(August 28, 2013 at 11:04 pm)bladevalant546 Wrote:(August 27, 2013 at 2:02 am)catfish Wrote: You're case is refused for irrelevance. The "judgement" is for an eon...
That is what you stated, so to defend my case.
Your Objection: You are attacking the position of relevance. Before I move on, what is the premise you are trying to compare to. In order for parties to have relevance there has to be a defining element that both those parties are pertaining too.
You should quit while you can...
But anyways, what??? Perhaps you should define "parties" for me, because I have no clue what you are trying to say...