right.
Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:38 am

by Herrebrugh » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:38 am
Munathanura wrote:New England and The Maritimes wrote:
Asking the religious right to prove anything will get you nowhere. Unlike homosexuals, these bigots choose to be religious, they choose to interpret their religion in a manner that calls for denying human rights to those it dislikes, and they choose to hate others for not agreeing with them.
They deny it up and down, but they're all spiteful little worms deep inside. Religion is, to them, something to prove they are special, and better than others. It's an exclusionary tool to provide them a group of people to look down upon. That's the only reason they cling so tightly to their faith, so they can tell themselves they're great because they're part of their religion. Their self-esteem issues let them think they have no redeeming qualities, but they so desperately want to be "better" than someone else, so they maintain this spiteful outlook on the world, and to make sure nobody thinks badly of them, they claim to do so out of "love."
In the method these people use it, religion is a disease. It's a virus and a plague on society in the hands of the religious right.
As a Christian myself, I always feel obligated to try and show the religious right that they are being bigoted. I doubt it's done any good, but I still have to try.

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:38 am
Dyakovo wrote:1: Unsurprising that you have no response...
2: Where?
3: So why post it?
4: Nope.
5: Not strange at all. Not everyone is homophobic.
6: I see you had no response to this either...
Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:39 am
. I try my best.Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:
by Herrebrugh » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:40 am

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:40 am

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:41 am

by Apollonesia » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:42 am
Dyakovo wrote:Apollonesia wrote:1a & b.![]()
2. I already received a link to a psychologist's opinion. I don't need another. Nice try.
3. No reason.
4. Cute. Umad?
5. Pro-Gay church? How strange.
1: Unsurprising that you have no response...
2: Where?
3: So why post it?
4: Nope.
5: Not strange at all. Not everyone is homophobic.
6: I see you had no response to this either...
New England and The Maritimes wrote:Asking the religious right to prove anything will get you nowhere.

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:43 am
I already received a link to a psychologist's opinion. I don't need another. Nice try.
Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:

by New England and The Maritimes » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:45 am
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Some people's opinions are based on rational observations, others base theirs on imaginative thinking. The reality-based community ought not to waste it's time refuting delusions.

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:46 am

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:47 am

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:49 am
.Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:51 am

by Munathanura » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:52 am
Tahar Joblis wrote:Your "heartfelt recommendation," i.e., baseless accusation of misogyny, is noted with all the respect that is due. Which corresponds to that due a $100 billion Zimbabwean banknote. :eyebrow:

by Dyakovo » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:56 am

by Farnhamia » Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:43 am

Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: American Legionaries, Benjium, Cannot think of a name, DutchFormosa, Fartsniffage, Galloism, Gravlen, Hispida, Ifreann, Necroghastia, Pizza Friday Forever91, Rusozak, Ryemarch, The Chinese Soviet, The Crimson Isles, Trump Almighty
Advertisement