“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#343068 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not part of the Establishment Clause, moron.
We were discussing the Establishment Clause.
The Free Exercise clause does not prevent an established church, or anything at all in the States, since it limits only "Congress".
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof."
That's your one-dimensional (sic) wall spiel that you told them about up in Littleton as David S. Nelson. You misquoted - and probably plagiarized - the hack Barton, who actually called it a one-directional wall. But that is par for you, as with your bogus Littleton addresses, and your phony Supreme Court attribution (ALLEGHENY v ACLU, 1989).

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#343069 Aug 28, 2011
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
If they have fun putting on handcuffs, that is their choice. If they have fun climbing mountains, that is there choice. Neither hurts anyone else.
As for a 'Creator', I don't see convicncing evidence of such a being, so why should someone want to 'get right' with it? Again, if they want to live in a fantasy land and believe in fairy tale men in the sky that send their son, who is themself, to save humans from himself, then I guess that is their choice.
Why are you on here arguing against the idea of a Creator with a passion?

How would you feel if those that like to put on handcuffs for fun and recreation think you would like it and insist you try it?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#343070 Aug 28, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the way you lie - even when it can't possibly help you. That's what makes it pathological.
The statement is correct.

You are a sick, washed-up, old quack doctor who hates his country and what it stands for.

The reason you hate it is because it was founded upon belief in God, and you hate that idea. You hate it that some want to preserve that tradition, which built the greatest country in all of history because of it.

But at the same time, you are happy for the God-believing American taxpayers to send cash to keep up that third-world shit hole you moved to. And you sleep at night knowing the American uniformed military makes the shit hole safe to sleep in.

Like a cur dog, you bite the hand that feeds you.

When are you sending me my money you owe me?

You already bragged that you are so rich you don't need it.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343071 Aug 28, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's face it: even without photographic evidence, it's obvious that Joseph was cuckolded. I mean cone on. And if he believed that it was by his god, then he believed that his god has raped his wife. It's not pretty however you interpret it.
Brother Marine wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what YOU are saying is,
"I am going to twist it so that it fits MY views, and it's not pretty because that's the way I WANT to interpret it."
mary either consented to her impregnation, or she did not.

if she consented she is an adulterer.

If she did not consent she was raped.

notice - the Pimp (angel) "Tells" her, NOT asks! she objects as much as she can, but it is after-all a god, and one cannot say no to a god. therefore, she was raped.

Joseph the most famous cuckold in the world. Maybe he enjoyed it, and also lent her out to his friends?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#343072 Aug 28, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's your one-dimensional (sic) wall spiel that you told them about up in Littleton as David S. Nelson. You misquoted - and probably plagiarized - the hack Barton, who actually called it a one-directional wall. But that is par for you, as with your bogus Littleton addresses, and your phony Supreme Court attribution (ALLEGHENY v ACLU, 1989).
Barton called it a one-directional wall. He is correct.

Your lie is that he quoted Jefferson saying it.

Why didn't you copy and paste me saying that Allegheny v. ACLU is a Supreme Court case? Huh?

We both know why. It never happened. If it had, you would have it spattered all over this page.

Is absence of the evidence that I said it evidence of its absence?

Very lame charges, quack.

At least you didn't use your favorite on me - your rape charge.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#343073 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
Just wait for the next scientific global cooling scare. You are a blathering moron.
And you are the retarded brother who will take us all down if we can't stop him. You throwbacks are as much of a threat to humanity as an asteroid.

Is there anybody still undecided about this issue. I know of an extremely good series of YouTube videos on risk management in decision making about this matter, that I would recommend if you're still on the fence. Links are at the bottom of this post. The argument, in a nutshell, resembles this:

An analogy is this: You walk into a coffee shop, and some people there tell you that your wife at home may be in serious danger. They thought that they saw a pick-up truck parked in my driveway just like one on the news belonging to a known brutal rapist on the loose. They advise you to take action now.

Then, another group of people come into the coffee shop and disagree. They tell me that there is no danger, the first group are alarmists and are mistaken, pick-up trucks like that have been around for years and my wife has never been harmed by them, that other kinds of truck have been associated with crimes in the past, and that there's no risk.

Plus, the second group has a document signed by a bunch of people with college degrees (although few in law enforcement) saying that they don't believe the claims about your wife being in danger.

What are you going to do? Nothing except just sip coffee, or go home to her in case that's necessary?

When you suggest that even though you don't know if the danger is real or not, it might be, and that you think that you should go home as a precaution, the second group hoots at you for being gullible and wasting resources like gasoline on an unnecessary drive.

You realize that you do indeed have some serious doubts about the warning, but that at the same time, you can't be sure that it isn't valid.

What do you think that you should do?

This is basic risk management. I can choose to act or not, and either could be right or a mistake. So, ask yourself this: if I make a mistake, which mistake can I live with better? Suppose I unnecessarily take precautions (a mistake of acting), or fail to do so when I should have (a mistake of inaction)- which can I live with?

It's like the choice of buying fire insurance - act (buy it) or not? Either choice could turn out right (if I never paid any fire insurance premiums but never had a fire, or if I had a fire and had been insured) or wrong (buying insurance that I didn't use, or having my house burn uninsured).

How do you decide? You look at the two possible mistakes, and you make the choice that, if wrong, does the least damage, damage you can live with, like wasted insurance payments compared to a burned up.

==========

Transcript with one long video : http://manpollo.org/education/videos/risk_man...

The video broken into seven parts:

How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 1 of 7)

How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 2 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 3 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 4 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 5 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 6 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
How It All Ends: Risk Management (pt 7 of 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

If any of you trust my judgment at least a little, and want to know more about these topics - global climate change in particular and risk management in general - please look at these. They are really very good. And Risk Management is only one piece of the series. Here's a head start on that for those interested: http://manpollo.org/

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#343074 Aug 28, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
As of the end of 2010, the warmest years on record are 2010 and 2005. The next warmest was 2009.You are an idiot listening to liars, and you don't even know it.
.. can you refer me to a website with current information on the methane hydrates being released in the Artic Ocean? I Goggled it but, nothing current (last data was in 2010). About a year ago, scientists discovered plumes of methane rising from the Arctic seabed in Northern Scandinavia. The permafrost was beginning to show signs of destabilization. Since then, everything seems to be hush-hush ..

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#343075 Aug 28, 2011
karl44 wrote:
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's face it: even without photographic evidence, it's obvious that Joseph was cuckolded. I mean cone on. And if he believed that it was by his god, then he believed that his god has raped his wife. It's not pretty however you interpret it.
<quoted text>
mary either consented to her impregnation, or she did not.
if she consented she is an adulterer.
If she did not consent she was raped.
notice - the Pimp (angel) "Tells" her, NOT asks! she objects as much as she can, but it is after-all a god, and one cannot say no to a god. therefore, she was raped.
Joseph the most famous cuckold in the world. Maybe he enjoyed it, and also lent her out to his friends?
Mary consented. Luke 1:38

Even if she hadn't, there was no contact, thus no possible rape.

By the same token, no adultery. Adultery requires contact with another physical person.

You are a brazen bald-faced lying piece of shit.

You have the same moral value as a rabid skunk.

I hope someone who lives near you gets tired of your pathetic sniveling ass and puts you out of your misery. You are worth approximately the same as the slug from a .38 that it would take to relieve the world of your wasted existence.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343076 Aug 28, 2011
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Your being an as*hole about it is.
the time has come to :

tell the truth about religion

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#343077 Aug 28, 2011
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
If they have fun putting on handcuffs, that is their choice. If they have fun climbing mountains, that is there choice. Neither hurts anyone else.
As for a 'Creator', I don't see convicncing evidence of such a being, so why should someone want to 'get right' with it? Again, if they want to live in a fantasy land and believe in fairy tale men in the sky that send their son, who is themself, to save humans from himself, then I guess that is their choice.
There is more evidence for a creator than there is for:

1. Multiverse theory (no evidence)

2. String Theory (no evidence)

3. Infinite actual quantity (no evidence, and impossible)

4. Points (do not exist)

5. Infinite positive distance on a finite length line (impossible)

These are 5 things you have spoken of enthusiastically.

All either impossible, or with 0 evidence.

Hypocrite.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#343079 Aug 28, 2011
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. can you refer me to a website with current information on the methane hydrates being released in the Artic Ocean? I Goggled it but, nothing current (last data was in 2010). About a year ago, scientists discovered plumes of methane rising from the Arctic seabed in Northern Scandinavia. The permafrost was beginning to show signs of destabilization. Since then, everything seems to be hush-hush ..
Christopher Columbus and crew saw the same thing on the ocean in 1492.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#343080 Aug 28, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
the American locust is extinct. During the 19th century, it had devastating effects on American agriculture. Now, with temperatures rising, the Mexican locust is moving north. If and when it reaches the US, it will have devastating effects on our agriculture.
Undocumented locust?
Ferrare wrote:
Were you gone suckingoff the crack dealer on the corner for another hit? I said, and I quote, "If there isn't a God, then why isn't planet Mars habitable? Hmmm?"
Answer the question and stop trying to flirt with me, you nelly fudgepacking homofascist!
LOL. How’s this not hilarious?

For your files: http://engrishfunny.files.wordpress.com/2011/...
Two Cents

Ottawa, Canada

#343081 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
There is more evidence for a creator than there is for:
1. Multiverse theory (no evidence)
2. String Theory (no evidence)
3. Infinite actual quantity (no evidence, and impossible)
4. Points (do not exist)
5. Infinite positive distance on a finite length line (impossible)
These are 5 things you have spoken of enthusiastically.
All either impossible, or with 0 evidence.
Hypocrite.
Do you know, saying points do not exist make you appear to be an idiot. Oops, I forgot, you are a pig [farmer]. Stay the way you are!

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343082 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Baseless insults?
You told Christians there god was a rapist.
the christian god is many ugly things

rapist, not the worst on the list

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343083 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
More enlightenment from a lying piece of shit atheist.
You chose to believe there is no god.
You have no knowledge to base that belief on.
If I ever considered being an atheist, watching how atheists lie about their own beliefs would nip it in the bud.
You lying bastard cowardly piece of human scum.
it is an honor to have you disagree with me!

Imagine how ashamed I would be if they thought I agreed with you.

and

thanks for the cussing

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#343085 Aug 28, 2011
There is a peculiar difference between life today and in yesteryears. Once upon a time people spent more time living it than trying to dissect it.

Maybe a result of the mass media and meme projection.

Like dividing that line into infinite portions, you can lose yourself in the process.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#343086 Aug 28, 2011
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
There is more evidence for a creator than there is for:
1. Multiverse theory (no evidence)
2. String Theory (no evidence)
3. Infinite actual quantity (no evidence, and impossible)
4. Points (do not exist)
5. Infinite positive distance on a finite length line (impossible)
These are 5 things you have spoken of enthusiastically.
All either impossible, or with 0 evidence.
Hypocrite.
you forgot

Buck Crick's brain: no evidence of its existance

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343087 Aug 28, 2011
polymath257 wrote:
Wow. Bucky is really losing it now. Spamming 9 posts in an hour that are all essentially the same thing. I wonder why he is so interested in the particular definition of rape.
he seems to think that all 365 lbs of him cannot be charged with Rape, unless he achieves vaginal penetration with his flaccid member.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#343088 Aug 28, 2011
Passion of the Masochrist wrote:
<quoted text>
When are you going to let Dave come out and play?
buck employs dave, like I use toilet paper.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#343089 Aug 28, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
Really? REALLY??? You're going to look at all the bizarre weather around the world and say this with a straight face?
I agree. And I believe that man will not prevent a disaster here. I expect that the a crisis lies down the road - a much more likely scenario that than we will do the prudent thing. Don't you? Or if you don't, can you base that on anything other than the preference to remain optimistic, whether justified or not?

Xdanox and Hidingfromyou want to live a very, very, very long time. But how many people have you heard comment how glad they are to be late middle aged, or older? I'm one, and not just because of climate.

If I thought that I had fifty to a hundred or more years left, I'd have to reinterpret expatriating according to the maxim that "you can run, but you can't hide". But with thirty or fewer years left in all likelihood, maybe I can. I'm going to try, anyway. If they fcuk up our paradise in Mexico, we'll just have to move accordingly. If climates and water supplies are labile enough to change over short periods, being able to relocate - unthinkable for Americans once - is a potential asset today.

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 Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min Gods r Delusions ... 578,952
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 14 min lightbeamrider 1,965
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 16 min onemale 270,059
Johnny Spencer 17 min Terra Jones 2
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 48 min Epiphany2 609,822
News Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 56 min ACME Rock Sales 121,445
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 1 hr thetruth 9,228
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr bad bob 176,203
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 8 hr MUQ2 39,952
More from around the web