RE: In the News.

RE: In the News. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

joether -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 11:28:09 AM)
You screwed up the HTML something ferious in your reply..... Try not to do that. Its annoying as hell to fix..... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether Conservatives hold 'law' to be: Do as I say, don't do what I do. Or even better: The Ends Justify the Means. I could go on and on all day with stuff like this. All of it true and factual. But I'll save the space.... Even you have to use ' ' marks around law because you know it isn't law. Yes, there may be conservatives who hold that viewpoint but they know they can't turn it into law. The Duggars are a great example of this. Muslims who hold to their beliefs have no such compunction about turning their viewpoint...men should not fuck other men...into law: Sodomy is punishable by execution. Women should be faithful to their husbands...adultery is punishable by flogging or stoning. If it was not true, please explain to me how the Bush administration could take prisoners from a warzone, accused of a nameless crime, without access to a lawyer and tortured quite deeply and often as some how being constitutional? That administration justification was 'we have to hit them over there, or they'll attack us over here'. A administration that denounce terrorists taking hostages, while it held hostages in Cuba. This is an administration...YOU....supported. Remember, we are talking about the United States of America. In the USA, gay men are not executed for having sex with each other. Yet there have been 57+ attempts to take their healthcare away from them. Which would leave many of them in worst shape then current. On one hand you say that we should protect America, and on the other, vote GOP/TP. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways! The next section? Yeah, that was all fucked up on the HTML. Try not to delete the 'original: (insert name here)' parts. Makes for a confusing discussion. You also put one to many [ /quote ] in there. Really screwed things up.... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Find something in the little bit of Sharia Law I quoted that even remotely compares to ANY law...regarding the same subjects of homosexuality or fornication...that conservatives or Republicans or Tea Partiers want to impose. Find something? How often do conservatives try to impose christian views onto the rest of us? Pushing legislation to state English is the offical language of land (which is unconstitutional). Kind of like what Muslims in Iran did with language? Or that a statue of satan should not be allowed next to a christian display while on state property? How about pushing laws banning gay marriage in the states? I could go on and on....AGAIN....to show your argument is full of shit. Conservatives Want a 'Conservative Version' of Sharia Law. Really, Joether? You want to use an OPINION piece...not a neutral, unbiased article...but an OPINION piece to shore up your 'declaration of facts'? Idiot. No, Joether...it is not unconstitutional to have an official language. The ACLU thinks it would be but they aren't SCOTUS. So far, no amendment has ever been passed by the U.S. Congress into law regarding an official language. This has not stopped several states from passing such amendments to their state constitution. Actually it IS unconstitutional. If I can not understand my rights because the are in a different language, how can I exercise them? How would I know where the law starts and ends without understanding the language around it? The 1st amendment had a sizable amount information beyond the wording of the amendment in US Law. Enough to fill a wing of a public library! If I didn't understand the language of the amendment, how would I understand all that additional information? I used an opinion piece to supplement my argument. It was to show how conservatives have their own version of sharia law. That they are advocating draconian laws according to a strict and un-American view of law. A concept well understood by non-psychotic christians. Actual Christians do not have a problem with the President of the Untied States. The guy advocates helping and protecting the poor, the ill, the young, the old, the beaten and any anyone whom has been an actual victim (unlike those conservatives whom play victim). quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Cite please on a statue of Satan law. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). One would think DOMA to mean, "keeping marriage from dissolving". Meaning making it harder for those already married to get divorces. No, DOMA was to keep gay people from getting married. Because according to conservative pseudo-christians, gay people should be be allowed to be marriage according to the bible. Last I checked, the US Constitution does not abide by the Holy Bible or any other religious document as a condition for laws. Yes, Freedom of Religion is a good thing! quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether How ABOUT pushing laws banning gay marriage? Do any of them call for the execution of the individuals who want to engage in the behavior that leads to gay marriage? Cite those please. No, your ideas of a 'conservative version of Sharia law' come straight from an editorialist...not a reporter...pushing his own, and your, political agenda by trying to make views comparable to views-translated-into-laws. No, my views on conservative 'sharia law' come straight from me. I think for myself. Which is why you and other conservatives have such a hard time. Because unlike you, 100% of my viewpoints aren't told to me by someone else. That people can tell me their views. And if they have a better argument, I might accept it. However, there is value in holding onto an unpopular viewpoint at times. That you can not understand why, shows the limits of your education.... CRAP! Just when I thought I got all the HTML editing done..... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether Go right ahead moron, CHALLENGE ME. I dare you! I double dog dare you! (that's code for: STFU while your behind in the argument as I have PLENTY of more ammo on this topic) I laughed so hard at your bullshit thoughts. I just F'ing PWNED you! Actually...I have challenged you. As regards you owning me, you have to make an argument that stands up well in someone else's mind besides yours. Your mistake was not in replying to me. It was assuming your right on all things, even in the face of arguments and ideas that easily demolish those viewpoints. Unlike you, I can concede things when the person I'm discussing something has the better argument. Can you notice where I did such a thing in this post? Yes, stop the press, I did concede something to you. You had the better argument. That is why we discuss things. To see if our argument is a good one, given other's viewpoints on the same topic. For you, its a football game. One side had to win and the other has to lose. That framework of thought means you'll always be frustrated at life. Very unhealthy....

CreativeDominant -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 11:36:33 AM)
There is nothing to say. You call me uneducated, yet you can't figure out how to use spell check, which words to use, how to post in response so your words are not used as mine....e.g. ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Conservatives hold 'law' to be: Do as I say, don't do what I do. Or even better: The Ends Justify the Means. I could go on and on all day with stuff like this. All of it true and factual. But I'll save the space.... Those are not MY words, they are yours. Anyone can go back and see they are yours. I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional?

mnottertail -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 11:39:31 AM)
quote: original: CreativeDominant I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Ben Carson has a doctorate, and perhaps a Ph.D, and he's a fucking idiot, so throwing degrees around like they are more than chaff is a futile endeavor.

joether -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:20:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant There is nothing to say. You call me uneducated, yet you can't figure out how to use spell check, which words to use, how to post in response so your words are not used as mine....e.g. There, Their, and They're. All words that are spelled corrected. Yet when and how they are used in the English language are different. That spelling is not the problem. Grammar however is. I'm 'OK' admitting my grammer SUCKS at times. When others on this board have spelling and grammar errors, do you see me correcting them? No! If anything I'll put in a bracket what I think they were trying to say. Thus, maybe helping them state their thought process better. If there are many brackets, I'll ask at the end "Is this your thought process?" If they say 'yes', I can give a reply. If 'no', its to understand the question and/or conversation before giving a reply. There are those on here that have good grammar skills and STILL can not make an argument to save their lives! Albert Einstein was horrible with basic mathematics, yet could handle complete ideas in Physics (which require a HUGE amount of mathematics). I am sure there are some well paid authors whom have one or more good editors of language to correct mistakes. You wish to attack someone that makes good arguments you have do not have a half decent counter on over issues of grammar? OK, its fine. Petty. But fine. It just means if you screw up....ONCE....they can attack you 'up the river and back down it'. An if you have a problem after or during that attack; your just a hypocrite! Yes, Mr. Grammar Nazi, you have fucked up in the past! So you REALLY do not have the moral high ground here.... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether Conservatives hold 'law' to be: Do as I say, don't do what I do. Or even better: The Ends Justify the Means. I could go on and on all day with stuff like this. All of it true and factual. But I'll save the space.... Those are not MY words, they are yours. Anyone can go back and see they are yours. If you had used proper HTML coding, this would not be an issue for you. You would have known that I had stated that first (i.e. I just corrected the html error). Some how you either purposefully or without realizing it, deleted the coding, thus, creating your confusion. [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) Example: [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether This would be an example of me replying to something you stated, in reply to my original quote. This is how it should look on your end. On my end it would look like this: [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant In both cases, we have to make sure there are three [ /quote ] (again, delete the space between the brackets and /quote). This is so that the discussion does not get unorganized. And thus, keeps you from getting confused on 'who said what'. Its a pain in the ass. I know. And I've been correcting your HTML coding for a few months. Notice I've never really said anything about it? I'll attack you for being a dumbass on what you stated all the same. Next time you wish to attack me on grammar, consider how many times I've corrected the HTML and said nothing about it.... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Then why do you not...BEHAVE...like someone with a PH.D? PH.D.s are trained to be mature. To give good answers that show intellect, understanding, thought, and determination of values. Often those with such degree's are more likely to be liberal than conservative, having studied information. I do not leave out the notion that only liberals can hold doctorate degrees. Just seems the majority with PH.D.s are also liberal in viewpoints. They are more likely to observe and study suffering in our and other cultures. To be conservative in this nation, one has to have a deficiency in morals. I'd rather have bad grammar and good morals as a person than the opposite. I could go 'on and on' on this topic all day. Speaking on the finer aspects of many subjects. Educated people are like that. There was one other conservative on these boards just a few short months ago, HunterCA. This person told us he held a Masters in Environmental Engineering. Yet on discussions of Climate Change (for example), he did not seem able to understand basic scientific concepts, let alone, more advance subject material. I recall one of the more liberal guys on here (whose name escapes me), taking Hunter to task on a few things to which there was no decent counter or rebuttal. Science is something that builds upon itself. And there have been other conservatives whom have stated they hold one or more advanced degrees, yet behaved like children. Their viewpoints were simplistic rather than studied. They were quick to behave immaturely rather than say "hey, lets keep this decent'. So if your getting the idea that I do not hold much trust in a conservative, whom gives simplistic answers, behaves like a child, and takes petty shots at someone, that they hold an advance degree; you would be correct. I've stated my level of education before. In fact, I've been attacked for it. By you in fact! Therefore, as logic goes, you should already know my level of education, right? So I'll state it again, Bachelors of Science. Mine is in psychology and business. Yet, I took...MANY...hard science courses before I switched my major. I started college as a Civil Engineering student. After sophomore year, I was just not enjoying the material that much. I did well enough for a 3.4 GPA. But it was not as enjoyable to study. Physics, Calculus, Chemistry, Biology, etc were course material before Accounting, Logistics, Small Business Management. Even after I graduated, I took additional courses in many different areas: Graphic Design, HTML, Political Theory, and of course a long time favor: Military Theory and Tactics. Yeah, my grammar sucks. Deal with it like an adult who had a PH.D.

CreativeDominant -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:30:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: original: CreativeDominant I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Ben Carson has a doctorate, and perhaps a Ph.D, and he's a fucking idiot, so throwing degrees around like they are more than chaff is a futile endeavor. I've met quite a few "educated idiots", some of them in the same field I'm in...health care. As I noted on another thread, Carson IS an idiot in a lot of ways. But...I don't value the degree nearly as much as Joether. He loves to chime in with statements similar to this..."conservatives rarely have gone past high school, therefore are uneducated".

CreativeDominant -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:37:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant There is nothing to say. You call me uneducated, yet you can't figure out how to use spell check, which words to use, how to post in response so your words are not used as mine....e.g. There, Their, and They're. All words that are spelled corrected. Yet when and how they are used in the English language are different. That spelling is not the problem. Grammar however is. I'm 'OK' admitting my grammer SUCKS at times. When others on this board have spelling and grammar errors, do you see me correcting them? No! If anything I'll put in a bracket what I think they were trying to say. Thus, maybe helping them state their thought process better. If there are many brackets, I'll ask at the end "Is this your thought process?" If they say 'yes', I can give a reply. If 'no', its to understand the question and/or conversation before giving a reply. There are those on here that have good grammar skills and STILL can not make an argument to save their lives! Albert Einstein was horrible with basic mathematics, yet could handle complete ideas in Physics (which require a HUGE amount of mathematics). I am sure there are some well paid authors whom have one or more good editors of language to correct mistakes. You wish to attack someone that makes good arguments you have do not have a half decent counter on over issues of grammar? OK, its fine. Petty. But fine. It just means if you screw up....ONCE....they can attack you 'up the river and back down it'. An if you have a problem after or during that attack; your just a hypocrite! Yes, Mr. Grammar Nazi, you have fucked up in the past! So you REALLY do not have the moral high ground here.... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether Conservatives hold 'law' to be: Do as I say, don't do what I do. Or even better: The Ends Justify the Means. I could go on and on all day with stuff like this. All of it true and factual. But I'll save the space.... Those are not MY words, they are yours. Anyone can go back and see they are yours. If you had used proper HTML coding, this would not be an issue for you. You would have known that I had stated that first (i.e. I just corrected the html error). Some how you either purposefully or without realizing it, deleted the coding, thus, creating your confusion. [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) [ quote ] (delete the space between the brackets and the word) ORIGINAL: (insert name) Example: [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether This would be an example of me replying to something you stated, in reply to my original quote. This is how it should look on your end. On my end it would look like this: [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant [ quote ]ORIGINAL: joether [ quote ]ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant In both cases, we have to make sure there are three [ /quote ] (again, delete the space between the brackets and /quote). This is so that the discussion does not get unorganized. And thus, keeps you from getting confused on 'who said what'. Its a pain in the ass. I know. And I've been correcting your HTML coding for a few months. Notice I've never really said anything about it? I'll attack you for being a dumbass on what you stated all the same. Next time you wish to attack me on grammar, consider how many times I've corrected the HTML and said nothing about it.... quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Then why do you not...BEHAVE...like someone with a PH.D? PH.D.s are trained to be mature. To give good answers that show intellect, understanding, thought, and determination of values. Often those with such degree's are more likely to be liberal than conservative, having studied information. I do not leave out the notion that only liberals can hold doctorate degrees. Just seems the majority with PH.D.s are also liberal in viewpoints. They are more likely to observe and study suffering in our and other cultures. To be conservative in this nation, one has to have a deficiency in morals. I'd rather have bad grammar and good morals as a person than the opposite. I could go 'on and on' on this topic all day. Speaking on the finer aspects of many subjects. Educated people are like that. There was one other conservative on these boards just a few short months ago, HunterCA. This person told us he held a Masters in Environmental Engineering. Yet on discussions of Climate Change (for example), he did not seem able to understand basic scientific concepts, let alone, more advance subject material. I recall one of the more liberal guys on here (whose name escapes me), taking Hunter to task on a few things to which there was no decent counter or rebuttal. Science is something that builds upon itself. And there have been other conservatives whom have stated they hold one or more advanced degrees, yet behaved like children. Their viewpoints were simplistic rather than studied. They were quick to behave immaturely rather than say "hey, lets keep this decent'. So if your getting the idea that I do not hold much trust in a conservative, whom gives simplistic answers, behaves like a child, and takes petty shots at someone, that they hold an advance degree; you would be correct. I've stated my level of education before. In fact, I've been attacked for it. By you in fact! Therefore, as logic goes, you should already know my level of education, right? So I'll state it again, Bachelors of Science. Mine is in psychology and business. Yet, I took...MANY...hard science courses before I switched my major. I started college as a Civil Engineering student. After sophomore year, I was just not enjoying the material that much. I did well enough for a 3.4 GPA. But it was not as enjoyable to study. Physics, Calculus, Chemistry, Biology, etc were course material before Accounting, Logistics, Small Business Management. Even after I graduated, I took additional courses in many different areas: Graphic Design, HTML, Political Theory, and of course a long time favor: Military Theory and Tactics. Yeah, my grammar sucks. Deal with it like an adult who had a PH.D. Actually, I did use coding properly. You could not. Funny how someone with a Bachelors degree cannot see where they made the error and own up to it, as you are always quick to say you do. Tis also funny how someone with such a varied educational background cannot string things together in a more concise, grammatically correct fashion. Finally, your belief that your arguments overrule and defeat everyone else's arguments is not borne out by the number of people on your own side rushing to support you.

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:45:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Have the two possies chosen cities for their conventions yet? If you took two minutes out of your 'busy' existence you would know two things: The DNC will be held July 25–28, 2016, at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. The GOP will be held held July 18–21, 2016, at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland Thank you for recognizaing my busy schedule sweetie

Kirata -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:46:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether You call me uneducated.... PH.D? ...PH.D.s ...PH.D.s ...PH.D. It's Ph.D. [:D] K.

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:55:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: joether Mr. Carson stated that if a Muslim were to become a US President, not only would he/she have to renounce their faith, but swear on a Holy Bible. Maybe we should force Mr. Carson to renounce his Christian faith and swear on a Korean if he's accepted as the GOP nomination. Sounds fair for that lame-ass hypocrite! Ok, I have officially blown soda all over my keyboard at the mental picture of Pol Pot handcuffed in the center of the inaugural with people putting hands on his head to swear. Sometimes misspellings are much better than the intended word. Pol pot was cambodian...otoh we could bring in park chung he or whathisname that we don't like.

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 12:59:31 PM)
quote: I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Well....you are a chiropractor and he is a moron who occasionally makes a few good points...the rest of his points would require a large hat.

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 1:03:30 PM)
quote: The next section? Yeah, that was all fucked up on the HTML. Try not to delete the 'original: (insert name here)' parts. Makes for a confusing discussion. You also put one to many [ /quote ] in there. Really screwed things up.... College boy like you should not have any problem unphoquing it.[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 1:08:53 PM)
quote: of course a long time favor: Military Theory and Tactics. Omfg....rotc....[8\|]

MrRodgers -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 1:11:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I have a doctorate, Joether. You have yet to tell us what your degree is in. Or is it...like so much of what you post...delusional? Well....you are a chiropractor and he is a moron who occasionally makes a few good points...the rest of his points would require a large hat. Sometimes Joether seems to need an literary chiropractor.

thompsonx -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 1:12:14 PM)
quote: Then why do you not...BEHAVE...like someone with a PH.D? Kerry mullis has a phd and a nobel prize...I understand he surfs, smokes pot and tells punkassmotherfuckers to kiss his ass.[;)]

AQRMZ -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 2:02:00 PM)
Sharialaw Well you can go back and forth and wallow in nonsense or you can just google it and you get something like this. You want to live under this, then move to the Middle East and stay out of my country or shut the fuck up. http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html ENJOY THE PICURE THAT WOULD NOT LOAD HERE. Sharia Law Sharia law is the law of Islam. The Sharia (also spelled Shariah or Shari'a) law is cast from the actions and words of Muhammad, which are called "Sunnah," and the Quran, which he authored. The Sharia law itself cannot be altered, but the interpretation of the Sharia law, called "figh," by imams is given some leeway. As a legal system, the Sharia law covers a very wide range of topics. While other legal codes deal primarily with public behavior, Sharia law covers public behavior, private behavior and private beliefs. Of all legal systems in the world today, Islam's Sharia law is the most intrusive and strict, especially against women. According to the Sharia law: • Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above). • Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death. • Criticizing or denying Muhammad is a prophet is punishable by death. • Criticizing or denying Allah, the moon god of Islam is punishable by death. • A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death. • A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death. • A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death. • A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old. • Girls' clitoris should be cut (per Muhammad's words in Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251). • A woman can have 1 husband, but a man can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more. • A man can unilaterally divorce his wife but a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce. • A man can beat his wife for insubordination. • Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman. • A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s). • A woman's testimony in court, allowed only in property cases, carries half the weight of a man's. • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits. • A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval). • A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative. • Meat to be eaten must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be Halal. • Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam. • The list goes on. Which countries use the Sharia law? Muslims' aspired Sharia state is Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Muhammad that has no legal code other than the Sharia and enforces it without mercy (see Sharia law in Saudi Arabia). But as detailed herewith, the Sharia law is also used in full or in part, nationally or regionally in: • United States of America* • United Kingdom* • Canada* • Afghanistan (89%)** • Algeria • Austria* • Bahrain • Bangladesh (82%) • Brunei • Comoros • Djibouti (82%) • Egypt (74%)** • Eritrea • Ethiopia • France* • Gambia • Germany* • Ghana • India • Indonesia (72%) • Iran • Iraq (91%) • Jordan (71%) • Kenya • Kuwait • Libya • Lebanon • Malaysia (86%) • Maldives • Mauritania • Morocco (83%)** • The Netherlands* • Nigeria • Oman • Pakistan (84%) • Palestinian territories (Gaza strip & the West Bank - 89%) • Qatar • Saudi Arabia • Somalia • Spain* • Sudan • Sri Lanka • Syria • Tanzania • Thailand (77%)** • Uganda • United Arab Emirates (UAE) • Yemen * In the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, and other European countries that resist the penetration of Sharia law, it has proven adept at infiltrating elements of the society that are left vulnerable (see Sharia law in America and the Islamization of America). ** Percent of Muslims who favor making Sharia the official law in their country (source: Pew Forum Research, 2013). In many countries where an official secular legal system exists alongside Sharia, the vast majority of their Muslim citizens favor making Sharia the official law. For example, while the Egyptian military may have blocked the Muslim Brotherhood's efforts in this direction, 74% of Egypt's Muslims still favor it. Even in Jordan, Indonesia and Malaysia - Muslim countries with progressive images - the relatively secular ruling elite sit atop Muslim masses, 71%, 72% and 86% respectively of whom want their countries to be ruled by Sharia. And in Iraq, where the United States shed blood and money for over a decade to try to plant democracy, 91% of its Muslims want to live under Sharia. The number of countries that adopt (elements of) the Sharia law continues to grow around the world, as does the depth of its penetration in the countries that already use it. This penetration is not by happenstance; it is managed to occur in five phases: see Spread of Islam and how to Stop Islam. Related: The reason why Islam is called the "Religion of Peace" Related: The most glaring Errors in Quran Related: The Good News

joether -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 3:25:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Actually, I did use coding properly. You could not. FUCK NO YOU DIDN'T! The post to which your replying to had to be HEAVY re-editted on the HTML. The document I was replying to had....many...errors. It took me a few edits just to get the form looking clean. quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Funny how someone with a Bachelors degree cannot see where they made the error and own up to it, as you are always quick to say you do. Tis also funny how someone with such a varied educational background cannot string things together in a more concise, grammatically correct fashion. Quick to say so, eh? Dude, I've been cleaning up you and all your conservative buddies HTML replies to me for....MONTHS. Did I say anything in that time? No. Because you guys had enough trouble forming a half decent argument. I felt forcing you to clean up the HTML would have been just to much for you to handle rationally. quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Finally, your belief that your arguments overrule and defeat everyone else's arguments is not borne out by the number of people on your own side rushing to support you. If I really believed that, then all of you would have been converted to liberals within the last three years. Unlike conservatives, liberals do not need to rush to each other's side. It takes eight of you just to take me on in an argument. That your arguments are...sadly....and.....very often.....simplistic in nature does not require to much ability on my part to counter. Or any of the other liberals on here. Or the moderates. Were as all the conservatives have to 'rush to judgement' and 'be on message' with each other is amusing. It says you are easy to manipulate and control. That group think is a rule not just a norm. That if one of you says something REALLY outrageous, ALL OF YOU, have to defend that person when I bash them. None of you can say to that person "Dude, that's like way out of line". Or paraphrasing of the concept. When you all behave like drones of each other, its not to hard to beat you all down. Liberals are tough to beat down because they tend to be 'free on thought'. They are pretty...Liberalis.... For someone that has their Ph.D., I would expect you to not only know all of this; but have countered it in your work before the need of myself, pointing it out....

joether -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 3:32:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether You call me uneducated.... PH.D? ...PH.D.s ...PH.D.s ...PH.D. It's Ph.D. [:D] You say it as you want; I'll say it as I want. We both understand what the other means without being childish about it. Got it?

Kirata -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 3:57:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether You call me uneducated.... PH.D? ...PH.D.s ...PH.D.s ...PH.D. It's Ph.D. [:D] You say it as you want; I'll say it as I want. We both understand what the other means without being childish about it. Get it? You're not saying it, you halfwit. Do you think we're talking about pronunciation? You're writing it. Incorrectly. Get it? K.

hardcybermaster -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 4:28:14 PM)
all 3 of you are being total pricks, grow the fuck up

Kirata -> RE: In the News. (9/23/2015 4:29:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hardcybermaster all 3 of you are being total pricks, grow the fuck up When I want shit from you, I'll squeeze your head. [:)] K.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.589844E-02