The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Formerly Once-Ler on December 06, 2017, 10:20:40 am
-
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/court-records-suggest-roy-moore-dated-wife-while-she-was-still-married/article/2642679 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/court-records-suggest-roy-moore-dated-wife-while-she-was-still-married/article/2642679)
Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore's account of when he began dating his wife Kayla would place the start of their courtship before her divorce from her first husband, according to court documents.
This comes as the Moore campaign's defense of the retired judge against multiple allegations of sexual misconduct hinges on disputing minute details of the accusers' versions of events.
On Tuesday afternoon, the Washington Examiner asked Moore's campaign to explain apparent contradictions between his account of his relationship with Kayla Kisor and information contained in public records.
“Regardless of when they met, Judge and Kayla did not date while she was still with her ex-husband or legally married,†campaign spokesman Brett Doster responded by email.
More at link :tree3:
-
Since child molestation is a resume enhancer for the Alabama GOP...I gotta figure dating a married woman is worth a couple percentage points.
Isn't there a Commandment about this?
-
Isn't there a Commandment about this?
There's certainly one about bearing false witness.
-
Still trying to get rid of Moore, I see. Looks like bringing up all those women to make accusations has fizzled, so now they're looking for more dirt.
YAWN!
-
There's certainly one about bearing false witness.
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO5JNfju3t8#)
Good point about Moore being a huge liar on top of an adulterer and child molester.
-
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO5JNfju3t8#)
Good point about Moore being a huge liar on top of an adulterer and child molester.
Such a good Christian...
-
Such a good Christian...
The fact is that Moore and his supporters aren't Christians. They may go to church and quote the bible freely but they show a complete and utter disregard for their final judgement. That tells me that they don't really believe there will be a God judging them. They're just like every other liberal on the planet who believes they should do whatever they want because there will be no consequences. After all they've spent the past couple of years supporting a man they know is an immoral degenerate liar and its becoming easier for them.
I may not be the greatest Christian but I do understand that I alone am responsible for my soul. As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
-
"Suggest" - code for Fake News. i.e. We don't know if this is true but....
Journalism at its finest
-
It's not called *dating* when you are married..it is called *adultery*
-
"Suggest" - code for Fake News. i.e. We don't know if this is true but....
They have to say that because the documents point to a definite timeframe, but that Ol' Roy.....you know he sometimes can't clearly recall those pesky details from so long ago. Especially when they're inconvenient.
-
It's amazing what minutiae the press can dig up on a low-level politician running for Senate and they can't find anything about Clinton, Comey, Mueller, Franken, etc., ad infinitum.
-
It's amazing what minutiae the press can dig up on a low-level politician running for Senate and they can't find anything about Clinton, Comey, Mueller, Franken, etc., ad infinitum.
Yeah! Quite amazing indeed!
-
"Suggest" - code for Fake News. i.e. We don't know if this is true but....
Journalism at its finest
It's certainly what passes for "journalism" these days! If you can't find what you need to advance the agenda make it up!
-
It's not called *dating* when you are married..it is called *adultery*
Well, he wasn't the guilty one, then. Heck, if you consider Matthew, the fact that he was dating a woman who already had a kid with someone else was an act of adultery—on HER part.
Besides, he was 37 years old and still single. It's clear this is written by inside-the-beltway types who think there are all these thirtysomething single women floating around everywhere. There aren't, and if you live outside those beltways, they don't exist. I know from experience.
They attacked him for dating 17 and 18 year olds, and now they're attacking him for dating a woman in her 20s. Who did they expect Roy Moore to date? A blow-up doll?!
-
And adultery means "having sex", not "going out". I'm married and I go places with other women. We just don't touch each other (ewww).
-
IF he was having sex with a married woman, it was adultery on his part as well.
Biblical morals don't adapt with the situation just because you want it to.
(Everyone see the big "IF" and take note, please).
-
And adultery means "having sex", not "going out". I'm married and I go places with other women. We just don't touch each other (ewww).
Depends on who you ask. The Vice President thinks that going out with a woman not your wife is adultery.
-
I expected another shoe to drop this week prior to the election, but if this is all they got I guess they'll be swearing Sen Moore in pretty soon.
-
Well, he wasn't the guilty one, then. Heck, if you consider Matthew, the fact that he was dating a woman who already had a kid with someone else was an act of adultery—on HER part.
Do you know details on her divorce? Was it filed by her or by her ex?
Besides, he was 37 years old and still single. It's clear this is written by inside-the-beltway types who think there are all these thirtysomething single women floating around everywhere. There aren't, and if you live outside those beltways, they don't exist. I know from experience.
You're exactly right.
They attacked him for dating 17 and 18 year olds, and now they're attacking him for dating a woman in her 20s. Who did they expect Roy Moore to date? A blow-up doll?!
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
-
Does anybody know the exact timeline of Reagan's courtships and his first and second marriages?
-
Does anybody know the exact timeline of Reagan's courtships and his first and second marriages?
Yes.
-
Do you know details on her divorce? Was it filed by her or by her ex?
You're exactly right.
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
The problem is that FAR too many people are so easily stampeded to conclusions not born out by any actual evidence!
-
Do you know details on her divorce? Was it filed by her or by her ex?
You're exactly right.
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
Psychoanalyse till the cows come home. Call me names, its ok.
All I want is a reliable senate vote for the next SCOTUS pick, immigration reform vote, tax bill, etc etc. If thats not important to you, thats OK too.
-
Does anybody know the exact timeline of Reagan's courtships and his first and second marriages?
Post Trump, Reagan's sins are irrelevant.
The bar is very, very, very low now.........
(In fact, it can't go much lower, can it?)
-
Post Trump, Reagan's sins are irrelevant.
The bar is very, very, very low now.........
(In fact, it can't go much lower, can it?)
LOL. You forget about Warren Harding? John Kennedy? What exactly is this bar you speak of? The one hidden by the MSM of the day to hide the truth.
-
Do you know details on her divorce? Was it filed by her or by her ex?
You're exactly right.
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
So now ... everyone who doesn't believe all the lame BS about Moore is a fanatical follower?
Is this the most important thing in your Life. Little odd bits of gossip that keep cropping up here about a Senatorial candidate.
-
Since child molestation is a resume enhancer for the Alabama GOP...I gotta figure dating a married woman is worth a couple percentage points.
Isn't there a Commandment about this?
Are you insane? Or just obsessed? Cannot we drop this?
You are venturing into dangerous territory here.
-
They attacked him for dating 17 and 18 year olds, and now they're attacking him for dating a woman in her 20s. Who did they expect Roy Moore to date? A blow-up doll?!
He couldn't believe his luck, meeting up with the recital girl once again. At last, he could fulfill his very own American Beauty moment he had fantasized about for years.
-
Careful Once-Ler you're venturing into dangerous territory here. :silly:
-
Are you insane? Or just obsessed? Cannot we drop this?
You are venturing into dangerous territory here.
I'll take "obsessed" for $500, Alex!
-
LOL. You forget about Warren Harding? John Kennedy? What exactly is this bar you speak of? The one hidden by the MSM of the day to hide the truth.
I'm speaking of recent history when the public knew of the vile behavior.
The MSM conveniently hid the dirt on JFK to make their "Camelot" imagery look real. If the public had known what JFK was really like, he never, ever would have been elected.
60 years later someone equally as bad got elected.
The bar for public approval of debauchery has dropped through the floor.
It's a fact, Frank. Laugh all you want, but it's a fact.
-
If this didn't happen in the last 20 years, I don't care. It's just not relevant. Kennedy killed a woman and we almost made him President.
Show me a recent pattern of behavior. Al Franken was doing drugs with John Belushi but that has no bearing on his behavior today
-
60 years later someone equally as bad got elected.
That'd be 2020. Are you from the future? That would be awesome!
-
I'm speaking of recent history when the public knew of the vile behavior.
The MSM conveniently hid the dirt on JFK to make their "Camelot" imagery look real. If the public had known what JFK was really like, he never, ever would have been elected.
60 years later someone equally as bad got elected.
The bar for public approval of debauchery has dropped through the floor.
It's a fact, Frank. Laugh all you want, but it's a fact.
I've seen interviews with political operatives and media types who were involved in the Kennedy/Nixon race. They admit to fooling the public into beliving that Kennedy was this young vigorous athletic democrat and Nixon was an old man on his last legs. In reality Nixon was only a few years older and in considerably better health. In televised debates they gave Kennedy soft filtered stage lighting but Nixon got harsh lighting literally 3 feet over his head to make him sweat and appear older.
Today things are worse but the public is also worse. They want crap flinging monkeys that reflect their lack of values and decency.
-
Oh, the horror!
-
The MSM conveniently hid the dirt on JFK to make their "Camelot" imagery look real. If the public had known what JFK was really like, he never, ever would have been elected.
60 years later someone equally as bad got elected.
Obama was much much worse, and it was only 48 years after Nixon's election which they gave to Kennedy.
-
That'd be 2020. Are you from the future? That would be awesome!
I was rounding up to make it sound less pedantic. :dx1:
But I'll correct it for the record.
56 years later, we elected someone as bad, knowing full well he was as bad, and not only that, he was nominated by the party that was supposed to care about such things.
The country is swirling the moral toilet bowl.......
And those of us who care are made fun of, even by conservatives. :shrug:
-
I was rounding up to make it sound less pedantic. :dx1:
Man.......I was hoping for some stock tips or the Powerball numbers. :crying:
-
I was rounding up to make it sound less pedantic. :dx1:
But I'll correct it for the record.
56 years later, we elected someone as bad, knowing full well he was as bad, and not only that, he was nominated by the party that was supposed to care about such things.
The country is swirling the moral toilet bowl.......
And those of us who care are made fun of, even by conservatives. :shrug:
I wouldn't say pedantic, maybe just a bit OCD. :tongue2:
-
All I want is a reliable senate vote for the next SCOTUS pick, immigration reform vote, tax bill, etc etc. If thats not important to you, thats OK too.
Today things are worse but the public is also worse. They want crap flinging monkeys that reflect their lack of values and decency.
I'll let these two quotations sit next to each other for maximum impact.
-
I've seen interviews with political operatives and media types who were involved in the Kennedy/Nixon race. They admit to fooling the public into beliving that Kennedy was this young vigorous athletic democrat and Nixon was an old man on his last legs. In reality Nixon was only a few years older and in considerably better health. In televised debates they gave Kennedy soft filtered stage lighting but Nixon got harsh lighting literally 3 feet over his head to make him sweat and appear older.
Today things are worse but the public is also worse. They want crap flinging monkeys that reflect their lack of values and decency.
Couldn't agree more.
-
Man.......I was hoping for some stock tips or the Powerball numbers. :crying:
Hmmmm............. I'm a pretty unlucky person, so you'd probably better go elsewhere for that. :laugh:
-
I wouldn't say pedantic, maybe just a bit OCD. :tongue2:
That too. :laugh:
-
Starting wars, leaving the GOP for dead, putting Christians in harm's way, believe me morality can be measured in more than one way. So good luck if one is trying to pin this on the admin. Concerned Women of America and others say is the most pro-life administration ever, giving back and standing up for religious freedoms. Merry Christmas not Happy Holidays, Matthew was a tax collector.
-
There's certainly one about bearing false witness.
Good point about Moore being a huge liar on top of an adulterer and child molester.
QED
-
I was rounding up to make it sound less pedantic. :dx1:
But I'll correct it for the record.
56 years later, we elected someone as bad, knowing full well he was as bad, and not only that, he was nominated by the party that was supposed to care about such things.
The country is swirling the moral toilet bowl.......
And those of us who care are made fun of, even by conservatives. :shrug:
Fortunately God doesn't do collective damnation. They can point and laugh all they want but there will one day be a very high cost.
-
If we held everyone to the absolute purist standards being bantered about there would be no one left to run anything.
-
If we held everyone to the absolute purist standards being bantered about there would be no one left to run anything.
Heard today on radio that some say that women are going to take a hit in the workplace, due to all this #metoo tweets.
Nobody will want to be alone in an office setting with any woman....or else we'll see cameras in every office.
-
Heard today on radio that some say that women are going to take a hit in the workplace, due to all this #metoo tweets.
Nobody will want to be alone in an office setting with any woman....or else we'll see cameras in every office.
Or woman won't be hired in the first place, why risk the trouble?
-
Or woman won't be hired in the first place, why risk the trouble?
It's not the women causing the trouble.
-
It's not the women causing the trouble.
But as long as the men are doing the hiring....
-
If we held everyone to the absolute purist standards being bantered about there would be no one left to run anything.
As I remember, guys found out how far girls would go, by trying. I believe it has largely been that way from early days, notwithstanding puritanical claims of the contrary.
-
Maybe I'm off on this, but from my personal experience ALL women start dating after the divorce papers are filed. I'm confused as to what the issue is here? I think they are saying that he started dating her before the divorce was 'finalized'. But again, from my experience this is totally common and completely natural.
I have never known any woman to wait for the divorce to be finalized before they start dating again. I must be missing something?
-
But as long as the men are doing the hiring....
As long as men are doing the hiring, women will be hired.
-
As I remember, guys found out how far girls would go, by trying. I believe it has largely been that way from early days, notwithstanding puritanical claims of the contrary.
And, probably at least a few of these cases are along those lines. Many are not.
-
It's not the women causing the trouble.
Perhaps more so than you might think. Women often have no understanding of male sex drive. The mere presence of women often causes men to go into "pursuit mode", and because women do not have such strong and often difficult to control urges, they don't grasp how much pressure this puts on a male.
I recall reading several years ago an account written by a woman who had to take testosterone to treat some sort of medical condition. She remarked that she had never experienced anything like it, and she then felt an over powering urge to "go our and rape somebody."
She said she then had a better understanding of why men were so aggressive sexually.
Women will often interact casually as if they don't have a care in the world, but men sometimes look at women as if someone was parading a banquet in front of them while they are starving.
There is a reason we have historically tried to keep male and female vocations separate. It causes problems, and these problems are inherent in the nature of men and women.
-
Perhaps more so than you might think. Women often have no understanding of male sex drive. The mere presence of women often causes men to go into "pursuit mode", and because women do not have such strong and often difficult to control urges, they don't grasp how much pressure this puts on a male.
I recall reading several years ago an account written by a woman who had to take testosterone to treat some sort of medical condition. She remarked that she had never experienced anything like it, and she then felt an over powering urge to "go our and rape somebody."
She said she then had a better understanding of why men were so aggressive sexually.
Women will often interact casually as if they don't have a care in the world, but men sometimes look at women as if someone was parading a banquet in front of them while they are starving.
There is a reason we have historically tried to keep male and female vocations separate. It causes problems, and these problems are inherent in the nature of men and women.
Nope, and I don't care. Keep your pants on and your hands to yourself in the workplace, male or female.
-
Nope, and I don't care. Keep your pants on and your hands to yourself in the workplace, male or female.
As if that is a viable solution. Normal men pursue women. This is what they are wired to do. Telling them to "stop it", is just naive.
This is where theory breaks down against reality.
-
As if that is a viable solution. Normal men pursue women. This is what they are wired to do. Telling them to "stop it", is just naive.
This is where theory breaks down against reality.
Naive? No, it's not. Men should act like adults at work.
-
And adultery means "having sex", not "going out". I'm married and I go places with other women. We just don't touch each other (ewww).
Well, there is more to the Moore story, here, please note the dates involved.
Divorce records obtained by the Washington Examiner show that Kayla, however, had not yet even filed for divorce from her first husband, John Charles Heald, by the time she caught Moore’s attention at the Christmas gathering. In fact, Kayla and Heald had only just separated on Dec. 1, 1984, two weeks before her and Moore’s serendipitous introduction.
The same records show Kayla filed for divorce at a courthouse in Floyd County, Ga., on Dec. 28, 1984. The divorce was finalized nearly four months later on April 19, and a permanent custody judgment was issued on Jan. 9, 1989.
So, he met her after they were separated, they met at a Christmas gathering. Now, a respectable woman isn't going to just go and jump into bed with some guy she just met (feel free to argue if you want to), and while they may have spent time getting to know each other without engaging in sexual activity until after the divorce, there are apparently a buttload of self-righteous horndogs around who just can't see that happening.
It seems pretty normal to me that she would not be in a huge hurry to get hooked up again, if for no other reason than maintaining appearances. Once more, the allegation assumes things which are not in evidence.
-
As I remember, guys found out how far girls would go, by trying. I believe it has largely been that way from early days, notwithstanding puritanical claims of the contrary.
I was ‘active’ in late 60’s and 70’s. I know what high school and college kids did and most were getting their freak on without much angst or overthinking it.
Now I can’t speak for the others, but I was a gentleman about it. I understood where the lines were. I found it was always best to approach the female cautiously until a clear signal was established; though – and here’s where it got tricky – sometimes their lips said no but the vibe was definitely yes.
Long as we’re being open, we did have a name for them, though I won’t say it here.
-
As if that is a viable solution. Normal men pursue women. This is what they are wired to do. Telling them to "stop it", is just naive.
This is where theory breaks down against reality.
Reality is that it is bad policy to get laid where you get paid, unless you are a gigolo.
-
I was ‘active’ in late 60’s and 70’s. I know what high school and college kids did and most were getting their freak on without much angst or overthinking it.
Now I can’t speak for the others, but I was a gentleman about it. I understood where the lines were. I found it was always best to approach the female cautiously until a clear signal was established; though – and here’s where it got tricky – sometimes their lips said no but the vibe was definitely yes.
Long as we’re being open, we did have a name for them, though I won’t say it here.
This.
While the vibe may have been different, the lips spoke the rules. Going beyond that was inviting problems, even then.
-
There's certainly one about bearing false witness.
:amen: Certainly more than one here who does not care about such.
-
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
That doesn't seem true at all. By far and away, the argument here has been for some actual evidence - Which even yet is not forthcoming. It takes more than tongue-waggin to tear a man's honor down.
-
That doesn't seem true at all. By far and away, the argument here has been for some actual evidence - Which even yet is not forthcoming. It takes more than tongue-waggin to tear a man's honor down.
Well, they got a bunch of flapping lips, too! :shrug:
-
That doesn't seem true at all. By far and away, the argument here has been for some actual evidence - Which even yet is not forthcoming. It takes more than tongue-waggin to tear a man's honor down.
Right! I am amazed just how many here would go "All In" on an "October" surprise. The toungue wagers have certainly fallen of the charts with me for considerin' any of there posts with any credibility.
I am sure that will not bother 'Em. But it sure cuts down scanning a thread when you can just passover posts from such.
-
The fact is that Moore and his supporters aren't Christians. They may go to church and quote the bible freely but they show a complete and utter disregard for their final judgement. That tells me that they don't really believe there will be a God judging them. They're just like every other liberal on the planet who believes they should do whatever they want because there will be no consequences. After all they've spent the past couple of years supporting a man they know is an immoral degenerate liar and its becoming easier for them.
I may not be the greatest Christian but I do understand that I alone am responsible for my soul. As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
Oh....brrrrother. The sanctimony (and BS) is really getting thick & deep in here today.
Idiotic, to say the least.
-
The fact is that Moore and his supporters aren't Christians. They may go to church and quote the bible freely but they show a complete and utter disregard for their final judgement. That tells me that they don't really believe there will be a God judging them. They're just like every other liberal on the planet who believes they should do whatever they want because there will be no consequences. After all they've spent the past couple of years supporting a man they know is an immoral degenerate liar and its becoming easier for them.
I may not be the greatest Christian but I do understand that I alone am responsible for my soul. As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
I don't know about the one you read, but my Bible has many cautions about spreading rumors and bearing false witness.
-
I don't know about the one you read, but my Bible has many cautions about spreading rumors and bearing false witness.
And.... about judging others (lest ye be judged)....
Which is why it borders on the absurd for someone to allude to them being such a "good Christian"... even while engaging in these same behaviors in judging and accusing others.
-
Oh....brrrrother. The sanctimony (and BS) is really getting thick & deep in here today.
Idiotic, to say the least.
As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
Maybe he should convert to Catholicism, then he can do what I do and keep Father on speed dial.
-
As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
Maybe he should convert to Catholicism, then he can do what I do and keep Father on speed dial.
Lol... I doubt that in his case that would work. It's that 'ongoing' kinda thing that makes it quite probably unredeemable. I think you have to "go and sin no more" in order for forgiveness to work....
even in Catholicism. ^-^
-
Lol... I doubt that in his case that would work. It's that 'ongoing' kinda thing that makes it quite probably unredeemable. I think you have to "go and sin no more" in order for forgiveness to work....
even in Catholicism. ^-^
Actually, if my Alter Boy years taught me anything... besides the difference betwixt good wine and bad... yes my years of service covered three different Priests. Leaned at a tender age Gallo from German Whites. Felt it was my duty to taste test in order to protect Father from any nefarious assassination plots from the Baptist.
Anywho I digress. It is not so much, "now go forth and sin no more", as it is you are truly contrite and feel what you have done is a sin. If we were perfect... maybe. But we are not... That is why Confession is every Saturday. Twice during Lent.
-
It's amazing what minutiae the press can dig up on a low-level politician running for Senate and they can't find anything about Clinton, Comey, Mueller, Franken, etc., ad infinitum.
:amen:
-
Naive? No, it's not. Men should act like adults at work.
A concept that seems obvious to adults.......
But I guess we are being forced to accept that since, "Boys will be boys," that adult men are not capable of controlling themselves.
(I know a heck of a lot of men who would object to the idea that they were not in control of their hormones. But I guarantee that these "men can't help themselves" apologists are probably are the first to make fun of women for theirs. Ironic, no??)
-
Naive? No, it's not. Men should act like adults at work.
Men are just doing what they are wired to do. If they can't control themselves, it's because a harlot put them in that position.
Or so the muzzies tell us.
-
Men are just doing what they are wired to do. If they can't control themselves, it's because a harlot put them in that position.
Or so the muzzies tell us.
And women slapped men if too fresh. And that was that. Has worked for millennia. Only recently has there been a problem.
P.S. If they giggled while slapping it meant try again. Was called "playin' hard to get".
-
Well, he wasn't the guilty one, then. Heck, if you consider Matthew, the fact that he was dating a woman who already had a kid with someone else was an act of adultery—on HER part.
Besides, he was 37 years old and still single. It's clear this is written by inside-the-beltway types who think there are all these thirtysomething single women floating around everywhere. There aren't, and if you live outside those beltways, they don't exist. I know from experience.
They attacked him for dating 17 and 18 year olds, and now they're attacking him for dating a woman in her 20s. Who did they expect Roy Moore to date? A blow-up doll?!
@jmyrlefuller
So a man who dates a married woman is innocent? Are you for real?
-
Are you for real?
He is for real. He uses his own picture as his avatar.
-
And adultery means "having sex", not "going out". I'm married and I go places with other women. We just don't touch each other (ewww).
@Restored
You thinking about marrying those women?
-
Are you insane? Or just obsessed? Cannot we drop this?
You are venturing into dangerous territory here.
@Emjay
So the few who are speaking out against the molester are insane. I guess you think all the pro-Moore posting should go unchallenged—-a repeat of last year’s Trump safe space?
Lol, nope.
-
He is for real. He uses his own picture as his avatar.
I thought yours was real, too, since Selma said this last year after her airplane incident...
I mixed alcohol with medication, and that caused me to black out and led me to say and do things that I deeply regret.
What tipped me off that it couldn't really be you was the 'deeply regret' part.
-
I thought yours was real, too, since Selma said this last year after her airplane incident...
I mixed alcohol with medication, and that caused me to black out and led me to say and do things that I deeply regret.
What tipped me off that it couldn't really be you was the 'deeply regret' part.
I've gone a little down hill since that avatar pic....
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/06/21/2F19F2B500000578-3348410-image-a-73_1449438401047.jpg)
-
I've gone a little down hill since that avatar pic....
That's OK. The only image I ever remember is the Cruel Intentions scene with SMG, anyway......
-
So now ... everyone who doesn't believe all the lame BS about Moore is a fanatical follower?
There are many great websites that can help you gain a bit of understanding of basic logic. What you ask does not follow from what I wrote.
-
If we held everyone to the absolute purist standards being bantered about there would be no one left to run anything.
@RetBobbyMI
There it is...I was wondering how long it would take for the p word to come up.
Moore could announce he leads a nighttime life as a furry, and the mess that conservatives have become would shrug and say “so what.â€
-
But as long as the men are doing the hiring....
@dfwgator
Why do you assume men are doing the hiring?
-
@dfwgator
Why do you assume men are doing the hiring?
Because it's mans work honey.
-
Perhaps more so than you might think. Women often have no understanding of male sex drive. The mere presence of women often causes men to go into "pursuit mode", and because women do not have such strong and often difficult to control urges, they don't grasp how much pressure this puts on a male.
I recall reading several years ago an account written by a woman who had to take testosterone to treat some sort of medical condition. She remarked that she had never experienced anything like it, and she then felt an over powering urge to "go our and rape somebody."
She said she then had a better understanding of why men were so aggressive sexually.
Women will often interact casually as if they don't have a care in the world, but men sometimes look at women as if someone was parading a banquet in front of them while they are starving.
There is a reason we have historically tried to keep male and female vocations separate. It causes problems, and these problems are inherent in the nature of men and women.
@DiogenesLamp
Will you stop? This isn’t 1860. Women have a pretty clear understanding of the male sex drive and the effects of testosterone. We get it.
But it’s no excuse at all for not controlling yourself. Unless you want to go a step further and put women in burkhas because, like Muslim men, the sight of female flesh means you can’t be responsible.
-
As if that is a viable solution. Normal men pursue women. This is what they are wired to do. Telling them to "stop it", is just naive.
This is where theory breaks down against reality.
@DiogenesLamp
So men are like apes who have no self control, even in the workplace?
-
@DiogenesLamp Will you stop? This isn’t 1860.
Ohhh......I get it now.
It was the War of Sex Session. I was hearing it wrong.
-
And women slapped men if too fresh. And that was that. Has worked for millennia. Only recently has there been a problem.
P.S. If they giggled while slapping it meant try again. Was called "playin' hard to get".
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
-
He is for real. He uses his own picture as his avatar.
@ ****slapping
-
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
I think it's lame. Buy a gun a learn to shoot.
-
Because it's mans work honey.
@Frank Cannon
What if the work is wimmens work?
-
Ohhh......I get it now.
It was the War of Sex Session. I was hearing it wrong.
@edpc
LOL
-
@Frank Cannon
What if the work is wimmens work?
Then you hire Kate Bush?
-
I think it's lame. Buy a gun a learn to shoot.
@Frank Cannon
Like that little ladies’ gun Moore flashes when he’s onstage?
-
@Frank Cannon
What if the work is wimmens work?
I don't know. Whatever you do in the kitchen is your business.
-
@Frank Cannon
Like that little ladies’ gun Moore flashes when he’s onstage?
Absolutely. You ever try and conceal carry a 357?
-
Then you hire Kate Bush?
Now see, I had to look that up!
I’m going to bed, y’all. I’ll bother you tomorrow.
-
Now see, I had to look that up!
I only know it because I was forced to see this in 1988........
(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMzE2OTAyNTAxMF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNTUzNTcxMTE@._V1_SX214_.jpg)
-
Are you insane? Or just obsessed? Cannot we drop this?
Good job demonstrating how sane and reasonable you are.
:thumbsup:
-
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/walkingdead/images/6/67/Season_eight_carl_grimes.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/350?cb=20171205030104[img][)
-
Good job demonstrating how sane and reasonable you are.
Actually, the 'cannot we drop this' made me think she was short, green, and a master of The Force.
-
And.... about judging others (lest ye be judged)....
Which is why it borders on the absurd for someone to allude to them being such a "good Christian"... even while engaging in these same behaviors in judging and accusing others.
Good grief, we as Christians are to "judge rightly"...
The verse you paraphrase could more aptly be shortened to "judge not... ye hypocrite".... if quoted for reference..
Who is not to judge? A person doing the same thing as what they are accusing others of doing.
On subject, I can not accuse Roy of wrongly dating younger women, I did it myself. Married one, 25+ years now. She even dated a fellow older than myself before I met her. Yes, talking about Alabama too.
-
What if the work is wimmens work?
Then you hire Kate Bush?
I got the reference, got the posters of Kate from college to prove it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TupvVpxY_U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TupvVpxY_U)
-
Wife was watching TV other day, (I don't watch much TV now days) and a commercial for Doug Jones comes on. The commercial claimed Roy Moore defended sexual predators while he was judge. Made me mad, but I could find nothing about the cases to see if Doug Jones was telling the truth.
I found this today though, and even liberal politifact admits Doug's commercial was a lie.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/)
Now I am tired of the lies. If Doug wants to talk about something, talk about defending the KKK fellow or when Doug defended UAB university (and most their football team) against a rape charges from a 14 y/o little brilliant red head girl that got put in a bad position and was not watched as they promised to do.
I will let ESPN tell the story.... Warning, very sad story to read. Yep I warned you.
http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html (http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html)
-
@Restored
You thinking about marrying those women?
If they ever get hold of some real money, darn tootin'.
-
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/court-records-suggest-roy-moore-dated-wife-while-she-was-still-married/article/2642679 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/court-records-suggest-roy-moore-dated-wife-while-she-was-still-married/article/2642679)
Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore's account of when he began dating his wife Kayla would place the start of their courtship before her divorce from her first husband, according to court documents.
The HORRORS! I say,"STRING HIM UP!"
Good thing we have all those moral Dims to remind us of these horrendous crimes,huh?
Moore is about 4 quarts low on a 5 quart sanity system,and shit like THIS is what people want to rant and rave about?
Sometimes it seems like a contest to see who can "out-crazy the other",the Dims or the alleged Republicans,doesn't it?
Especially when you consider that Moore's main claim to fame is illegally installing a "10 Commandments" display in a courthouse,and his most rabid supporters amount to The American Taliban that get wood at the thought of "puttin GAWD back in charge!"
-
They have to say that because the documents point to a definite timeframe, but that Ol' Roy.....you know he sometimes can't clearly recall those pesky details from so long ago. Especially when they're inconvenient.
@edpc
It creeps me out to support that religious buffoon,but I'd like to see YOU prove with witnesses and an established time line to alibi charges that hit YOU out of the blue from 30 or 40 years ago,and essentially HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.
You couldn't. Nobody could.
-
It's amazing what minutiae the press can dig up on a low-level politician running for Senate and they can't find anything about Clinton, Comey, Mueller, Franken, etc., ad infinitum.
@Sanguine
That's easy enough to understand. Nobody is going to end up as rotting meat in a dumpster for investigating Moore.
-
The HORRORS! I say,"STRING HIM UP!"
Good thing we have all those moral Dims to remind us of these horrendous crimes,huh?
Moore is about 4 quarts low on a 5 quart sanity system,and shit like THIS is what people want to rant and rave about?
Sometimes it seems like a contest to see who can "out-crazy the other",the Dims or the alleged Republicans,doesn't it?
Especially when you consider that Moore's main claim to fame is illegally installing a "10 Commandments" display in a courthouse,and his most rabid supporters amount to The American Taliban that get wood at the thought of "puttin GAWD back in charge!"
Agree 100%, SP. This outrage at dating his future wife while her divorce was still pending is just silly. What's not silly is Moore's penchant for being removed from office for lawlessness. THAT's what should disqualify him from office in the eyes of conservatives.
-
Well, he wasn't the guilty one, then. Heck, if you consider Matthew, the fact that he was dating a woman who already had a kid with someone else was an act of adultery—on HER part.
@jmyrlefuller
Never mind Matthew,let's take this to "the boss" and consider that Gawd hissef impregnated a woman married to another man to create Jesus.
Assuming of course that you can suspend reality believe that mythical,superstitious nonsense to start with.
-
Depends on who you ask. The Vice President thinks that going out with a woman not your wife is adultery.
@Frank Cannon
The VP will believe anything he needs to believe that might put him in the WH. He's nothing more than just one more politically opportunistic weasel with the morals of Machiavelli.
-
The problem is, Roy Moore and many of his fanatical followers seem to take a holier-than-thou approach to life. The perception is that they show little compassion, understanding, and mercy for those in rough straits...but then aren't so perfect in their own lives. This looks like hypocrisy.
@Suppressed
Hatred is their reason to live. They are all,male AND female,"Church Ladies" that will smile and say "Bless your heart!" while twisting the knife in your back.
NOBODY epitomizes the true meaning of hypocrisy and jealousy than these people. They just can't stand the thought that somebody,somewhere,is having a good time.
-
@jmyrlefuller
Never mind Matthew,let's take this to "the boss" and consider that Gawd hissef impregnated a woman married to another man to create Jesus.
Assuming of course that you can suspend reality believe that mythical,superstitious nonsense to start with.
Pete, I don't make fun of your beliefs, I'd appreciate it if you would return the courtesy.
-
Pete, I don't make fun of your beliefs, I'd appreciate it if you would return the courtesy.
@Sanguine
I am merely stating what is accepted as being Biblical Fact. I'm just not sugar-coating it.
-
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
@CatherineofAragon
I really don't know but My guess is that your are pretty much immune to that sort of thing now!
-
@Sanguine
I am merely stating what is accepted as being Biblical Fact. I'm just not sugar-coating it.
And, you know that's not what I was talking about.
-
Assuming of course that you can suspend reality believe that mythical,superstitious nonsense to start with.
Said the man who believes something doesn't exist.
-
Wife was watching TV other day, (I don't watch much TV now days) and a commercial for Doug Jones comes on. The commercial claimed Roy Moore defended sexual predators while he was judge. Made me mad, but I could find nothing about the cases to see if Doug Jones was telling the truth.
I found this today though, and even liberal politifact admits Doug's commercial was a lie.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/)
Now I am tired of the lies. If Doug wants to talk about something, talk about defending the KKK fellow or when Doug defended UAB university (and most their football team) against a rape charges from a 14 y/o little brilliant red head girl that got put in a bad position and was not watched as they promised to do.
I will let ESPN tell the story.... Warning, very sad story to read. Yep I warned you.
http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html (http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html)
Doug Jones is the exact type of POS plaintiff trial lawyer who has no business ever being within a mile of any elective office! JMHO!
-
Naive? No, it's not. Men should act like adults at work.
Of course they should, but I don't think you have given my point any consideration before rejecting it outright.
I certainly don't believe you put as much thought into responding to it as I put into formulating it.
I'm just going to put it aside now. It's not terribly relevant anyways.
-
@Emjay
So the few who are speaking out against the molester are insane.
Yes. You know how to tell they are insane? They keep using pronounced judgements like "Molester" without real proof.
Rational people do not merely accept accusations as "proof", especially in light of witnesses that dispute the claims of the accusers.
-
How many times have we been lectured by the Left that what a person does in their 'private life' does not affect how they will govern in office?
How often have Republicans gone along with that reasoning?
How often have we been lectured that we should not 'judge' sinful behaviors by the very people who now demand Moore be judged by his past behavior (if it is to be believed)?
I find the hypocritical juxtaposition delightfully informative.
-
Of course they should, but I don't think you have given my point any consideration before rejecting it outright.
I certainly don't believe you put as much thought into responding to it as I put into formulating it.
I'm just going to put it aside now. It's not terribly relevant anyways.
I've put many year's worth of thought into the subject and found nothing in your comment that would compel me to re-think it.
I do think it's relevant. Why do so many men today dress like little boys in baggy shorts and tee shirts and flip flops? Why do so many men abdicate their God-given gifts and act like helpless pawns in the game of life? Why do some men blame women for their failures? (And, yes, there is a female version of these questions too. Like why do so many women dress like streetwalkers? Why do full-grown women talk like little girls?) It could be worth a discussion.
-
@DiogenesLamp
So men are like apes who have no self control, even in the workplace?
Apparently this is the lesson we are to learn here (at least from the perspective of a few).
Men have no self-control. They are weak, and driven by their bodies, with no control of them by their minds or souls.
Therefore, women should not be permitted to work with men, because men just aren't capable of controlling their base instincts.
Quite a lesson, eh, @CatherineofAragon ?
(Good thing I know so many men that make a mockery of these idiotic, childish excuses).
-
@DiogenesLamp
So men are like apes who have no self control, even in the workplace?
I expect some are, but let me diverge for a moment on what I regard as a common fallacy;
The notion that any group is all of something, and not an array of disparate individuals. I get into this point on a myriad of discussions, such as pot usage and such.
Do you know what a Bell Curve is? Well just as the majority of the people will fall in the center, there are those who do not. A Bell Curve is in fact a representation of a range of data. There is no one characteristic that is conserved across the spectrum.
People like their information in binary form. They want "yes" or "no" answers. They want "black" or "white" answers. Answers in function form, or as percentages are not satisfying. They want such answers reconstituted into a "go"/"no go" form so they can more easily make decisions.
The real world does not always restructure itself for our convenience.
Yes, some men have more difficulty controlling themselves than do other men. Our target must necessarily be the average, because this simplifies our decision making process.
My point here is that this is not an accurate way of looking at the reality.
-
I've put many year's worth of thought into the subject and found nothing in your comment that would compel me to re-think it.
I do think it's relevant. Why do so many men today dress like little boys in baggy shorts and tee shirts and flip flops? Why do so many men abdicate their God-given gifts and act like helpless pawns in the game of life? Why do some men blame women for their failures? (And, yes, there is a female version of these questions too. Like why do so many women dress like streetwalkers? Why do full-grown women talk like little girls?) It could be worth a discussion.
I really don't think a lot of discussion is required. The answer is simple. Because they have been conditioned to do those things by a now very sick society we live in.
-
Pete, I don't make fun of your beliefs, I'd appreciate it if you would return the courtesy.
There is no rationality when there is abject hatred and fury. Don't expect it.
-
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
Excessive over reaction. Punch in the mouth, yes. Deprive him of sight for life? Excessive bordering on psychotic.
Actionable as well.
-
@CatherineofAragon
I really don't know but My guess is that your are pretty much immune to that sort of thing now!
@Bigun
Nope. It does kind of skeeve me out, though, when elderly chrome domes give me the eye.
-
@Bigun
Nope. It does kind of skeeve me out, though, when elderly chrome domes give me the eye.
@CatherineofAragon
LOL! I'll bet! :rolling:
-
Wife was watching TV other day, (I don't watch much TV now days) and a commercial for Doug Jones comes on. The commercial claimed Roy Moore defended sexual predators while he was judge. Made me mad, but I could find nothing about the cases to see if Doug Jones was telling the truth.
I found this today though, and even liberal politifact admits Doug's commercial was a lie.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/06/doug-jones/jones-ad-wrongly-attacks-moore-sex-crime-case/)
Now I am tired of the lies. If Doug wants to talk about something, talk about defending the KKK fellow or when Doug defended UAB university (and most their football team) against a rape charges from a 14 y/o little brilliant red head girl that got put in a bad position and was not watched as they promised to do.
I will let ESPN tell the story.... Warning, very sad story to read. Yep I warned you.
http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html (http://www.espn.com/magazine/vol5no12uab.html)
@Sighlass
Could it be this case that the ad is referring to?
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/that-time-roy-moore-refused-to-convict-a-child-molester-who-abused-a-4-year-old/ (https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/that-time-roy-moore-refused-to-convict-a-child-molester-who-abused-a-4-year-old/)
-
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/walkingdead/images/6/67/Season_eight_carl_grimes.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/350?cb=20171205030104[img][)
I would never take Carl’s eye. Can’t blame me for that, man.
-
Yes. You know how to tell they are insane? They keep using pronounced judgements like "Molester" without real proof.
Rational people do not merely accept accusations as "proof", especially in light of witnesses that dispute the claims of the accusers.
@DiogenesLamp
I’m in good company, then. Ben Shapiro, Jonah Goldberg, David French, Erick Erickson, Amanda Carpenter and other solid conservatives use that exact term when referring to Moore.
*Sits down to wait for derisive explanation of why they’re all slack-jawed morons compared to you-know-who *
-
I've put many year's worth of thought into the subject and found nothing in your comment that would compel me to re-think it.
I do think it's relevant. Why do so many men today dress like little boys in baggy shorts and tee shirts and flip flops? Why do so many men abdicate their God-given gifts and act like helpless pawns in the game of life? Why do some men blame women for their failures? (And, yes, there is a female version of these questions too. Like why do so many women dress like streetwalkers? Why do full-grown women talk like little girls?) It could be worth a discussion.
@Sanguine
Yes, the blame is shared; there’s no doubt about it.
But the BS TOS-inspired blame-women-for-everything isn’t going to fly. Maybe there it does, where it seems the majority of men are cranks who have to order up Filipino wives, but not here.
Good observation about the preferred male attire. A conservative woman once called it the overgrown Charlie Brown look.
-
@DiogenesLamp
I’m in good company, then. Ben Shapiro, Jonah Goldberg, David French, Erick Erickson, Amanda Carpenter and other solid conservatives use that exact term when referring to Moore.
*Sits down to wait for derisive explanation of why they’re all slack-jawed morons compared to you-know-who *
Roy will clear it all up with prose.....
https://www.yahoo.com/music/roy-moore-tried-convince-black-195713407.html (https://www.yahoo.com/music/roy-moore-tried-convince-black-195713407.html)
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find the actual poem anywhere. I bet it's compelling. *****rollingeyes*****
-
@jmyrlefuller
Never mind Matthew,let's take this to "the boss" and consider that Gawd hissef impregnated a woman married to another man to create Jesus.
Assuming of course that you can suspend reality believe that mythical,superstitious nonsense to start with.
I will point out that those governments in the past which rejected these claims as "superstition", created the most horrific piles of dead human bodies that history has ever seen.
By an objective standard, the "superstitious" governments have been far less lethal to their populations than were the "enlightened" ones.
-
Apparently this is the lesson we are to learn here (at least from the perspective of a few).
Men have no self-control. They are weak, and driven by their bodies, with no control of them by their minds or souls.
Therefore, women should not be permitted to work with men, because men just aren't capable of controlling their base instincts.
Quite a lesson, eh, @CatherineofAragon ?
(Good thing I know so many men that make a mockery of these idiotic, childish excuses).
@musiclady
Yes, I don’t know any men like this. Not one.
That argument is the same put forth by Muslim men.
-
@Sanguine
I am merely stating what is accepted as being Biblical Fact. I'm just not sugar-coating it.
You have that right. You are in fact doing a pretty good job of coating it with crushed glass in the hopes of injuring someone.
-
I think we need this reliable conservative vote in the senate, hopefully Alabamans will come through for the nation.
As for allegations of sexual abuse I think that they are threadbare, plus the timing is politically suspect. Moore appears to have had a normal spiritual life since the time frame in question, so I give him the benefit of the doubt.
And because President Trump needs reliable votes in the senate to get anything done, he finally, reluctantly, indorsed Moore, so there’s that too.
-
@CatherineofAragon
LOL! I'll bet! :rolling:
@Bigun
*shrug*
I posted a pic once. You could judge for yourself. Or not.
Sorry to hit a nerve.
(Not really)
-
I've put many year's worth of thought into the subject and found nothing in your comment that would compel me to re-think it.
So you were already familiar with the case of the woman who had to take testosterone to treat a medical condition? What a coincidence that this piece of information had already made it's way to you. Here I thought it was a chance encounter that even made myself aware of it. I wonder how many other people have heard of it?
But again, the point is not worth arguing over, at least for me it's not.
-
I will point out that those governments in the past which rejected these claims as "superstition", created the most horrific piles of dead human bodies that history has ever seen.
By an objective standard, the "superstitious" governments have been far less lethal to their populations than were the "enlightened" ones.
Atheism as practiced by the state, is deadly. You’re quite right about that.
Individual atheism, well that’s part of American liberty. Free to choose how and what you believe within the spiritual realm.
-
Roy will clear it all up with prose.....
https://www.yahoo.com/music/roy-moore-tried-convince-black-195713407.html (https://www.yahoo.com/music/roy-moore-tried-convince-black-195713407.html)
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find the actual poem anywhere. I bet it's compelling. *****rollingeyes*****
@edpc
I scrolled down that page with true fear that there would be video.
I’m very relieved there wasn’t any, lol.
-
I really don't think a lot of discussion is required. The answer is simple. Because they have been conditioned to do those things by a now very sick society we live in.
And this is another aspect of this topic. The behavior of individuals is to a large extent confined by their social conditioning. In a society that conditions men to act chivalrous, the men will act chivalrous. In a society that conditions them to act like animals, they will act like animals.
Some are taught better, some are not. Those that are not are likely to misbehave.
-
I scrolled down that page with true fear that there would be video.
I’m very relieved there wasn’t any, lol.
There is somewhere. The local news has footage from inside the church, but not the actual reading. I'd like to see that hot mess.
http://m.wsfa.com/wsfa/db_362159/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=ibskwgFl (http://m.wsfa.com/wsfa/db_362159/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=ibskwgFl)
-
So you were already familiar with the case of the woman who had to take testosterone to treat a medical condition? What a coincidence that this piece of information had already made it's way to you. Here I thought it was a chance encounter that even made myself aware of it. I wonder how many other people have heard of it?
But again, the point is not worth arguing over, at least for me it's not.
@DiogenesLamp
You keep saying that but you’re still arguing.
I know you want to think you’re edumacating the wimmen on the great mysteries of the male body, but dude, like I said, it’s not news.
-
So you were already familiar with the case of the woman who had to take testosterone to treat a medical condition? What a coincidence that this piece of information had already made it's way to you. Here I thought it was a chance encounter that even made myself aware of it. I wonder how many other people have heard of it?
But again, the point is not worth arguing over, at least for me it's not.
Oh, don't be coy! You want to argue it. Let's do it, but it will have to be on another thread. Don't want to take this one so far off track.
-
Oh, don't be coy! You want to argue it. Let's do it, but it will have to be on another thread. Don't want to take this one so far off track.
LOL. Yeah. We wouldn't want to pollute this stellar thread.
-
Court records suggest Roy Moore married his wife
-
@DiogenesLamp
I’m in good company, then. Ben Shapiro, Jonah Goldberg, David French, Erick Erickson, Amanda Carpenter and other solid conservatives use that exact term when referring to Moore.
Ah, the ole "Well other people do it too!" defense. So old it even has a Latin name. "Argumentum ad populum".
Well that's a fallacy. It's what mindless people do, and I would not advocate making my judgements based on the opinions of others. I believe in weighing facts and coming to conclusions based on those facts.
*Sits down to wait for derisive explanation of why they’re all slack-jawed morons compared to you-know-who *
How about an explanation that people should think for themselves instead of letting other people stampede them into a misjudgement?
Years ago there was an experiment in which they would gather together this group of people to witness some staged event. In fact, everyone in the group except for one person was an accomplice to the experimenters.
They would stage an event, and then one by one they would ask the people in the group to tell them what happened. All the accomplices would simply tell the same lie about what happened. They would finally get around to the one person who was not "in" on the game, and ask them what happened. About 90% of the time, the "subject" would simply go along with what the group said. Only about 10% of the time would the subject contradict the rest of the group and say what actually did happen.
This experiment is a window on human nature, and the fallacy of accepting other people's opinions as your own.
What is all the more curious is the impression you leave in your commentary. You strike me as someone who insists on being independent of thought, and a "damn the consequences, i'm telling the truth" sort of person.
And yet here we are. You seem to be accepting the unsubstantiated accusations at face value, and ignoring any influence by actual witnesses (who have put their names to their statements) contradicting the accusers.
The body of objective evidence does not support the conclusions that "Erick Erickson" (a grandstanding imbecile for whom I have never had any respect.) et al. The body of objective evidence, and even the long held standard of "innocent until proven guilty", supports Moore.
-
And this is another aspect of this topic. The behavior of individuals is to a large extent confined by their social conditioning. In a society that conditions men to act chivalrous, the men will act chivalrous. In a society that conditions them to act like animals, they will act like animals.
Some are taught better, some are not. Those that are not are likely to misbehave.
Also, Western societies tend to evolve, even within the context of ancient texts and shared religious values, so practices change or modify with the times.
-
LOL. Yeah. We wouldn't want to pollute this stellar thread.
@Frank Cannon
Lol
-
Ah, the ole "Well other people do it too!" defense. So old it even has a Latin name. "Argumentum ad populum".
Well that's a fallacy. It's what mindless people do, and I would not advocate making my judgements based on the opinions of others. I believe in weighing facts and coming to conclusions based on those facts.
How about an explanation that people should think for themselves instead of letting other people stampede them into a misjudgement?
Years ago there was an experiment in which they would gather together this group of people to witness some staged event. In fact, everyone in the group except for one person was an accomplice to the experimenters.
They would stage an event, and then one by one they would ask the people in the group to tell them what happened. All the accomplices would simply tell the same lie about what happened. They would finally get around to the one person who was not "in" on the game, and ask them what happened. About 90% of the time, the "subject" would simply go along with what the group said. Only about 10% of the time would the subject contradict the rest of the group and say what actually did happen.
This experiment is a window on human nature, and the fallacy of accepting other people's opinions as your own.
What is all the more curious is the impression you leave in your commentary. You strike me as someone who insists on being independent of thought, and a "damn the consequences, i'm telling the truth" sort of person.
And yet here we are. You seem to be accepting the unsubstantiated accusations at face value, and ignoring any influence by actual witnesses (who have put their names to their statements) contradicting the accusers.
The body of objective evidence does not support the conclusions that "Erick Erickson" (a grandstanding imbecile for whom I have never had any respect.) et al. The body of objective evidence, and even the long held standard of "innocent until proven guilty", supports Moore.
@DiogenesLamp
I'm sorry my friend but I think you are talking WAY over the heads of your intended audience here!
-
Atheism as practiced by the state, is deadly. You’re quite right about that.
Individual atheism, well that’s part of American liberty. Free to choose how and what you believe within the spiritual realm.
The problem with individual atheists is their need to inform others of atheism's "virtues." They cannot help proselytizing their position to others. They are seldom content to be an atheist or agnostic without making others aware that they consider a belief in the spiritual to be inferior intellectually.
Have you ever known an atheist that didn't make a point to inform you that he/she was an atheist?
They not only want to believe in the absence of the divine, they insist on making an effort to convince others to believe this as well.
And therein lies a problem. Our whole social structure is based on the belief in the Divine. Western culture is specifically based on the teachings of Christianity, and most especially the principle that we are all equal in God's eyes.
You attack the notion of God, you attack the foundation of equality. With no God, you have to embrace the Darwinian alternative, and then you have to acknowledge Nietzsche's arguments as valid.
Without God as the foundation of society, you get eugenics. Unavoidably you get eugenics.
People don't realize that current societal morality is based on a chain of postulates that all hinge on "God."
-
I'll cut ole Roy some slack here.... When did he become a Christian? Everything before that....I'll give him a pass. None is without sin.
-
@DiogenesLamp
You keep saying that but you’re still arguing.
Nothing proves my point better. It is my nature to argue. I would rather argue than do a lot of other things. I am a "contrarian." :)
I know you want to think you’re edumacating the wimmen on the great mysteries of the male body, but dude, like I said, it’s not news.
In truth, I think I am thinking out loud more than doing anything else. I doubt much of what I say will resonate in unreceptive minds.
But It makes me think, and I feel compelled to think. Like I said, it's in my nature.
-
Why do so many men today dress like little boys in baggy shorts and tee shirts and flip flops?
I'm 55 and I wear t shirts, shorts and sneakers every day weather permitting. When not seeing a client this is what I wear to my finance related job also...heck have visited well own clients in this garb on occasion.
I remember a freeper who said at one time jeans and tennis shoes should never be worn by anyone over age 25..only dress pants/dresses and dress type shoes. Not that freeper are ya?
@Sanguine
-
Oh, don't be coy! You want to argue it. Let's do it, but it will have to be on another thread. Don't want to take this one so far off track.
That was exactly my point about it being mostly irrelevant to the main topic.
I actually don't consider the topic to be sufficiently significant to warrant a discussion of it's own. In the triage of topics, there are more important things to discuss.
It's just that people keep returning my serve.... :)
-
@DiogenesLamp
I'm sorry my friend but I think you are talking WAY over the heads of your intended audience here!
One of my inherent vices is an insistence on treating people as equals in terms of understanding, even when their behavior doesn't seem to warrant it. :)
In my view, people have a presumption of intelligence and knowledge until proven "not guilty. "
:)
-
One of my inherent vices is an insistence on treating people as equals in terms of understanding, even when their behavior doesn't seem to warrant it. :)
In my view, people have a presumption of intelligence and knowledge until proven "not guilty. "
:)
How wonderful of you. *****rollingeyes*****
-
There is no rationality when there is abject hatred and fury. Don't expect it.
:nometalk:
-
I'll cut ole Roy some slack here.... When did he become a Christian? Everything before that....I'll give him a pass. None is without sin.
(https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/ZDN32YGH6B7d3E4t3bKMXQ--~B/YXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD00MDg7dz00MDA-/http://www.quickmeme.com/img/68/686dbec3e6d184439d1ee718a4aac2072bcba6b785fc0757e1b673923e48e376.jpg.cf.jpg)
-
I'm 55 and I wear t shirts, shorts and sneakers every day weather permitting. When not seeing a client this is what I wear to my finance related job also...heck have visited well own clients in this garb on occasion.
I remember a freeper who said at one time jeans and tennis shoes should never be worn by anyone over age 25..only dress pants/dresses and dress type shoes. Not that freeper are ya?
@Sanguine
So ... just out of curiosity I wonder what kind of shoes would then be acceptable for a 25+ year old to wear to the gym? IMHO Jeans never go out of style you just gotta find the jeans that are best for your body type and age. As for shoes ... depends on the weather and the occasion. Oh ... and as for wearing white after Labor Day ... I live in Florida ... go for it! Today, I'm wearing long jeans, a t-shirt and flip-flops ... it's sunny and 80 degrees ... I'm leaving to have lunch in a bit and really don't see the reason to change as the majority of people are dressed just like me. :cool:
-
I'm 55 and I wear t shirts, shorts and sneakers every day weather permitting. When not seeing a client this is what I wear to my finance related job also...heck have visited well own clients in this garb on occasion.
I remember a freeper who said at one time jeans and tennis shoes should never be worn by anyone over age 25..only dress pants/dresses and dress type shoes. Not that freeper are ya?
@Sanguine
I dress like a bum. Almost always. I don't respect people based on their appearance, and I don't feel compelled to attempt to impress people with mine.
I regard clothing as a shallow affectation that is unrelated to the actual measure of a person.
I have no jewelry, no tattoos, no embellishments of any sort. I regard all of that stuff as "primitive."
(https://probaway.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/diogenes_04.jpg)
-
I'm 55 and I wear t shirts, shorts and sneakers every day weather permitting. When not seeing a client this is what I wear to my finance related job also...heck have visited well own clients in this garb on occasion.
I remember a freeper who said at one time jeans and tennis shoes should never be worn by anyone over age 25..only dress pants/dresses and dress type shoes. Not that freeper are ya?
@Sanguine
Oh, hell, no! Dress pants and shoes. Definitely not me.
I live in central Texas. Jeans get put away in May, not to emerge again until late September.
But, this, boy-child-on-summer-vacation type of attire is what I find objectionable:
(https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fbisousmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F08%2FB-the-cargo-shorts-767612.jpg&sp=1ddc4b592094c484dd74abcc4c563361)
-
Ah, the ole "Well other people do it too!" defense. So old it even has a Latin name. "Argumentum ad populum".
Well that's a fallacy. It's what mindless people do, and I would not advocate making my judgements based on the opinions of others. I believe in weighing facts and coming to conclusions based on those facts.
How about an explanation that people should think for themselves instead of letting other people stampede them into a misjudgement?
Years ago there was an experiment in which they would gather together this group of people to witness some staged event. In fact, everyone in the group except for one person was an accomplice to the experimenters.
They would stage an event, and then one by one they would ask the people in the group to tell them what happened. All the accomplices would simply tell the same lie about what happened. They would finally get around to the one person who was not "in" on the game, and ask them what happened. About 90% of the time, the "subject" would simply go along with what the group said. Only about 10% of the time would the subject contradict the rest of the group and say what actually did happen.
This experiment is a window on human nature, and the fallacy of accepting other people's opinions as your own.
What is all the more curious is the impression you leave in your commentary. You strike me as someone who insists on being independent of thought, and a "damn the consequences, i'm telling the truth" sort of person.
And yet here we are. You seem to be accepting the unsubstantiated accusations at face value, and ignoring any influence by actual witnesses (who have put their names to their statements) contradicting the accusers.
The body of objective evidence does not support the conclusions that "Erick Erickson" (a grandstanding imbecile for whom I have never had any respect.) et al. The body of objective evidence, and even the long held standard of "innocent until proven guilty", supports Moore.
@DiogenesLamp
No, you won’t be allowed to misrepresent my point.
Long-winded lecture aside, I was responding to the attempts of a few here to portray the use of “molester†as some kind of fringe position/tactic, or outright trolling. My point is that it’s a generally accepted conservative view that the molestation charges are credible.
If you keep yourself in a Breitbart bubble, you won’t be aware of it.
-
One of my inherent vices is an insistence on treating people as equals in terms of understanding, even when their behavior doesn't seem to warrant it. :)
In my view, people have a presumption of intelligence and knowledge until proven "not guilty. "
:)
@DiogenesLamp
Do you understand how the ping function works yet? I think I’ve explained it three times now.
-
@musiclady
Yes, I don’t know any men like this. Not one.
That argument is the same put forth by Muslim men.
You are absolutely right about that. Muslim men have no control, and everything is the woman's fault, just for being there.
None of the men I know are as weak as the argument being put forth here. And the argument that a Christian man doesn't want to work with women because men have no self-control and are "wired" to be aggressors, is the most pathetic excuse I've ever read to keep women out of the workplace.
I'm amazed that any man would condemn his entire gender like this................... and himself.
I guess it's because he's anonymous. :shrug:
@CatherineofAragon
-
I have no jewelry, no tattoos, no embellishments of any sort. I regard all of that stuff as "primitive."
When I worked for my dad I had to wear a suit and tie and perfect clean shoes every day at the office. . When I took over his business i pretty much went to kaki's and button down shirts with my company name embroidered on it. He did not like it but accepted it. Last time I wore a suit was when he died 3 years ago. ..won't even wear one to church on Christmas or Easter.
After forced to wear a suit for 25+ years I had enough.
Like you I have no tats, jewelery, not even a watch.
@DiogenesLamp
-
I wear similar shorts and T shirts but not ghetto like those. Mine stop above the knee and not as baggy. I have never worn flip flops my entire life.
But, this, boy-child-on-summer-vacation type of attire is what I find objectionable:
(https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fbisousmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F08%2FB-the-cargo-shorts-767612.jpg&sp=1ddc4b592094c484dd74abcc4c563361)
@Sanguine
-
The problem with individual atheists is their need to inform others of atheism's "virtues." They cannot help proselytizing their position to others. They are seldom content to be an atheist or agnostic without making others aware that they consider a belief in the spiritual to be inferior intellectually.
That's the same criticism many have of the "religious". It's one thing to believe in God, quite another to aggressively proselytize. The behavior's obnoxious, whether practiced by those who seek to convert believers or non-believers.
-
Besides, he was 37 years old and still single. It's clear this is written by inside-the-beltway types who think there are all these thirtysomething single women floating around everywhere. There aren't, and if you live outside those beltways, they don't exist. I know from experience.
BS, Maybe in your small town.. Any larger city has scores of 30 something single women...many of whom are looking for marriage. Yes, higher percentage of non marriable types than the 20's woman but plenty still out there.
I don't know a single guy who is 37 thinking dating a 20 year old woman is normal. I can say I have truthfully never met one.
@jmyrlefuller
-
I wear similar shorts and T shirts but not ghetto like those. Mine stop above the knee and not as baggy. I have never worn flip flops my entire life.
@Sanguine
Yes, we were talking about different styles.
-
The fact is that Moore and his supporters aren't Christians. They may go to church and quote the bible freely but they show a complete and utter disregard for their final judgement. That tells me that they don't really believe there will be a God judging them. They're just like every other liberal on the planet who believes they should do whatever they want because there will be no consequences. After all they've spent the past couple of years supporting a man they know is an immoral degenerate liar and its becoming easier for them.
I may not be the greatest Christian but I do understand that I alone am responsible for my soul. As I've gotten older not a day passes when I don't make a decision involving asking myself If I want to face God with it.
CC, I'm no theologian. However, based on my past 20 years of being a Catholic, and serving as a catechist for the same amount of time, all I can say to you is "let your heart not be troubled." God's love for us is infinite, and he understands and appreciates your struggle, as He does with all of us.
If I've ever received a "sign from God", last night was it. As I arrived last night, I found out that I was the only one of six teachers present for our two Wednesday night RE classes (30+ 6 graders). I had forgotten the lesson plan, eww, I sensed a disaster looming.
Last year, there would have been no problem, as I had taught the same curriculum (Old Testament) for at least 15 years. This year, new curriculum focused on New Testament.
One teacher for 30 kids, when there's normally 2-3 for 15. To stay in line with requirements for two adults, a program director assisted.
A major portion of the lesson was on "agape love", the highest form of love: that of God for man, and man for God.
When I saw that, I knew I was meant to be there at that particular point in time. Fr. Bob Spitzer graduated from Gonzaga two years before I did. He wrote a book about 15 years ago, entitled "Healing the Culture." In that book, he discusses the 4 levels of Happiness, similar to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The highest level of happiness according to Fr. Spitzer is "agape love."
For roughly 30 minutes, I had the attention of each student, and we had a great discussion. Their answers to my questions displayed an advanced cognitive level for their age group. It also reaffirmed a theory of mine, that these young men and women are attentive when the teacher is passionate about what they're teaching...mine was off the chart last night.
-
Can somebody tell me why in Hades there's such an extended time between the primary and the final election?
Is it that slow elsewhere?
-
If this didn't happen in the last 20 years, I don't care. It's just not relevant. Kennedy killed a woman and we almost made him President.
Show me a recent pattern of behavior. Al Franken was doing drugs with John Belushi but that has no bearing on his behavior today
That's why I stay away from Ancestry.com. I'm sure there's something in my family's past that I really don't want to know about. :silly:
-
That's why I stay away from Ancestry.com. I'm sure there's something in my family's past that I really don't want to know about. :silly:
True. My mom did a search and discovered a distant female relative was a popular 'entertainer' in western mining towns. I didn't have any doubts what that meant.
-
....
For roughly 30 minutes, I had the attention of each student, and we had a great discussion. Their answers to my questions displayed an advanced cognitive level for their age group. It also reaffirmed a theory of mine, that these young men and women are attentive when the teacher is passionate about what they're teaching...mine was off the chart last night.
[/quote]
It is wonderful when that happens.
-
Can somebody tell me why in Hades there's such an extended time between the primary and the final election?
Is it that slow elsewhere?
@Night Hides Not the MSM, DNC and McConnell need that much time to dig up dirt and leak it to try and make sure Roy doesn't make it to DC.
-
Maybe I'm off on this, but from my personal experience ALL women start dating after the divorce papers are filed. I'm confused as to what the issue is here? I think they are saying that he started dating her before the divorce was 'finalized'. But again, from my experience this is totally common and completely natural.
I have never known any woman to wait for the divorce to be finalized before they start dating again. I must be missing something?
All I know is this: one of the most memorable summers of my life was 1979, when I was TDY at a German anti-aircraft range in Germany. About five miles off base was the town of Lutjenberg, which came to life during the summer.
I have never been in an area with such a large concentration of newly divorced women. Our little detachment of 40 soldiers were the only Americans for 200 miles, and those new divorcees couldn't get enough of them, to include two women who shared a house with a young women I was seeing.
On more than one occasion, I'd stop by for breakfast after closing down the bar of the Hotel Ostseeblick at 4 AM with the owner (my GF worked elsewhere as a waitress). While enjoying my coffee and zweibelrost, a couple of my troops were coming downstairs from their "assignations". lol
I never saw the same two soldiers coming down those stairs.
BTW, "zweibelrost" as I recall it was raw hamburger seasoned with onions. On toast, I considered it a delicacy, paired very nicely with good German coffee.
It was a great summer from a professional standpoint. I was the XO, often left in charge due to the CO often being gone due to marital issues. My soldiers and NCOs were fantastic, we really worked well as a unit. It wasn't my leadership, it was the fact that everyone knew if we did our jobs right, we'd only have to work 4 days a week.
Oh yeah, I had a great time that summer, too. Made so many friends, that I'd make the 400 mile drive when I had an occasional 3 day weekend. Would leave Friday after work, drive 5 hours (mostly autobahn), head back at 2 AM Tuesday morning, getting to my office by 7 AM.
By the end of that summer, I was near fluent in German. Made my last two years in Germany that much more enjoyable.
-
@Night Hides Not the MSM, DNC and McConnell need that much time to dig up dirt and leak it to try and make sure Roy doesn't make it to DC.
Makes as much sense as anything I've read...thanks!
-
Can somebody tell me why in Hades there's such an extended time between the primary and the final election?
Is it that slow elsewhere?
To allow for military absentee ballots to be sent overseas and returned before Election Day. (Why, when they're not living in the state? Because no one wants to be the one who denies a soldier, sailor or Marine the right to vote, even if they wouldn't otherwise have it.) Yes, it's that way everywhere else, too, although most states don't have the runoff rules to factor in.
-
....
For roughly 30 minutes, I had the attention of each student, and we had a great discussion. Their answers to my questions displayed an advanced cognitive level for their age group. It also reaffirmed a theory of mine, that these young men and women are attentive when the teacher is passionate about what they're teaching...mine was off the chart last night.
It is wonderful when that happens.
You should see their ears perk up when I say, "there are no wrong answers in my class."
-
Excessive over reaction. Punch in the mouth, yes. Deprive him of sight for life? Excessive bordering on psychotic.
:thumbsup:
-
When I saw that, I knew I was meant to be there at that particular point in time. Fr. Bob Spitzer graduated from Gonzaga two years before I did. He wrote a book about 15 years ago, entitled "Healing the Culture." In that book, he discusses the 4 levels of Happiness, similar to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The highest level of happiness according to Fr. Spitzer is "agape love."
For roughly 30 minutes, I had the attention of each student, and we had a great discussion. Their answers to my questions displayed an advanced cognitive level for their age group. It also reaffirmed a theory of mine, that these young men and women are attentive when the teacher is passionate about what they're teaching...mine was off the chart last night.
@Night Hides Not
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall, both to hear the teaching and to observe the young folks absorbing that lesson.
-
To allow for military absentee ballots to be sent overseas and returned before Election Day. (Why, when they're not living in the state? Because no one wants to be the one who denies a soldier, sailor or Marine the right to vote, even if they wouldn't otherwise have it.) Yes, it's that way everywhere else, too, although most states don't have the runoff rules to factor in.
Good answer...can't they use Federal Express?
Aw heck, we didn't have it back then, and I got a soldier's check sent to him in ONE DAY.
Sorry, we're back to that summer of '79. One of my MP's hadn't been paid in six weeks. He was miserable, hearing all of the stories of the fun had in nearby Lutjenberg. I knew that my NCOs had been working his chain of command, obviously to no avail. 18 years old, almost in tears, half the summer gone.
I got ticked, and told my clerk, "get me his Group Commander on the phone! I'm only talking to him!" Five minutes later, I'm on the phone with him. I explained the situation to him, that he was my last resort.
I followed that with "Sir, I had the pleasure of meeting you at the outbriefing of the Nuclear Surety Inspection at Bravo Battery, 5/6 ADA. I was the Augmentation Reserve Force Commander from Charlie 6/56."
I had gotten into it with the Chief Evaluator. I had 4 hours to assemble and train 40 air defenders whose last infantry experience was basic training. I got them there 30 minutes ahead of mission time, and this a-hole LTC starts chewing me out, "what took you so damn long?" I explained to him they needed extra training for this mission. For pete's sake, we were going to run infantry small unit tactics inside an area housing nukes.
At the outbriefing, the only negative comment had to do with the lack of urgency displayed by my unit. It was such a ridiculous comment, the officers from the other unit were snickering.
When the team left, the Deputy CG of 32nd AADCOM, BG Archie Cannon went to the podium. He pointed his finger at me, and said, "LT, anytime you want to give your soldiers extra training, you have my express permission."
The tenor of the conversation with the Group Commander immediately changed. "Sure I remember! LT, how are you doing up there!" Within an hour, a jeep was on being dispatched to our location, 400+ miles away. They arrived in time for breakfast, and we presented the paycheck to my MP.
Truly one of my fondest memories of my 8+ years in the Army.
-
@Night Hides Not
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall, both to hear the teaching and to observe the young folks absorbing that lesson.
Better yet, watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_YjXjv2f8E (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_YjXjv2f8E)
16 years ago, my wife and I visited Gonzaga during my 25th reunion. Father Bob (then President of GU) gave a 90 minute talk on his book. It was mesmerizing. He's a very dynamic speaker.
-
Excessive over reaction. Punch in the mouth, yes. Deprive him of sight for life? Excessive bordering on psychotic.
Actionable as well.
@DiogenesLamp
If some man grabs my privates? The hell. I'll try my best. Besides, one eye is not sight-deprived.
-
@DiogenesLamp
No, you won’t be allowed to misrepresent my point.
I don't have any need to misrepresent your point. Your point is clear. Roy Moore is a "WITCH!!!!" and he needs to burn because "WITCHCRAFT IS EVIL!!!!"
Not a thing you say ever addresses evidence or proof.
Long-winded lecture aside, I was responding to the attempts of a few here to portray the use of “molester†as some kind of fringe position/tactic, or outright trolling. My point is that it’s a generally accepted conservative view that the molestation charges are credible.
I can think for myself. If this collection of "conservatives" among them that turd blossom "Erick Erickson", find the charges credible, then they have not done due diligence in forming their opinions. (Which is entirely consistent with past behavior from Erick Erickson.)
Again, three witnesses contradict Beverly Nelson. The Accounts between Nelson and Corfman sound like two completely different MOs, and there are inherent contradictions with these women's own statements.
Here, this gay fellow makes a pretty good summation of the problems with these womens claims. (https://barbwire.com/2017/12/07/roy-moore-fog-political-war/)
If you keep yourself in a Breitbart bubble, you won’t be aware of it.
I don't read Beitbart. I occasionally end up there from a link off of other sites, but Breitbart is not on my list of daily reading.
-
@DiogenesLamp
Do you understand how the ping function works yet? I think I’ve explained it three times now.
A bit narcissistic aren't you? While you may be included in the group to which I was referring in my post to which you responded, my post wasn't intended to be specifically about you. It was a general observation.
Now if you want to be informed of all my general observations, I shall be delighted, but asking me to ping you every time I philosophize on life is a bit burdensome for me, and I would instead ask you to do what I do; Ignore pings and just look through the threads till you find something you want to discuss.
@CatherineofAragon
-
When I worked for my dad I had to wear a suit and tie and perfect clean shoes every day at the office. . When I took over his business i pretty much went to kaki's and button down shirts with my company name embroidered on it. He did not like it but accepted it. Last time I wore a suit was when he died 3 years ago. ..won't even wear one to church on Christmas or Easter.
After forced to wear a suit for 25+ years I had enough.
Like you I have no tats, jewelery, not even a watch.
@DiogenesLamp
If I had a job in which it was a requirement, I would certainly dress as my employer instructs.
My preference is common sense attire for whatever work I feel like doing. Boots, Jeans, and a T-shirt are usually sufficient to my daily needs. Shorts in the summer.
I think you and I are very much simpatico on this topic. People should dress as they like, and in whatever feels comfortable to them.
-
That's the same criticism many have of the "religious". It's one thing to believe in God, quite another to aggressively proselytize. The behavior's obnoxious, whether practiced by those who seek to convert believers or non-believers.
Maybe so, but some proselytization produces far worse long term results than other.
Atheists and Muslims have each produced body counts greater than 100 million dead.
Judaism and Christianity? Not so much. Also Jews don't proselytize. You got to WANT to be in their club!
:)
-
Pete, I don't make fun of your beliefs, I'd appreciate it if you would return the courtesy.
@Sanguine @sneakypete
Just wait 'til Easter....it's on April 1 this coming year!
-
@Sanguine @sneakypete
Just wait 'til Easter....it's on April 1 this coming year!
A cosmic collision.
-
When I worked for my dad I had to wear a suit and tie and perfect clean shoes every day at the office.
When I ran a business using college-student labor, I made my sales staff wear suits. I helped them find inexpensive wear at second-hand store, sales, and overcoats from Army-Navy if they couldn't afford more.
The people they encountered were so impressed when comparing them against their peers (the typical slovenly college kid), they were quite successful.
But I could never wear a suit for work again. Like you, I'm over it!
-
Just so I have this clear.
Looking at a Roy Moore timeline, he nailed someone else's wife first and the Ten Commandments on the Court room's wall second?
Ok...
-
When I ran a business using college-student labor, I made my sales staff wear suits. I helped them find inexpensive wear at second-hand store, sales, and overcoats from Army-Navy if they couldn't afford more.
The people they encountered were so impressed when comparing them against their peers (the typical slovenly college kid), they were quite successful.
But I could never wear a suit for work again. Like you, I'm over it!
Most of my clients I have had for 20+ years or I get referral business from them. If I had a meting with a new client with multiple people present I would probably wear a suit...but I am semi retired as is and just don't care anymore.
Also most of my competition now use the same dress down look. It's the times.
My wife and family has strict orders not to bury me in a suit.
@Suppressed
-
@RoosGirl
@Sighlass
Could it be this case that the ad is referring to?
Yes obviously, thanks. Your article from Rawstory is exactly why I don't trust liberal sources without researching them. It is about as obvious a blatant hit piece as the Jones commercial.
......one case Moore recently heard as a state judge—when he refused to convict a child molester who abused a 4-year-old—sheds light on his backward views of sexual assault.
First off the lie that Roy refused to convict the 17 y/o kid. Roy was NOT overturning the first conviction of 1st degree sodomy, He was saying that the second conviction of "Forced" sodomy was NOT supported by law, and Roy was right. Like I pointed out earlier, even liberal fact check Politifact agrees. If Roy was "in the bag" for the kid and wanted to let him go of all charges, then Roy would of objected to the first charge also. Rawstory was just being a leftist dirt bag trying to wrongly pile on Roy by leaving out the fact that Roy did NOT overturn the first sodomy conviction. As a matter of fact, that section of the ruling was not even before the Supreme court, the state only wanted a 2nd opinion on what "forced" meant for future prosecution sake.
Reminds me of when the people rioted in LA due to the fact that the police officers did not get convicted of "attempted murder" or Rodney King... Well the facts did not support "attempted murder". If you got a person on the ground and wanted to kill him (attempt to murder him) then you finish the job. IOWs if "wanting" to murder someone, the perfect case scenario would be while they were laying on the ground helplessly before you. The prosecution just went for too big a judgement hoping to get the extra punishment time in there.
Also note this ...
An appeals court later overturned the forcible rape charge, and the case eventually reached the state Supreme Court.
Your article that you linked from Raw does not mention that the second charge (forced) was first overturned in another court (The Court of Criminal Appeals) before reaching Roy in the Supreme court of Alabama. Roy's decision was not out of the blue wild, it was already pointed out as suspect in a previous lower court. Was the lower court also full of perverts that defend sodomy? Of course not... it was just a bad decision to try and stick the pervert kid with "forceable" sodomy when it wasn't proven to be so.
One can read the decision here... word for word.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-supreme-court/1707584.html
Let us look at Moore's dissent word for word... look how he has respect for not "legislation from the bench". A factor most constitutionalist cherish. Also note Roy's stated position on how he feels about sodomy (not exactly what Jones and Raw suggested)
I dissent because I am concerned the Court is stepping into the shoes of the legislature in this case.
Sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished. In this case the defendant, Eric Lemont Higdon, a 17–year–old who worked as an intern at a day-care facility, was convicted under § 13A–6–63(a)(3), Ala.Code 1975, of sodomy in the first degree of a child under 12 years old and was sentenced to 23 years' imprisonment. He has not challenged that conviction on appeal.
Higdon was also charged under § 13A–6–63(a)(1), Ala.Code 1975, which states: “A person commits the crime of sodomy in the first degree if ․ [h]e engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another by forcible compulsion.†(Emphasis added.) “Forcible compulsion,†in turn, is defined as “[p]hysical force that overcomes earnest resistance or a threat, express or implied, that places another person in fear of immediate death or serious physical injury to himself or another person.†§ 13A–6–60(8), Ala.Code 1975 (emphasis added).
The “implied†threat in the definition of forcible compulsion is not the threat of sexual assault but of “immediate death or serious physical injury.†The legislature has defined serious physical injury as “[p]hysical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ.†§ 13A–1–2(14), Ala.Code 1975.
Because there was no evidence in this case of an implied threat of serious physical injury under this definition, or of an implied threat of death, Higdon cannot be convicted of sodomy in the first degree “by forcible compulsion.†This Court has previously taken the position that an implied threat under § 13A–6–60(8) may be inferred in cases “concerning the sexual assault of children by adults with whom the children are in a relationship of trust.†See Powe v. State, 597 So.2d 721, 728 (Ala.1991)(emphasis added). Today the Court extends that rule to cases involving sexual assault of children by other children, of perhaps a different age and level of maturity. Although this may be a noble cause in certain situations, policymaking is beyond the role of this Court. This Court has potentially opened the door to cases in which a 10–year–old could be convicted of “first-degree sodomy by forcible compulsion†for intercourse with an 8–year–old, or a 6–year–old with a 4–year–old, or a 16–year–old with a 14–year–old. The legislature, however, has already drawn these lines in the statute under which Higdon was convicted, stating that a person commits sodomy in the first degree if “[h]e, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is less than 12 years old.†§ 13A–6–63(a)(3). Because the Legislature of Alabama has adopted § 13A–6–63(a)(3), which covered Higdon's conduct, for which he is being punished, this Court has no “right†or “authority†to make a “new†law to govern conduct between minors the legislature obviously chose not to address. Therefore, because I believe this Court is adding its own rule to the statute, I respectfully dissent.
_________________________________
I personally think a judge that does not bend the rules to "pile on" and and rules according to the law refreshing. Doug Jone's ad was a lie, and so was Raw's take on the ruling.
Thanks for making me look deeper at the subject. I now have even more respect for Judge Moore.
-
My wife and family has strict orders not to bury me in a suit.
I made a "Beetlejuice" suit several years ago for Halloween. I've told my family that I want to be buried in it as a joke to whomever might dig me up in the future. :)
(http://thebestpictureproject.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/beetlejuice1.png)
-
I'll cut ole Roy some slack here.... When did he become a Christian? Everything before that....I'll give him a pass. None is without sin.
There is that aspect @mrpotatohead , which is never addressed by his detractors.
However, Moore's adamant denial and outright offense at the charge put this on a different plane - And witnesses against his detractors, and the motive found in many of them, either because Moore ruled against them (or their kin), or because of outright partisanship, leave the whole matter with little traction.
In the end, the only argument left is whether a 32 year old man should go a'courting (in a gentlemanly and platonic fashion, with parents approving) with legal and consenting women of a young age - An argument wholly offset by cultural norms in that generation and location.
Much ado about nothing,
-
I'm 55 and I wear t shirts, shorts and sneakers every day weather permitting. When not seeing a client this is what I wear to my finance related job also...heck have visited well own clients in this garb on occasion.
I remember a freeper who said at one time jeans and tennis shoes should never be worn by anyone over age 25..only dress pants/dresses and dress type shoes. Not that freeper are ya?
Oh, good Lord, @mirraflake I would be hard pressed to find any of that rot in my storage, not to mention my closet. There are very good reasons why a working man turns his nose at that attire. And I might add, the only folks I ever see in that get-up are lawyers, preachers, and funeral directors.
-
There is a reason we have historically tried to keep male and female vocations separate. It causes problems, and these problems are inherent in the nature of men and women.
Ever see the video "Can women and men just be friends" (without sex coming into the equation)
100% of women said yes, 100% men said no.
If a woman is hot her male friends are going to want to get into her pants.
Men are from Mars, Women from venus.
@DiogenesLamp
-
Men are from Mars, Women from venus.
Authored by one of the least manliest men, ever........
(https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/rio9zCDOWxwiThHkhpSouA--~B/YXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD01NjA7dz00MDA-/http://thesuccesskey324.webs.com/JohnGray.jpg.cf.jpg)
-
Ever see the video "Can women and men just be friends" (without sex coming into the equation)
100% of women said yes, 100% men said no.
If a woman is hot her male friends are going to want to get into her pants.
Men are from Mars, Women from venus.
@DiogenesLamp
@mirraflake
Many quite intelligent women are quite clueless in such matters, and overestimate their understanding of men.
-
With the "Half Your Age Plus Seven"
Line...
(https://i.imgur.com/O6fSljE.png)
And an error in labeling Leigh Corfman
-
@mirraflake
Many quite intelligent women are quite clueless in such matters, and overestimate their understanding of men.
As are many men. Including the Mars/Venus guy.
-
Ever see the video "Can women and men just be friends" (without sex coming into the equation)
100% of women said yes, 100% men said no.
If a woman is hot her male friends are going to want to get into her pants.
Men are from Mars, Women from venus.
@DiogenesLamp
@mirraflake
And if the man is hot and wealthy or famous,the women will be stabbing each other in the back to see who gets to bag him.
-
@RoosGirl
Yes obviously, thanks. Your article from Rawstory is exactly why I don't trust liberal sources without researching them. It is about as obvious a blatant hit piece as the Jones commercial.
First off the lie that Roy refused to convict the 17 y/o kid. Roy was NOT overturning the first conviction of 1st degree sodomy, He was saying that the second conviction of "Forced" sodomy was NOT supported by law, and Roy was right. Like I pointed out earlier, even liberal fact check Politifact agrees. If Roy was "in the bag" for the kid and wanted to let him go of all charges, then Roy would of objected to the first charge also. Rawstory was just being a leftist dirt bag trying to wrongly pile on Roy by leaving out the fact that Roy did NOT overturn the first sodomy conviction. As a matter of fact, that section of the ruling was not even before the Supreme court, the state only wanted a 2nd opinion on what "forced" meant for future prosecution sake.
Reminds me of when the people rioted in LA due to the fact that the police officers did not get convicted of "attempted murder" or Rodney King... Well the facts did not support "attempted murder". If you got a person on the ground and wanted to kill him (attempt to murder him) then you finish the job. IOWs if "wanting" to murder someone, the perfect case scenario would be while they were laying on the ground helplessly before you. The prosecution just went for too big a judgement hoping to get the extra punishment time in there.
Also note this ...
Your article that you linked from Raw does not mention that the second charge (forced) was first overturned in another court (The Court of Criminal Appeals) before reaching Roy in the Supreme court of Alabama. Roy's decision was not out of the blue wild, it was already pointed out as suspect in a previous lower court. Was the lower court also full of perverts that defend sodomy? Of course not... it was just a bad decision to try and stick the pervert kid with "forceable" sodomy when it wasn't proven to be so.
One can read the decision here... word for word.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-supreme-court/1707584.html
Let us look at Moore's dissent word for word... look how he has respect for not "legislation from the bench". A factor most constitutionalist cherish. Also note Roy's stated position on how he feels about sodomy (not exactly what Jones and Raw suggested)
_________________________________
I personally think a judge that does not bend the rules to "pile on" and and rules according to the law refreshing. Doug Jone's ad was a lie, and so was Raw's take on the ruling.
Thanks for making me look deeper at the subject. I now have even more respect for Judge Moore.
@Sighlass I just skimmed that story and got the gist of how it was biased since I have read a few other stories about that issue, but it was what I could find quickly. If you take a moment to understand what happened it is clear to me that he wasn't letting a child molester off the hook at all. There are people here that believe it the way the article I linked was written though.
-
@mirraflake
Many quite intelligent women are quite clueless in such matters, and overestimate their understanding of men.
I had a woman tell me one time women have the same sexual drive and horniess level as men. I'm still laughing at that one.
@Suppressed
-
I had a woman tell me one time women have the same sexual drive and horniess level as men. I'm still laughing at that one.
@Suppressed
@mirraflake
You have my sympathy.
Not ALL women are horndogs,anymore than ALL men are horndogs,but they do exist. Trust me on this one.
-
@mirraflake
You have my sympathy.
Not ALL women are horndogs,anymore than ALL men are horndogs,but they do exist. Trust me on this one.
I know what you are saying, she implied ALL women have the same sex rive and horniess as men.
@sneakypete
-
Breaking news per FoxNews...
Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama senate candidate
-
Breaking news per FoxNews...
Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama senate candidate
Hey Gloria Alred.....where's your Moses now? :laugh:
-
Hey Gloria Alred.....where's your Moses now? :laugh:
@DCPatriot
Is there ANYONE on the planet with a worse accuracy and truth record than Gloria Alred? Even Hay-Raldo looks like a Saint compared to her.
It's to the point where if she comes out to represent the Charles Manson estate,that's enough to make you suspect he was innocent.
Hell,if she stepped forward to represent ME,I'd begin to suspect *I* am guilty.
-
Breaking news per FoxNews...
Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama senate candidate
OOPS!!! Crow eating party to begin at ...!
-
@DCPatriot
Is there ANYONE on the planet with a worse accuracy and truth record than Gloria Alred? Even Hay-Raldo looks like a Saint compared to her.
It's to the point where if she comes out to represent the Charles Manson estate,that's enough to make you suspect he was innocent.
Hell,if she stepped forward to represent ME,I'd begin to suspect *I* am guilty.
Totally, agree @sneakypete ! ^-^
-
Agree 100%, SP. This outrage at dating his future wife while her divorce was still pending is just silly. What's not silly is Moore's penchant for being removed from office for lawlessness. THAT's what should disqualify him from office in the eyes of conservatives.
Lawlessness? Like upholding the Alabama Constitution against the ruling of a Federal District Court Judge? Considering 81% of the electorate voted for the One man one woman marriage Amendment, which had been LAW for nearly a decade, I'd say the Chief Justice was doing his job and standing up for the Alabama Constitution and the will of the people.
As for the Ten Commandments monument, I have expounded at length on the fact that those Commandments are the seminal basis for and generally oldest example of even secular law. To pick and choose, does not do them justice, and to leave them up is something I had no problem with.
But those are the so-called 'laws' he defied: A judge ruling contrary to the State Constitution, and defied another ruling to remove a monument to a set of fundamental laws which have endured for millennia.
IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW are the ones who are LAWless.
-
There is that aspect @mrpotatohead , which is never addressed by his detractors.
However, Moore's adamant denial and outright offense at the charge put this on a different plane - And witnesses against his detractors, and the motive found in many of them, either because Moore ruled against them (or their kin), or because of outright partisanship, leave the whole matter with little traction.
In the end, the only argument left is whether a 32 year old man should go a'courting (in a gentlemanly and platonic fashion, with parents approving) with legal and consenting women of a young age - An argument wholly offset by cultural norms in that generation and location.
Much ado about nothing,
That's it in a nutshell. But the highest density of homosexuals in the US (DC Area) will do all they can to scuttle the man because of the provisions of the Alabama Constitution he upheld, and general Christian hate. Small wonder there is so much animosity.
-
OOPS!!! Crow eating party to begin at ...!
LOL! We saw that right away. But don't expect the crow eaters to show up. :shrug:
-
The case against Roy Moore gets weaker and more suspicious. I think the dems dropped their bombshell too soon.
They should have waited until there was no time to investigate or refute it.
Here is a 'bombshell' story on Breitbart where one of the accusers admits to lying the the other two are exposed as having fake stories.
And, by the way, just as we suspected the yearbook thing was a total hoax.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/08/bombshell-roy-moore-accuser-admits-forged-yearbook/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/08/bombshell-roy-moore-accuser-admits-forged-yearbook/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social)
Modify message
But the Moore haters will cling to the lies with their last breath.
-
The case against Roy Moore gets weaker and more suspicious. I think the dems dropped their bombshell too soon.
They should have waited until there was no time to investigate or refute it.
Here is a 'bombshell' story on Breitbart where one of the accusers admits to lying the the other two are exposed as having fake stories.
And, by the way, just as we suspected the yearbook thing was a total hoax.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/08/bombshell-roy-moore-accuser-admits-forged-yearbook/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/08/bombshell-roy-moore-accuser-admits-forged-yearbook/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social)
Modify message
But the Moore haters will cling to the lies with their last breath.
We spotted the yearbook problems right away, only becoming even more sure when the two colors of ink were shown.
They did jump the gun, but I hope they ever do so, it gives time to research and refute the accusations they present in the most pejorative and inflammatory terms available to get emotional responses. There will ever be those who will not shed their emotional reactions and go on facts, but that happens. :shrug:
-
LOL! We saw that right away. But don't expect the crow eaters to show up. :shrug:
Don't think they will be hungry today! 888high58888
-
Don't think they will be hungry today! 888high58888
Ahhh...disappointed by an accused child molester that turned out to be nothing Moore* than a political hit job, just weeks before an important election that could have shifted the balance of power in the senate.
*(thanks to @corbe for the use of that literary device)
-
Breaking news per FoxNews...
Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama senate candidate
She wrote "Moore" so as to look like his own signature.
That immediately says "attempt to deceive."
Had she not been attempting to deceive people, she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting, instead of like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.
-
She wrote "Moore" so as to look like his own signature.
That immediately says "attempt to deceive."
Had she not been attempting to deceive people, she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting, instead of like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.
Exactly right. If she had merely been "adding notes".... it would have been added in her own handwriting, vs. attempting to mimic Moore's.
She is a totally discredited "witness" now. And she did it to herself. The irony....
-
She wrote "Moore" so as to look like his own signature.
That immediately says "attempt to deceive."
Had she not been attempting to deceive people, she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting, instead of like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.
The official narrative is now that she 'wrote notes', such as adding the date his name and D.A.
Which everyone is screaming is not 'forgery' - but note-taking, which they maintain is still proof that her allegations are gospel.
Because everyone adds information to a signature in a yearbook to help them remember a criminal act 40 years later when it is politically convenient.
-
But not smart enough to change ink color, oh, she certainly had questionable motives.
-
I think all they ever said was that Moore signed the year book, no more, no less.
I don't even know if I'm for an ethics committee, but that's what they would be looking at and whatever is alleged to be written, "to a girl with such beauty" or however that went.
-
She wrote "Moore" so as to look like his own signature.
That immediately says "attempt to deceive."
Had she not been attempting to deceive people, she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting, instead of like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.
And used different colored ink. If she was trying to truly forge, one can argue that she would have sought out black ink or whatever color would have been correct.
-
The official narrative is now that she 'wrote notes', such as adding the date his name and D.A.
You write "notes" in YOUR handwriting. You do not attempt to make your notes look like the original writer's handwriting.
Her writing his last name to look like he wrote it, and adding the "D.A." implies that the source for these two embellishments was her own divorce papers, where his name looks like that, and is followed by the "D.A." afterwards. (After his secretary, Debra Adams, indicating it is a stamped signature on her authority.)
Which everyone is screaming is not 'forgery' - but note-taking, which they maintain is still proof that her allegations are gospel.
What she did is not innocent note taking. What she did was intended to make it look like he wrote it.
Because everyone adds information to a signature in a yearbook to help them remember a criminal act 40 years later when it is politically convenient.
Her divorce was in 1999, so the "Moore" part of the signature is at least that new. More like it was written in November of 2017 when she decided to use it as a political prop in an attempt to bring down Moore.
-
And used different colored ink. If she was trying to truly forge, one can argue that she would have sought out black ink or whatever color would have been correct.
The thought occurred to me that as someone of her age, perhaps she can no longer see so well, and couldn't tell that the ink was a different color. This explanation fits with the idea that these "notes" were added recently.
The color differences are noticeable but not stark. We only found out about them as a result of a single image taken by a photographer. You can't see the difference in the color of ink from the television broadcasts.
I think she couldn't tell the difference when she wrote it because her eyes weren't as good as they were when she was 17.
-
I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this
-
I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this
It was ALL hinky from the get-go... Then Allred showed up, and I knew for sure.
-
I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this
LOL. You wrote this as a joke, right? You have seen the Lisa Bloom/Gloria Allred stage show before, right?
-
LOL. You wrote this as a joke, right? You have seen the Lisa Bloom/Gloria Allred stage show before, right?
Okay ... this has now been put to bed.
So are we gonna still be obsessing about this after everyone involved is dead ... including us?
-
Okay ... this has now been put to bed.
Phrasing.
-
As for the Ten Commandments monument, I have expounded at length on the fact that those Commandments are the seminal basis for and generally oldest example of even secular law. To pick and choose, does not do them justice, and to leave them up is something I had no problem with.
Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?
Or maybe you think the Muslims have it right when it comes to religion controlling government?
You can't have it both ways,so make up your mind if you want America to be a Religious State populated by slaves,or a Free Nation governed by laws and populated by people free to make their own decisions as long as they aren't harming anyone else?
But those are the so-called 'laws' he defied: A judge ruling contrary to the State Constitution, and defied another ruling to remove a monument to a set of fundamental laws which have endured for millennia.
State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.
IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW are the ones who are LAWless.
In other words,"Praise MY version of de Lawd,and to HELL with the US Constitution!"
-
Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?
Yes I have. It is the made up lie that the Roosevelt Appointed Kooks on the Supreme Court cobbled together from an old letter to explain why their own personal preferences were the new law of the land.
There is no actual basis for this claim in history or in law prior to the 1940s.
You can't have it both ways,so make up your mind if you want America to be a Religious State populated by slaves,or a Free Nation governed by laws and populated by people free to make their own decisions as long as they aren't harming anyone else?
That is not the choice we face. You are putting forth the "fallacy of false choice." We can have a religious society as well as a free society. We have had exactly this for most of this nation's history.
State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.
The constitution dictates separation of powers. The States have the ability to exercise their own powers within complete compliance with the Constitution. The two sources of authority are not in conflict.
IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW are the ones who are LAWless.
In other words,"Praise MY version of de Lawd,and to HELL with the US Constitution!"
States have always had the authority to designate an official religion. It wasn't until 1830 something that the last state did away with their official religion. The stuff people are taught nowadays is a modern fiction.
-
Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?
I haven't heard it mentioned in the Constitution of the United States of America. Can you show me where it can be found?
Or maybe you think the Muslims have it right when it comes to religion controlling government?
Strawman. No one is advocating religion controlling government. No one.
State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.
Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you think is being overpowered here? Please be specific.
-
States have always had the authority to designate an official religion.
Correctamundo. Not that any state is trying to do it here now.
It always amazes me how ignorant some people are of what the Constitution actually says.
-
Phrasing.
Ooops. Bad choice of words.
This has now been completely proven to be utterly false and a travesty that too many people fell for.
-
Okay ... this has now been put to bed.
So are we gonna still be obsessing about this after everyone involved is dead ... including us?
This is a perfect post, @Emjay for me to say that I laughed out loud seeing the actual title of the thread....and that it's ten pages and counting.
Probably 75% of 2nd marriages started with a courtship of a married partner.
Does it make right? No.
Does it matter in the coming election? In a State which sets 16 as the age of consent?
*****rollingeyes*****
-
Y'all might want to get it right. Fox News was forced to retract that false headline. Breitbart is still running with it, which isn't quite surprising.
[url]http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline[/url
(https://i.imgur.com/c2FicJN.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/6P1suSt.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Jcms5vD.jpg)
-
Y'all might want to get it right. Fox News was forced to retract that false headline. Breitbart is still running with it, which isn't quite surprising.
@CatherineofAragon
You are mincing words. It is false witness regardless, even if only by omission (which I highly doubt is the case).
-
@CatherineofAragon
You are mincing words. It is false witness regardless, even if only by omission (which I highly doubt is the case).
@roamer_1
Lol, no I'm not.
(https://i.imgur.com/Ydd24lq.jpg)
-
Ole Miss One-Note is still clinging to a rapidly collapsing story.
Nelson—who, I will remind you, is friends with "Roy Moore groped me at 14" Leigh Corfman, indicating possible collusion—now admits she wrote part of the note she previously attributed to Moore. She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along. The fact that she took such care to make part of her note look like Moore's signature, using a current signature as a sample, implies she may still be lying.
The poster in question will still cling to false and unprovable rumors like the canard that he was somehow banned from a mall. It's becoming quickly clear that such posters may not even believe the nonsense they spout and are at this point are doing this just to troll other posters. Well, I'm calling it out.
-
Ole Miss One-Note is still clinging to a rapidly collapsing story.
Nelson—who, I will remind you, is friends with "Roy Moore groped me at 14" Leigh Corfman, indicating possible collusion—now admits she wrote part of the note she previously attributed to Moore. She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along. The fact that she took such care to make part of her note look like Moore's signature, using a current signature as a sample, implies she may still be lying.
The poster in question will still cling to false and unprovable rumors like the canard that he was somehow banned from a mall. It's becoming quickly clear that such posters may not even believe the nonsense they spout and are at this point are doing this just to troll other posters. Well, I'm calling it out.
@jmyrlefuller
That's Mrs. One Note to you. I was able to find a spouse. ^-^
-
@jmyrlefuller
That's Mrs. One Note to you. I was able to find a spouse. ^-^
(https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/NTm.ugXlBWQ3tqBkym9V0Q--~B/YXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD00MDA7dz03NjI-/http://b.fssta.com/uploads/content/dam/fsdigital/fscom/BOXING/images/2014/09/13/091314-BOXING-he-bit-me-LN-PI.vresize.1200.630.high.0.jpg.cf.jpg)
One more low blow like that and I'll deduct a point........ :rolling:
-
Ole Miss One-Note is still clinging to a rapidly collapsing story.
Nelson—who, I will remind you, is friends with "Roy Moore groped me at 14" Leigh Corfman, indicating possible collusion—now admits she wrote part of the note she previously attributed to Moore. She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along. The fact that she took such care to make part of her note look like Moore's signature, using a current signature as a sample, implies she may still be lying.
The poster in question will still cling to false and unprovable rumors like the canard that he was somehow banned from a mall. It's becoming quickly clear that such posters may not even believe the nonsense they spout and are at this point are doing this just to troll other posters. Well, I'm calling it out.
She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along
Not to be argumentative but I'm not sure she did claim that all along and the Allred press conference lacked clarifying this. I believe the claim was Roy signed her yearbook.
But I think Judge Roy is likely to win. It will be a shame and sham if they set up an ethics investigation just for him. Right now, we need to know everyone in congress who has acted up, crossed the line, the US had to pay out because of their behavior, that's a start.
-
(https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/NTm.ugXlBWQ3tqBkym9V0Q--~B/YXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD00MDA7dz03NjI-/http://b.fssta.com/uploads/content/dam/fsdigital/fscom/BOXING/images/2014/09/13/091314-BOXING-he-bit-me-LN-PI.vresize.1200.630.high.0.jpg.cf.jpg)
One more low blow like that and I'll deduct a point........ :rolling:
@edpc
You might have to do that.
-
Y'all might want to get it right. Fox News was forced to retract that false headline. Breitbart is still running with it, which isn't quite surprising.
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline (http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline)
You can clearly see the word "Moore" is written in blue ink. Not only is it written in blue ink, it looks exactly like Moore's signature on her divorce documents, up to and including the D.A. (Debra Adams) that was included on the divorce document.
Attempting to write the man's last name so that it looks like he wrote it is pretty much "forgery" in any reasonable sense of the word.
In other words, the headline isn't false, it's accurate.
-
By the way, the mods did not react in any way when she said that to me, so I hope they will be as forgiving to me.
-
That doesn't make any sense in view of the fact that in a fit of pique, I posted something to C of A that she had previously posted to me.
I came to my senses and decided not to sink to her level and deleted the post.
@CatherineofAragon
-
Yes I have. It is the made up lie that the Roosevelt Appointed Kooks on the Supreme Court cobbled together from an old letter to explain why their own personal preferences were the new law of the land.
But virgin birth and the Earth being created in 6 days is believable?
If you want to talk about kooks,there is no better place to find them in herds than in the Bible or on religious teebee programming.
We can have a religious society as well as a free society.
No,we can't. History has proven that allegation to be a lie,and the secular warfare and torture killed off a considerable percentage of the population for hundreds of years.
We have had exactly this for most of this nation's history.
Yes,but under severe protest by the Bible Thumpers that keep insisting we all live by "Gawd's Law!"
The constitution dictates separation of powers.
The States have the ability to exercise their own powers within complete compliance with the Constitution. The two sources of authority are not in conflict.
INCLUDING the separation of Church and State,which of course breaks your heart.
States have always had the authority to designate an official religion.
Which is PRECISELY what led most of America's early settlers to leave the religious police states of Olde Europe.
It wasn't until 1830 something that the last state did away with their official religion.
Yes,and you and others like you have been ranting and raving about it ever since,and want to go back to Religious Rule. GAWD demands it.
-
I haven't heard it mentioned in the Constitution of the United States of America. Can you show me where it can be found?
Cute. Did you learn how to tapdance around a lie in the church you attend by telling partial truths while lying about larger ones?
Strawman. No one is advocating religion controlling government. No one.
AN ABSOLUTE FREAKING LIE. I grew up hearing the religious loons related to me calling for just that. You can still hear it today from teebee preachers,Judge Roy Moore loons,the "life begins at erection" crowd,etc,etc,etc. Even Bubba Bill liked to walk out of church clutching his Bible when he lived in the WH.
It's being promoted right here on this board by you and others.
Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you think is being overpowered here? Please be specific.
Nope,not going to play your game. You have hundreds of files saved on your computer to throw out and argue for decades without ever having to write a single independent thought,while trying to tie your opponents up refuting obvious lies you will never admit to,and are probably so blind to that you can't see them yourself.
You have NO interest in true debate,just proselytizing.
-
Probably 75% of 2nd marriages started with a courtship of a married partner.
Does it make right? No.
@DCPatriot
You might see that differently if you were involved in one of THOSE first marriages. They were the situations that gave birth to the phrase,"A living hell!"
Not that all of those people manage to do much better on their second marriage. Not many people want to admit that THEY just MIGHT have been a part of the problem themselves.
*****rollingeyes*****
-
Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?
Or maybe you think the Muslims have it right when it comes to religion controlling government?
You can't have it both ways,so make up your mind if you want America to be a Religious State populated by slaves,or a Free Nation governed by laws and populated by people free to make their own decisions as long as they aren't harming anyone else?
State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.
IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW are the ones who are LAWless.
In other words,"Praise MY version of de Lawd,and to HELL with the US Constitution!"
We are dealing with a Monument to Law. But then, you could purge government property of all such.
For that matter anything to do with religion.
Then every cross in every Military Cemetery (headstone or not) would have to come down, and every Star of David. They aren't just monuments to the men, but to their faith, an egregious breach of the separation of Church and State. Incidentally, the same two faiths which share the Ten Commandments.
Interesting, too, that that same government you think should be separated from church and state makes national monuments around Medicine Wheels, which are just another religious statement/monument. Need I go on?
It was not paid for by 'government' money. It is the prime example of Written Law in Western Civilization, the oldest standing ones, anyway, so the monument could be considered that way as well.
LOL! But I KNOW YOU won't. :shrug:
-
But I think Judge Roy is likely to win. It will be a shame and sham if they set up an ethics investigation just for him. Right now, we need to know everyone in congress who has acted up, crossed the line, the US had to pay out because of their behavior, that's a start.
If they investigated everyone on Capitol Hill at once guilty of some violation, they would not be able to muster a quorum.
-
I haven't heard it mentioned in the Constitution of the United States of America. Can you show me where it can be found?
Cute. Did you learn how to tapdance around a lie in the church you attend by telling partial truths while lying about larger ones?
Ah, so it isn't in the Constitution after all. You simply made it up. Glad we got that clear. Perhaps if you were willing to discuss the legal and Constitutional aspects of this instead of consistently falling back on religion, then you wouldn't end up looking like a dishonest fool.
Strawman. No one is advocating religion controlling government. No one.
AN ABSOLUTE FREAKING LIE. I grew up hearing the religious loons related to me calling for just that. You can still hear it today from teebee preachers,Judge Roy Moore loons,the "life begins at erection" crowd,etc,etc,etc. Even Bubba Bill liked to walk out of church clutching his Bible when he lived in the WH.
You are confusing an individual's personal religious convictions with religious control of government. And by doing so, you are indirectly advocating secular control of government. This directly contradicts your 'separation of church and state' BS. But I digress. Again, I challenge you to find a single example of someone advocating religious control of government. Bill Clinton didn't. Roy Moore doesn't. Heck, even someone like Jerry Falwell was not willing to discard the Constitution in favor of a theocracy.
But of course none of that matters to your close-minded bigoted self. Heck, not even the Constitution itself matters. You are on a full tilt emotional rant against your boogeyman - God Himself. So spare us your denigration of the Constitution.
It's being promoted right here on this board by you and others.
You, sir, are a liar. Throughout my entire posting history, you cannot find a single post on this board where I have advocated religious control of government. Time and time again, I have deferred to the Constitution itself, which is certainly more than you have done since you are unable to cite a single word of it, relying instead on fictions not contained within.
Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you think is being overpowered here? Please be specific.
Nope,not going to play your game. You have hundreds of files saved on your computer to throw out and argue for decades without ever having to write a single independent thought,while trying to tie your opponents up refuting obvious lies you will never admit to,and are probably so blind to that you can't see them yourself.
You have NO interest in true debate,just proselytizing.
Not going to play my game? YOU were the one making the claim. YOU were the one bringing it up. And now YOU are the one refusing to defend that claim. In other words, YOU are the liar here.
And for the record, I am the one here who is interested in true debate. I am the one wishing to discuss the Constitution. While YOU are the one who keeps bringing up religion.
-
That doesn't make any sense in view of the fact that in a fit of pique, I posted something to C of A that she had previously posted to me.
I came to my senses and decided not to sink to her level and deleted the post.
@CatherineofAragon
@Emjay
Gotta hand it to you...you're a pro at the passive-aggressive schtick! Even when I agree with you, you manage to turn me off!
-
@Emjay
Gotta hand it to you...you're a pro at the passive-aggressive schtick! Even when I agree with you, you manage to turn me off!
Not you too. The person in question calls me passive-aggressive all the time. I would be aggressive-aggressive but in order to save my sanity and, in view of the incredible nastiness that she has posted to me in the past, I have her on ignore.
Not because I'm afraid to see her posts but because she brings out the worst in me and I don't like the worst in me.
-
Not you too. The person in question calls me passive-aggressive all the time. I would be aggressive-aggressive but in order to save my sanity and, in view of the incredible nastiness that she has posted to me in the past, I have her on ignore.
Not because I'm afraid to see her posts but because she brings out the worst in me and I don't like the worst in me.
Then stop bleep pinging her and talking about her, fruitcake.
-
@Emjay
Gotta hand it to you...you're a pro at the passive-aggressive schtick! Even when I agree with you, you manage to turn me off!
You know what? I didn't like your post at all but it made me realize something.
It's not enough to have that woman on ignore on this board. I have to have her on ignore in my mind. I hadn't thought about her at all in ages until she started this unhinged crusade against Roy Moore and that really ticked me off.
So, I will not post any more passive-aggressive attacks against her.
I promise.
-
Then stop bleep pinging her and talking about her, fruitcake.
She has fruitcake? Oh, a comma. Nevermind.
-
It's not enough to have that woman on ignore on this board. I have to have her on ignore in my mind. I hadn't thought about her at all in ages until she started this unhinged crusade against Roy Moore and that really ticked me off.
So, I will not post any more passive-aggressive attacks against her.
I promise.
..........after this one. :laugh:
-
Cute. Did you learn how to tapdance around a lie in the church you attend by telling partial truths while lying about larger ones?
Ah, so it isn't in the Constitution after all. You simply made it up. Glad we got that clear. Perhaps if you were willing to discuss the legal and Constitutional aspects of this instead of consistently falling back on religion, then you wouldn't end up looking like a dishonest fool.
@Hoodat
Speaking of dishonest fools,who is a bigger fool than someone that equates superstition with FACT. Care to discuss how old the universe is,Bubba? Virgin Birth? The accuracy of the Bible,a book so "accurate" it had to be rewritten?
You are confusing an individual's personal religious convictions with religious control of government. And by doing so, you are indirectly advocating secular control of government. This directly contradicts your 'separation of church and state' BS. But I digress.
Yes,you do,with the same old tired circular argument. All through history organized religions have seized control over governments and dictated to the people what they could and couldn't do. Anyone that tries to deny this is a liar.
Again, I challenge you to find a single example of someone advocating religious control of government. Bill Clinton didn't. Roy Moore doesn't. Heck, even someone like Jerry Falwell was not willing to discard the Constitution in favor of a theocracy.
Every Bible-Thumper that has ever lived. "Weeze gotta bring GAWD back to government!" Religious whackjobs are still whining about the removal of Blue Laws,for one example.
But of course none of that matters to your close-minded bigoted self. Heck, not even the Constitution itself matters. You are on a full tilt emotional rant against your boogeyman - God Himself. So spare us your denigration of the Constitution.
Better a closed mind than being mindless. Proof of this is your lame accussation that I go into "emotional rants against God Himself!" I don't rant about imaginary creatures. They don't exist. I rant against the mindless disciples of these imaginary creatures whose goal is to use the force of law to make the rest of us live according to their/your superstitious beliefs.
You, sir, are a liar.
*I* am not the one that worships a fictional Holy Ghost,or that believes in life after death.
Not going to play my game? YOU were the one making the claim. YOU were the one bringing it up. And now YOU are the one refusing to defend that claim. In other words, YOU are the liar here.
Give it a rest,drama queen. Your WHOLE DAMN LIFE is based on believing lies. Which is your right if that's what makes you happy. You just WILL NOT be able to establish religious rule in America,no matter how many brain-damaged judges you run for public office.
Guess what,Bubba? You are going to die,and when you die,that is the end of you,forever. You ain't coming back.
-
Ah, so it isn't in the Constitution after all. You simply made it up. Glad we got that clear. Perhaps if you were willing to discuss the legal and Constitutional aspects of this instead of consistently falling back on religion, then you wouldn't end up looking like a dishonest fool.
Speaking of dishonest fools,who is a bigger fool than someone that equates superstition with FACT. Care to discuss how old the universe is,Bubba? Virgin Birth? The accuracy of the Bible,a book so "accurate" it had to be rewritten?
That's really beautiful and all. But in no way does it address the challenge against your 'separation of church and state' fantasy. Clearly it is not in the Constitution. Yet you bring it up as if it has some sort of magical property. It doesn't. In addition, your non-rational response to your inability to show otherwise was rather pathetic.
You are confusing an individual's personal religious convictions with religious control of government. And by doing so, you are indirectly advocating secular control of government. This directly contradicts your 'separation of church and state' BS. But I digress.
Yes,you do,with the same old tired circular argument. All through history organized religions have seized control over governments and dictated to the people what they could and couldn't do. Anyone that tries to deny this is a liar.
But we're not talking about that red herring, are we? Again, no one here is advocating religion-controlled government. No one except for the secularist.
And you may want to learn what 'circular reasoning' actually is. Maybe next time, you can avoid looking like a complete fool.
Again, I challenge you to find a single example of someone advocating religious control of government. Bill Clinton didn't. Roy Moore doesn't. Heck, even someone like Jerry Falwell was not willing to discard the Constitution in favor of a theocracy.
Every Bible-Thumper that has ever lived. "Weeze gotta bring GAWD back to government!" Religious whackjobs are still whining about the removal of Blue Laws,for one example.
You clearly have no understanding of what religious control of government actually is. Iran has a religion-controlled government. We have a Constitutional government. And again, no one is advocating that we discard the Constitution and turn our government into a theocracy. No one.
Better a closed mind than being mindless. Proof of this is your lame accussation that I go into "emotional rants against God Himself!" I don't rant about imaginary creatures.
QED
*I* am not the one that worships a fictional Holy Ghost,or that believes in life after death.
Yet you are still a liar. Which is understandable since you openly admit that you have no moral compass other than your own mind.
Not going to play my game? YOU were the one making the claim. YOU were the one bringing it up. And now YOU are the one refusing to defend that claim. In other words, YOU are the liar here.
Give it a rest,drama queen. Your WHOLE DAMN LIFE is based on believing lies. Which is your right if that's what makes you happy.
Yet another complete disconnect with what was said. Again, you made the claim. Again, you refuse to defend that claim. Again, you are the liar.
You just WILL NOT be able to establish religious rule in America,no matter how many brain-damaged judges you run for public office.
I have zero desire to establish religious rule in America. I thought I made that plain in the beginning. Perhaps you should turn your emotions down a bit so you would have a clearer picture of what is going on here.
This whole thing between you and me started off because you brought up the 'separation of church and state' thingie which is NOT in the Constitution. And when challenged on this, you went ballistic on some religious tirade which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Constitution - a document that I love dearly.
Guess what,Bubba? You are going to die,and when you die,that is the end of you,forever. You ain't coming back.
Your basis?
-
Your basis?
You know he's trolling you, right?
-
(http://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/24862625_2012507278776440_1611973572764553830_n.jpg?oh=43b1ebec4e329320f220bd25d2506d42&oe=5A8A2276)
^-^
-
You know he's trolling you, right?
It's what he does.
Apparently when he's bored, he goes after Christians...... no, not just Christians, but Christ Himself, and God, the Father and Creator......... with all the hate and anger he's got stored up in his being.
-
It's what he does.
Apparently when he's bored, he goes after Christians...... no, not just Christians, but Christ Himself, and God, the Father and Creator......... with all the hate and anger he's got stored up in his being.
People like that usually end up blaming God for something....which is ironic because they believe He doesn't exist.
-
You know he's trolling you, right?
I see it more as exposing someone who is spiritually bankrupt - a person who has lost all capacity for honesty, open-mindedness, and willingness.
-
People like that usually end up blaming God for something....which is ironic because they believe He doesn't exist.
Yes. That is the greatest irony. That some people are so very angry at something they pretend doesn't exist.
And none of them sees the bizarre nature of his/her position.
-
I see it more as exposing someone who is spiritually bankrupt - a person who has lost all capacity for honesty, open-mindedness, and willingness.
I see it as daddy issues.
-
I see it more as exposing someone who is spiritually bankrupt - a person who has lost all capacity for honesty, open-mindedness, and willingness.
I see it as just another inevitable religious flame-war, anytime two thinkers butt heads on whether there's an afterlife. :laugh:
-
I see it as just another inevitable religious flame-war, anytime two thinkers butt heads on whether there's an afterlife. :laugh:
And the only way to prove it one way or another is to die.
Raincheck, please......
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/1z6ev9.jpg)
-
Dyslexia special report on the evening news. Flim at 11.
-
And the only way to prove it one way or another is to die.
Raincheck, please......
Indeed! :laugh:
-
(https://s.yimg.com/tr/i/c1ea775ff86c4d0a91189940b5d8b1f7_A.jpeg)
-
I see it as just another inevitable religious flame-war, anytime two thinkers butt heads on whether there's an afterlife. :laugh:
But that's not the case here. Only one poster had a meltdown over the afterlife. The other poster simply asked a question about the Constitution.
-
But that's not the case here. Only one poster had a meltdown over the afterlife. The other poster simply asked a question about the Constitution.
Meh... @sneakypete 's principles are as bedrock as the staunchest NT er around here.
If indeed, religion is the opiate of the masses, and he happens to be strong and courageous just in the present....where's the problem?
Worst case, he gets to say, "Whoops"!
-
@Fantom
A slap, huh? That’s nice. And be careful not to giggle.
Tell you what. If a man grabs my breast or gropes my crotch, I’m going to try my best to take an eye. What do you think of that?
@CatherineofAragon
I think you are nuts. And would be doing hard time for grievous bodily injury. As well you should.
-
@CatherineofAragon
I think you are nuts. And would be doing hard time for grievous bodily injury. As well you should.
Not if I'm on the jury.
-
Not if I'm on the jury.
Hmmn, a couple of decades ago.... I was at a local gun/knife club.... I prefer the edge of society. Anyways, late that night I went to my truck to leave, a woman followed. I did not know her and only had spoke a word or two to in passing that night.
As I got in my truck she stepped in , without a word unbuttoned my fly and started performing fellatio.
I stopped her .. all without taking any of her eyes. Had I taken an eye... good to know such as you sit juries.
Little happens in a vacuum.... although the above did. Most grab ass happens with at least some flirting. I have had many... well several women take hold of parts of my intimate anatomy with little forewarning. Often it ended well, no one lost an eye.
In my twenties I even had homo's make such hands on approach. Two in fact, one I laughed at, the other caught a strait left to the button.. dropped him like a sack of potatoes. They both, still have both eyes.. or did last I saw them.
-
I stopped her...
Cuz her beard was scratchy?
-
This thread has certainly taken a turn to the strange, now it seems to be a competition for who can make the best threats.
Well, I'm tired of seeing it float to the top of my "Unread Posts" page, and I've grown bored with it.
For the crime of being boring, this thread is now locked.