The "Tolerant Left" Strikes Again

Posted in the Columbus Forum

Comments (Page 33)

Showing posts 641 - 660 of902
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#661
Apr 23, 2013
 
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
No gay people have kids? Really?
Like sire, like pup.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#662
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Like sire, like pup.
I don't know what that non sequitor has to do with my question.

I'll ask again. Do you think no gay people don't have kids?
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#663
Apr 23, 2013
 
^^ no gay people have kids.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#664
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what that non sequitor has to do with my question.
I'll ask again. Do you think no gay people don't have kids?
Same-sex couples cannot produce biological children.
Remember...earlier today you failed Critical Thinking 101.
It's still not working for you.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#665
Apr 23, 2013
 
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
That's exactly why I did register. I was 'notlocal' for a long time then some hijack started posting as me.
Duh, it's so hard to figure out when someone does that.:-/
yeap I remember when you were notlocal.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#666
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what that non sequitor has to do with my question.
I'll ask again. Do you think no gay people don't have kids?
The one who is the subject of this thread has two I believe.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#667
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
It is troubling that it was an anonymous letter that brought her to the attention of those with hiring/firing capabilities.
There are a couple of things to consider. If you yourself are a member of staff and have committed a sin as defined by the Catholic church, do YOU need to worry about an anonymous letter being sent? And would some of the posters here approve of such? I certainly hope the person who sent the anonymous letter is as blameless as Jesus himself. I'm not into the gay rights movement and I have no idea what all those letters Tip writes mean, or if he's being sarcastic. But I find it hard to believe that no other member of staff has committed an egregious sin in the last 19 years. If the Church decided to clean house, I hope they are making sure the cobwebs are cleaned out as well. That's all I'm saying.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#668
Apr 23, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Cultural norm, is it not, that obit publish the spouse/significant other of the immediate survivors? When my dad died it was listed as, survived by "daughters, GOKeefe (insert name here), Sister2 (insert name here), etc..."
That was 28 years ago, too.
Lawyers don't argue on presumptions. Honestly, I hope this has legs. I am incredulous that in 19 years, not one single person knew she was a lesbian. Whether or not one personally agrees with the lifestyle, it seems wrong that after all this time suddenly she's a sinner of the highest degree. Not one single person was ever invited to their home for a holiday (or any other) gathering?
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#669
Apr 24, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Obit provides proof of the domestic arrangement.
So are you going to claim that I didn't sleep with my ex husband?
Not necessarily. But I could probably find an old Henny Youngman or Jack Benny joke to make that point. Where's the proof that she was engaging in sexual relations with her partner?

Its also my understanding that one of the Church's tenets is that its followers are supposed to treat those with homosexual tendencies kindly and fairly, with love..that its not a sin to have those inclinations, but it is a sin to act upon them. I think I've seen Topix' resident expert in Catholicism make that very statement here.

It sure seems a bit arbitrary, given the dissimilar treatment that male homosexual priests are documented to have received, though that allegedly has stopped.

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#670
Apr 24, 2013
 
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't register because you are a friggin coward.
I thought all lawyers are big on accountability. The ones I deal with are. Of course, they are actual attorneys.
Ok...You claim that the reason I don't register is because I am a coward who fears accountability, and suggest that perhaps I am not what I claim to be.

Now, lets look at what you say about why YOU registered in the very next post you place, minutes later:
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
That's exactly why I did register. I was 'notlocal' for a long time then some hijack started posting as me.
Duh, it's so hard to figure out when someone does that.:-/
Tell me Annie: What aspects of courage personal accountability were implied when you registered to keep others from posting under "notlocal"?

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#671
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
The one who is the subject of this thread has two I believe.
Virgin births?

Or turkey basters?

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#672
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Same-sex couples cannot produce biological children.
Remember...earlier today you failed Critical Thinking 101.
It's still not working for you.
You do realize that gay people have functioning reproductive parts, don't you? I bet if you thought really, really hard you could think of some ways a gay person could have a biological child.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#673
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
Lawyers don't argue on presumptions. Honestly, I hope this has legs. I am incredulous that in 19 years, not one single person knew she was a lesbian. Whether or not one personally agrees with the lifestyle, it seems wrong that after all this time suddenly she's a sinner of the highest degree. Not one single person was ever invited to their home for a holiday (or any other) gathering?
You Catholics are something else. It's your school. You can teach the Earth is flat and have nothing but pedophile priests as teachers for all I care. But your absolute horror that your kids might be taught by a homosexual is utterly baffling. Homosexuality is not contagious. Your insistance on living with 2,000 year old intellects is amazing.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#674
Apr 24, 2013
 
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize that gay people have functioning reproductive parts, don't you? I bet if you thought really, really hard you could think of some ways a gay person could have a biological child.
Well...I think it would be much more entertaining for this forum to await your biology lesson demonstrating how two same-sex individuals can procreate, resulting in the birth of their shared biological child.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#675
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Well...I think it would be much more entertaining for this forum to await your biology lesson demonstrating how two same-sex individuals can procreate, resulting in the birth of their shared biological child.
Ahhhhh, Georgie has taught you well, Vadar. There you go adding a new variable to the equation. Why admit you are wrong when you can simply change the foundation of the discussion?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#676
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhh, Georgie has taught you well, Vadar. There you go adding a new variable to the equation. Why admit you are wrong when you can simply change the foundation of the discussion?
No variable added.
Homosexual couples cannot procreate.
That was and is the topic of this conversation.

To rehash for your addled brain:

- Duke ignorantly pretends here that these "domestic partners" have not engaged in sexual activity.

- Gokeefe challenges Duke's assertion by asking if any sane person would question whether she had engaged in sexual activity with her ex-husband.

- I point out the disordered state of the homosexual partnership by demonstrating that Gokeefe has proof of her union [i.e., biological children]; and that no homosexual couple can produce such proof.

The End.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#677
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
No variable added.
Homosexual couples cannot procreate.
That was and is the topic of this conversation.
To rehash for your addled brain:
- Duke ignorantly pretends here that these "domestic partners" have not engaged in sexual activity.
- Gokeefe challenges Duke's assertion by asking if any sane person would question whether she had engaged in sexual activity with her ex-husband.
- I point out the disordered state of the homosexual partnership by demonstrating that Gokeefe has proof of her union [i.e., biological children]; and that no homosexual couple can produce such proof.
The End.
No variable added, eh? Let's check.

Your post yesterday on the subject:
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Same-sex couples cannot produce biological children.
And your post today:
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
how two same-sex individuals can procreate, resulting in the birth of their shared biological child.
Read those two posts over a couple of times and see if the there is a word, a kind of important word, that exists in today's post that didn't exist in yesterday's post. You can do it. It starts with "S."
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#678
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
No variable added.
Homosexual couples cannot procreate.
That was and is the topic of this conversation.
To rehash for your addled brain:
- Duke ignorantly pretends here that these "domestic partners" have not engaged in sexual activity.
- Gokeefe challenges Duke's assertion by asking if any sane person would question whether she had engaged in sexual activity with her ex-husband.
- I point out the disordered state of the homosexual partnership by demonstrating that Gokeefe has proof of her union [i.e., biological children]; and that no homosexual couple can produce such proof.
The End.
All Gokeefe's children do is prove that a sperm hit one of her eggs. They offer no proof whatever how that little bugger got into her uterus.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#679
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize that gay people have functioning reproductive parts, don't you? I bet if you thought really, really hard you could think of some ways a gay person could have a biological child.
Heck, I just mentioned two of them.

woof

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#680
Apr 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
No variable added, eh? Let's check.
Your post yesterday on the subject:
<quoted text>
And your post today:
<quoted text>
Read those two posts over a couple of times and see if the there is a word, a kind of important word, that exists in today's post that didn't exist in yesterday's post. You can do it. It starts with "S."
You are playing a semantics game to further prove your idiocy.
You go, girl!

Meanwhile:

Two same-sex individuals, within a domestic partnership [the topic of this discussion], cannot procreate.

REPEAT: Two same-sex individuals, within a domestic partnership [the topic of this discussion], cannot procreate.

REPEAT: Two same-sex individuals, within a domestic partnership [the topic of this discussion], cannot procreate.

I will await your biology lesson.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 641 - 660 of902
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

18 Users are viewing the Columbus Forum right now

Search the Columbus Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 1 hr C George 770
Bennett Smith gate stories from the victims poi... (May '13) 3 hr Movie Goers 1,951
Korean sinking ship has "less whites"! Another ... 3 hr Duke for Mayor 3
Is Nevada rancher a freeloader? 3 hr Duke for Mayor 111
why is chelsea clinton so ugly? 3 hr They cannot kill a Spook 9
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius Resigning 3 hr TonyD2 88
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 4 hr Seriouslady 2,161
•••
•••
•••
•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••