A Random Liberal

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by beej

Oh my God!! It doesn't??? Pretty tough to tell from some of what I've been reading on this board. And, yes, I know, I'm an idiot noob; right DJ?

That, and you mother wears army boots.

Regards,

D-Ray

[beej]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

That, and you mother wears army boots.

Regards,

D-Ray

And looked hot in 'em too!!!!

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by beej

And looked hot in 'em too!!!!

Oh no! Let's not get Freudian here!

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by mezz

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if those sign holders were actually gay liberals trying to stir up trouble and portray their imaginary opponets the way they'd like the media to see them. The means always seem to justify the end for liberals and ethics never even enter into the picture (because most liberals don't even really know what they are).

Originally Posted by merrylander

Quoted only as an example of the bullshit mezz posts and that he describes as "debating". mezz you are flat out the dumbest ahole I have ever come across in 81 years.

Originally Posted by mezz

Pretty lively there for 81 Rob. Glad to be able to assist is keeping those juices flowing. You're certainly no Eeyore on this forum .


I still love ya though. Mezz.

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I've always liked that quote, but it can obscure some important points. For example, it is relevant to evaluate one's position by understanding what biases he or she brings. I believe that it is also relevant to question the debating techniques of the person involved in a discussion/argument. It is certainly relevant to question the sources upon which one bases his or her premises. It is completely fair to describe the flaws in logic in an individual's argument, and to point out inconsistencies. While those points are personal observations, they are not bereft of ideas.

That being said, it doesn't advance a debate to describe one with different views as stupid, or queer, or ugly.

Regards,

D-Ray

I rest my case in regards to this troll who goes by the name of Mezz. Add ageism to his faults. Debate? This kid would be tossed from a seventh grade debate team in 30 seconds flat.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Dave your posts are usually accurate, but it is a stretch to describe the Westboro folks as Christians. It is easy to find congregations that are accepting of all folks, and welcome same-sex couples to participate in worship and in the church family. I attend such a church.

Regards,

D-Ray

Well, they claim to be such. And I find it interesting that the Baptist church hasn't at least asked them to stop using the name. Or have they?

Dave

[JJIII]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I've always liked that quote, but it can obscure some important points. For example, it is relevant to evaluate one's position by understanding what biases he or she brings. I believe that it is also relevant to question the debating techniques of the person involved in a discussion/argument. It is certainly relevant to question the sources upon which one bases his or her premises. It is completely fair to describe the flaws in logic in an individual's argument, and to point out inconsistencies. While those points are personal observations, they are not bereft of ideas.

That being said, it doesn't advance a debate to describe one with different views as stupid, or queer, or ugly.

Regards,

D-Ray

I concur.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

[snip]That being said, it doesn't advance a debate to describe one with different views as stupid, or queer, or ugly.

Regards,

D-Ray

Except for one small problem; specious conjecture does not equal debate.

[wgrr]

Chic fil A donates millions of dollars to anti-gay hate groups through a charitable arm of their business.

The Family Research Council is one of the worst. When Congress was considering a resolution to condemn Uganda for making homosexuality a crime that was punishable by death, the FRC donated thousands of dollars lobbying to kill the resolution. Chic fil A donates money to this vile group. You can draw your own conclusions.

Read all about the Family Research Council here:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...search-council

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

This is one of the reasons why liberal activism rubs me the wrong way. This is not an a-typical act, IMHO. Liberals like to try to intimidate and bully in a way that is totally mean spirited, and like this turd, they're not above making making innocent bystanders like a drive through window worker collateral damage for their cause. But they wish to be excused for their actions because their "intentions are just."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thNqs...layer_embedded

Enjoy.

Where are your citations for this claim? You state "This is not an atypical act, In Your Humble Opinion." While I grant that you are entitled to your opinion, most people have some basis in fact for forming said opinion. If you don't mind, what are the facts you use in forming this opinion? What other incidents caused you to think that liberal activists engage in intimidation and mean spirited bullying? (I'll accept the turd apellation as hyperbole at this stage.)

The reason I ask is that you've shown a penchant for ad hominem attacks and regularly use what can only be described as underhanded dissembling when asked direct questions by myself and others Whell. You've fired off on more than a few occasions spurious claims of my having obsessive interest in you.

The only obsession I ascribe to is truth. Which compels me to point up these baseless ad hom attacks and falsehoods you chose to engender or repeat from unknown sources. Unknown as in every time I've asked for reference sources you simply ignore any request or jocularly complain that I have some sort of obsession. I hope this explains my interest in the subject to you and please keep your attempts at pivoting to a minimum.

Back to the subject Whell. What sources or verifiable incidents do you base what appears on the face of it to be ad hominem characterizations of the liberal activist movement? I'm not interested in anecdotal homilies from the FRC or any such organizations. Please keep it to verifiable incidents that have led you down this path.

BTW I'm merely curious as to how an individual such as yourself acquires such knowledge if indeed it can be factually described as such. Is it through newsletters such as FRC produces or do you winnow through news sources? If so which ones? Is it only YouTube?

[Twodogs]

When did America's biggest problem become deviant sexual acts, and the support for the same? Keep that nasty shit in your nasty little bedrooms.