Why Should Jesus Love Me?

Since: May 11

Maidstone, UK

#597656 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What is it with you and coming to your own conclusions, false as they may be?
As I told you earlier, I broke a windshield. There's no such thing as "assault with a deadly weapon" on a windshield.
It was a holiday weekend and the courts were closed on Monday, so Tuesday morning I was scheduled to go to court for arraignment. I went to court, sat in the cage with the rest of the guys, and that's it. My case never went before a judge, I was never arraigned.
According to the public defender, the court has 48 hours to arraign somebody. I was booked in at 9 PM on Friday, which counts as a day, then I sat in court all day on Tuesday, which counted as the second day. Since I wasn't arraigned, they had to release me.
Within a few days I was put in contact with the guy I got into a fight with and broke his windshield, settled out of court and I had his windshield repaired.
I have no criminal record.
not seeing the word, "club" here either....

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597657 Oct 2, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
I hear you have a mouth full of cock quite often.
Here's your English lesson for the day
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/2636f66424/d...

More on that subject
Bongo

Yonkers, NY

#597659 Oct 2, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be stupid, you moron.
If a guy is in a car, and you smash the windshield with a club, that's an assault on the guy, and the club is a deadly weapon.
That's what you said you did.
You slipped through on a technicality.
If there is anything you really really know about, that would be slipping through on a technicality, right. This may also include slipping on the bathhouse floor.

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#597660 Oct 2, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to know how he "settled out of court" on a criminal case.
Do the police in the US actually hand the contact details of the victims to their alleged asailant? Seems a little unsafe to me.
He'll have an "explanation" for that one too.

He also said he wasn't charged with assault with a deadly weapon.

Then he said the court "dropped" it to vandalism.

Dropped what?

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#597661 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't it time for you to post more derogatory homosexual slurs about cocks in my mouth?
It wasn't derogatory. Why do you have a problem with me exposing your homosexuality ?

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#597662 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what the stupid cop said. "Well the guy was in the car!"
Luckily, the courts were smarter than the stupid cop.
And you.
You lucked out.

From your description of your crime, you were guilty of assault with a deadly weapon on the occupant of the car.

That's a felony, punishable in California by 2, 3 or 4 years in the state prison.

You and Skom should be co-felons.

Sooner or later they'll get you if you keep beating your wife.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#597663 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG.
O__O
I was charged, not convicted.
BIIIIIG deference, purfesir.
I think you are lying once again.

You were found not guilty ? Was the judge drunk or stupid ?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597664 Oct 2, 2013
Epiphany2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I enjoyed reading your post Ians
Really? I'm glad of that. And thanks for saying so.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#597665 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what the stupid cop said. "Well the guy was in the car!"
Luckily, the courts were smarter than the stupid cop.
And you.
The cop should have shot you.

Since: May 11

Maidstone, UK

#597666 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG.
O__O
I was charged, not convicted.
BIIIIIG deference, purfesir.
you say you were charged, not convicted, you admit the offence, you admit liability by "settling out of court".

If this is the case how are you different to a criminal you want to string-up, burn or lock away? Just the fact you escaped conviction? Your MAMMOTH HYPOCRISY is showing again.

If you have no criminal conviction then why did you "settle out of court"? This is a civil remedy not a criminal remedy. You mean you were convicted and ordered to pay restitution? LMAO

I think that's more likely to be the case but you got caught in your own argument related to how you feel criminals should be treated so you decided criminals who get away with it get a pass when it comes to your own ideas of criminal justice....because it would have to include you.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#597667 Oct 2, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I'm lookin' forward to it.

Since: May 11

Maidstone, UK

#597668 Oct 2, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
He'll have an "explanation" for that one too.
He also said he wasn't charged with assault with a deadly weapon.
Then he said the court "dropped" it to vandalism.
Dropped what?
*whispers* I think he means...pleaded no contest to a lesser charge...

but he has no record...honest.

It's like Walter 'RiversideRedneck' Mitty's World of Fantastical Whimsy in here LOL.
LineDazzle

Reading, UK

#597669 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what the stupid cop said. "Well the guy was in the car!"
Luckily, the courts were smarter than the stupid cop.
And you.
The court doesn't drop crimes, they drop sentences and punishments, imbecile!

Looks like you are telling a lie!

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#597670 Oct 2, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
again...
What one side considers evidence another considers nonsense.
So.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
The parting of the Red Sea was once a miracle now miracles are reduced to polarised reflections in office windows and mildew stains in old fountains, yet the 'religious' have no problem accepting these things as irrefutable proof of supernature.
I don't beleive the Red Sea "was parted".

You can, if you choose. It doesn't mean it occurred.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no proof in existence of an afterlife or supernature or gods. If there were it would be a cause celebre and the churches would be full.
Sure there is, you just don't want to accept it.

Self.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care if someone picked up something on a tape recorder which sounded vaguely like someone talking because the chances are it was someone talking.
That is your perogative. Just because you don't accept that Science can discover this.

You have a odd sense of what is Science and what is not.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I own an IR reflective suit from my time in the army looking at me in it through a thermal imager would make me appear 'spectral'.
Great - you've just debunked why some people would hoax an apparition. I wonder how many people actually know this, and how many people have actually triued to attempt a hoax using this method. I doubt it was. But hey, what do I know, huh? I'm just Agnostic.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has yet 'come through' from the spirit world to tell us what a mind numbingly boring time they're having worshipping god.
I too have also wondered this, and have pretty much concluded what the religious world claims as "heaven" is falsely conveyed to the world. That is why I chose to leave Christianity many years ago.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
You're telling me that just because something is picked up on a 'mechanism' it becomes scientific evidence? Really.....?
It is evidence. What do you call evidence? Just because you claim it be "circumstantial", no matter - it is still evidence.

In fact, circumstantial evidence, was what made much of Science it is today. "The Sun revolves around the Earth" was circumstantial, but later proved absurd. But brought about the correct belief of the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Your argument is invalid.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I’d be very interested to see where I said that. There are issues like calibration, anti tamper seals, controls and tempest monitoring where electronic equipment are concerned. Sticking a video camera in a dark room or a tape recorder left running in an empty house do not a valid experiment make.
HUH?
"You're telling me that just because something is picked up on a 'mechanism' it becomes scientific evidence?"

You just stated it in the statement above. Whereas, I have never stated you said anything, so please stop insinuating I had stated something I never did or by putting words into my mouth. You sound like a "Christian".

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#597671 Oct 2, 2013
<<continued to MisterCharrington>>
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to tell me what happens to my immortal soul then insist for the sake of your argument that I must believe in such a thing as a soul before you can continue then you have already lost. Your opening gambit is a requirement that I lower the standard of proof which is required to convince me.
I have no clue on what will happen to your "immortal soul".
Why would I? DO you think I am a god?
I'm not. Chill out MC - Go sit back down and take deep breathes, before you hyperventilate.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
What you are attempting to do once again is shift the burden of proof. You are saying there is an afterlife and I should behave a certain way to have a good one.
This forum doesn't require proof, so please stop projecting some unfounded action to occur.
Like I said already - I could care less on what you believe in, but with you making these unfounded claims - with this incident is true or false, is just bologna and a very "Christian-like" tactic.
Some Atheist you turned out to be, especially when you act like a "Christian".
*sighs*
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I say it has not been proven to my satisfaction on the preponderance of evidence so it is up to you to rebut.
No it isn't. I have only one requirement, and that is to openly post my opinions within this public forum.
With you thinking "it is up to you to rebut" is an incomplete thought.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
The default position is that there is no afterlife the positive assertion that such a thing exists is yours.
Why isn't the default position "there is an afterlife"?
Did you just make this up?
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
When one goes into court for example the task is to determine whether an act took place. Guilt v No-guilt....did an act or omission take place which caused a particular outcome. i.e. Did it happen?(something happened - positive assertion).
...and there has been plenty of times that circumstantial evidence has been presented.
DOH!!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597672 Oct 2, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
I guess it doesn't matter what I wrote at all, because no matter what I did write - "sweating is not an act of will", and is a process that occurs through some scientific process.
Yes, your illustration didn't undermine your argument. It just failed to support it.

But don't write off sweating as an act of will so quickly. I'm sure that there are people that can do it or that can train themselves to do it. What's harder for many of us is to believe something that we find unbelievable as an act of free will.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#597673 Oct 2, 2013
<<continued to MisterCharrington>>
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a presumption of innocence(nothing happened) the default position, which can be rebutted with adequate evidence of the correct type. Effective rebuttal attracts a verdict of guilty(there is a demonstrable result of the act(or ommission)).
You are failing to represent your side.
Can you provide evidence that supports your position?
Or are you going to just quote people?
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no verdict of innocent; there is a verdict of not guilty if the rebuttal of the default negative position was unsuccessful.
So. We aren't talkign about verdicts, so please try to stay focussed.
We are talking about a spiritual phenomenon that many people believe to exist.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I agnostic? No I'm an atheist, we may not know everything about reality but we know enough to say that a god/gods/supernature are not represented anywhere in reality which would by default make them unreal and highly unlikely to the degree that they can be disregarded.
"are not represented anywhere in reality"
- Odd that you would conclude this, when there has been many references throughout history by many people.
But just because you say it is false, it must be. And to promote this, you expect others to show you otherwise. Odd.
Odd, in that you cannot even support your own position, but expect others to do theirs.
Self.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism isn’t a worldview btw, atheism is a single position on a single issue. Atheism requires no faith, belief, worship, ritual or veneration.
Thanks for the explanation.
Then you are not Atheist, as you believe that the supernatural world does not exist.
You are jsut a human, huh? With no beliefs in anything.
DOH!!
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
You do not honestly believe that you have no proof of anything if you haven’t experienced it first hand. That is a juvenile tactic which looks juvenile. If that’s the case then the Napoleonic Wars never happened.
I believe, because I believe I have had a first-hand experience.
Since it appears that you have not, I can truly understand your position. It isn't juvenile either.
What is juvenile is you have already made a conclusion upon someone you have never met, know nothing about, and all because you believe differently.
That is juvenile and very immature.
"My belief in nothing is better than your belief in something."
That is how you are sounding.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing of your mental 'self' which projects beyond your 'self',(rather like god/gods/the faerie folk) or has any affect beyond what goes on in your ‘self’.
You just presented evidence that shows otherwise - you posted freely using your own thoughts. This is Self.
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
What you're describing is wilful subscription to comfortable and cosy thoughts, not reality.
Untrue.
You posted and that was a moment in reality.
My view is that you haven't studied the Self.
LineDazzle

Reading, UK

#597674 Oct 2, 2013
...Once a court case has been passed, they don't change the court decision.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#597675 Oct 2, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to know how he "settled out of court" on a criminal case.
Do the police in the US actually hand the contact details of the victims to their alleged asailant? Seems a little unsafe to me.
His story changes with every post.

Not only is RR a liar, he isn't even good at it.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#597676 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Fail.
.. this is not a test; nobody passes or fails ..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Fail. You're talking about geological and biological similarities, I'm not.Just because America and Libya have oxygen speaks nothing to their national differences.
.. yes, the cultures are differ but both can sustain life therefore there is a correlation which cannot be easily dismissed with a simple 'fail'..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's like saying the Babylonian religions and Christianity are the same because they both use words...
.. they use identical symbology so, again, it cannot be easily dismissed with a indignant 'fail'..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
And I don't know what "damage" you're referring to.
.. from religion causing damage to the brain (1) to alienating and killing people in the name of a belief ..

(1) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm...
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Woah there!! I am not at all anti-gay. Why do you have to say that?!
.. I did't say it, your posts say it. Same thing applies to Ben's recent post about a man sucking c*ck. Along with being anti-gay, it's misogynistic and objectifies women ..

.. why don't male-to-male insults include, "You probably lick p*ssy." Think about it before a quick quip ..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Also, why do you assume Christianity "made" me misogynistic? Why don't you factor in other possibilities?
.. fair enough. There are other possibilities but, along with being a cultural constraint, it's also biblical ..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullshit.
Or horse shit.
I can't decide.
.. OK ..
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The sum total of me comes from more influence than just Christianity. I don't live in a little Christian bubble and go around thumping Bibles all day long.
I'm more than that.I thought you knew...
.. yes, you're more than you realize; you're the perfect expression of 'what is.' Can I change it? No. Can you change it? Yes. It's a matter or erasing the embedded tapes in your brain that continue to replay; tapes that insult humanity ..

.. they sound like this: "Blacks are violent," "Gays are not normal," and " Women are dumb." It's really up to you ..

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Hawaiians to Attorney General Sessions: We're n... 4 min discocrisco 8
News Nancy Pelosi: Border Wall Is 'Immoral, Expensiv... 6 min discocrisco 1
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 9 min nanodoofus 110,118
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min nanodufus 675,534
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 22 min gabrielinstupidland 982,286
All blacks should be deported to LIBERIA!!!! (Oct '08) 1 hr White Trash Baboon 10
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 2 hr real 33,202
More from around the web