RE: Gay pair to adopt children of unfit Catholic parents
May 28, 2014 at 5:20 pm
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2014 at 5:20 pm by One Above All.)
(May 28, 2014 at 4:48 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: And they're not an army of liberal thugs? To be honest pal, I've been around this forum for a long time, a lot longer than you to know the whole structure. In every large scale debate, I've been a one man side, replying to multiple posters at a time, taking the heat, trying to keep my cool at the same time. And I still keep my cool.
Have you tried... not insulting entire groups of people based on your own bigoted views? How would you feel if I started calling you a retard for being a theist? If I knew your religion, I could go deeper and really bring out all the stereotypes YOU brought when YOU spoke of my friends (homosexuals) and one of my former partners.
(May 28, 2014 at 4:48 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I use the term liberal to denote who they are. Did any of them come to deny the term? No.
They didn't come to deny it for the same reasons they don't deny other insults: because they're either not insults in their minds, or because they're irrelevant.
(May 28, 2014 at 4:48 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Yet I stand by my main point. I firmly believe in the family institution. And I know that neo-liberalism and leftist counter-culture movements do not care the slightest about the institution of family. Their ideology has been constructed by the notorious Frankfurt School of thought that actively seeks to undermine these institutions.
I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Seriously. You (people who throw around "liberal" like it's an insult) never make sense when you start ranting about "liberals this" and "liberals that".
(May 28, 2014 at 4:48 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: There is not a shred of defamation in my words. I have no need for defamation.
Sure there's not... Saying homosexuals are drug addicts who keep children as pets to get attention is certainly not defamation... Hey, did you hear about the muslim who blew up some people because they dared depict Mohammed? Or the christian who killed her children because God told her to? Or the mormon who tried saving someone from a bullet and was surprised when his magic underwear didn't protect him? Or the Amish who shaved other Amish's beards? Or the South Africans who burned children alive because they were albinos? Or (...)?
No defamation here; no, sir.
(May 28, 2014 at 4:48 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Esen kal.
No clue what this means either.
EDIT: I also want to note you still haven't addressed why you won't debate ME. I have an idea, but I'd like to see you confirm it before I say it.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?