Stem-Cells, degenerate Gay Lesbo rights, Abortion, Janet Jackson's boob..what's the problem ??
POSTED BY: JaynezTown
UPDATED: Sunday, December 1, 2024 16:44
VIEWED: 31108
PAGE 14 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Sigma - do you mind if I call you Sigma?
Not at all
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:Quote:
How many times do you think I'll have to ask before I get an answer?... Or will I?
Good question. Fair. I think the answer depends on what kind of answer we should expect.
[snip]
Hard to know. heh.....
Well, the first response was... unresponsive. So, to me, the probability of getting an answer is getting lower.
I don't understand why answering a straight question with a straight answer is so difficult.
It makes me want to do what Riley suggested and put him in a cage and do experiments on him
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Good morning, Sigma, Finn. 
Sigma:
Quote:
Well, the first response was... unresponsive. So, to me, the probability of getting an answer is getting lower.
Clearly. I was being over-optimistic. Giving the benefit of the doubt to my fellow Finn ("Pink thong! Pink thong!"). I was weak.
Quote:
I don't understand why answering a straight question with a straight answer is so difficult.
Ooh! Ooh! I can answer this: because that would mean Finn ("If you're gay you're promiscuous!") would have to actually think about what he's saying. He'd have to ask himself a hard question or two, examine his assumptions, and justify his conclusions. Mental gymnastics can be exhausting, especially when you're unused to self-examination in the first place.
Quote:
It makes me want to do what Riley suggested and put him in a cage and do experiments on him
This way is probably more humane if somewhat more irritating.
"You mean they have the internet on computers now?" Homer
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:"You two are the two who are the two. I'm the other one."
Originally posted by ReeQueen:Quote:
It makes me want to do what Riley suggested and put him in a cage and do experiments on him
This way is probably more humane if somewhat more irritating.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
"You two are the two who are the two. I'm the other one."
1) What?!?!?
2) There was a
= joke... at least mostly 3) I'll quote myself from my last post and the one before that and the one before that and the one before that... at least.
Now, since I've become dragged into some side note that I don't care to waste my time on, I'll return to ask a question that must be answered before I continue this current discussion (I've also asked it before).
How does this gays being promiscuous argument, have anything to do whether gays are allowed to marry or not? That is assuming that they are promiscuous, which is far from proven.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This has already been answered.
You're obsessed. You need to let it go and move on with your life.
Incidentally, the quote in my previous post was said by Willow from Buffy.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Clearly. I was being over-optimistic. Giving the benefit of the doubt to my fellow Finn ("Pink thong! Pink thong!"). I was weak.
Giving the benifit of the doubt and second chances is what makes up accepting and it gives our selves a chance to learn. If Finn would step back for a second and give a "second chance" to the gay community, I have no doubt that given what facts and logic that have been brought up here, he'd change his mind. But that is given that he is open to that, which it doesn't seem that he is.
I know this guy that was in my Quantum class and he was telling us about this religion class he was taking. It was titled, "Science and Religion" or something like that.
He told us that everybody has some swing with regards to what they believe. For some, what they are willing to accept, that isn't what they believe, given proof to the contrary, is greater than others. The part of someones belief that they won't change even given a mountain of proof is what the prof. called everyones "black box."
I will conjecture that we've stepped into Finn's black box. I really think, that no matter how many holes I/we put into his stats. How many times I/we logically, etc counter his arguments that there'll even be a chance at changing his mind.
Especially since he says such silly things like, "since there are as many (or possibly more) heterosexuals who practice anal sex as there are homosexual males doing so."
If my conjecture is true, I pitty him.
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Ooh! Ooh! I can answer this: because that would mean Finn ("If you're gay you're promiscuous!") would have to actually think about what he's saying. He'd have to ask himself a hard question or two, examine his assumptions, and justify his conclusions. Mental gymnastics can be exhausting, especially when you're unused to self-examination in the first place.
Well said!
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Good morning, Sigma, Finn.
It's night time right now here, so, good night
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@Finn:
Actually, NO you haven't. To do so, you would have to cite yourself and not just refer me to "earlier posts."
You do remember berating me about not citing my sources properly, right? Oooo, another example of you being a hypocrite.
So, please, cite your sources. Give me quotes, because it does seem as though you are not able to do so. Prove me wrong.
And, are you aware that context were the meaning comes from in many quotes? This would seem to be the case in the one you stated. So, again, what?
Also, this isn't obsession. What I am doing is forcing you to actually answer the question. One which was posed to you on a number of occassions, but never answered. You may think you've addressed this issue but you haven't.
You must realize that just because you are thinking about something when you type, and you're "inner voice" explains everything clearly, we aren't listening to your inner most thoughts while you are typing your posts.
We only read the end post, which it is clear that they have enough missing information so as to not answer the question.
I'll quote myself from my last post and the one before that and the one before that and the one before that and before that... at least.
Now, since I've become dragged into some side note that I don't care to waste my time on, I'll return to ask a question that must be answered before I continue this current discussion (I've also asked it before).
How does this gays being promiscuous argument, have anything to do whether gays are allowed to marry or not? That is assuming that they are promiscuous, which is far from proven.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I have answered it. Half the posts in this thread deal with that exact issue. If you can’t grasp that simple thing, then citing specific posts isn’t going to help you.
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Also, this isn't obsession. What I am doing is forcing you to actually answer the question. One which was posed to you on a number of occassions, but never answered. You may think you've addressed this issue but you haven't.
If you had spent more time actually reading my posts instead of inventing strawman reasons to call me a bigot, you would already have your answer. I’m not to blame for your inability to objectively examine an issue.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I have answered it. Half the posts in this thread deal with that exact issue. If you can’t grasp that simple thing, then citing specific posts isn’t going to help you.
If you had spent more time actually reading my posts instead of inventing strawman reasons to call me a bigot, you would already have your answer. I’m not to blame for your inability to objectively examine an issue.
Listen.
I've already explained that although I fully believe that you think you've answered this question all that matters is what the people who actually read your posts in this regard.
All you've said in this thread is that gays shouldn't marry because they are promiscusous. But you have not given any reason why.
Provide the reason why.
And even if you've stated this before, then a copy/paste would be easy for you now wouldn't it? And I don't know anyone that'll go through 100+ posts to find just one statement by anyone, so to ask that is unreasonable.
So, instead of prattling on about how the answer is there, why not provide it? Instead of continuing this pointless exercise. You have the power to end this with (apparently) one copy/paste.
I'll quote myself from my last post and the one before that and the one before that and the one before that and before that and before that... at least.
Now, since I've become dragged into some side note that I don't care to waste my time on, I'll return to ask a question that must be answered before I continue this current discussion (I've also asked it before).
How does this gays being promiscuous argument, have anything to do whether gays are allowed to marry or not? That is assuming that they are promiscuous, which is far from proven.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Because I’ve never said this. I’ve never said anything like this. This is apparently a figment of your imagination. Until you are willing to set aside these ridiculous strawman arguments, it’s a waste of my time to continue giving you information that you won’t listen to.
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
All you've said in this thread is that gays shouldn't marry because they are promiscusous. But you have not given any reason why.
Quote:There’s nothing stupid about it. But I supposed it you can’t do arithmetic you might find it hard to figure out. Save your pitty, though. I stand completely behind everything I’ve said in this thread. I think I've made my case well.
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Especially since he says such silly things like, "since there are as many (or possibly more) heterosexuals who practice anal sex as there are homosexual males doing so."
If my conjecture is true, I pitty him.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME