Is there a reason to suspect I am not? I am serious, but I am also choosing my position carefully.
Progress! i would like to congratulate liberals the victory they gained with a activist judge
- Thread starter DutchJazzer
- Start date
Is there a reason to suspect I am not? I am serious, but I am also choosing my position carefully.
I agree. However, I think you also think the judge was correct in his decision here.
Definitely Types I, II, or III FGM are much worse than circumcision, even more barbaric.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
[QUOTE="One Brow, post: 1674032,
Only a culturally blind or uninformed person sees a difference.[/QUOTE]
LOL. I'm waiting with baited breath to here someone explain how cutting off a little bit of unimportant skin is akin to genital mutation of women. A procedure that is done on baby girls out of self-rligious indignation.
So, the mental thought factory of the religious indoctrination haters have them irrationally hating something religion-based, foreskin cutting off, that they simply cant handle because it is based entirely out of their hate for a religious indoctrination practice. Can you explain yourselves in a way they can understand you are important to? Or we can continue on hating each other and fighting over perceived individuals injustices.
Only a culturally blind or uninformed person sees a difference.[/QUOTE]
LOL. I'm waiting with baited breath to here someone explain how cutting off a little bit of unimportant skin is akin to genital mutation of women. A procedure that is done on baby girls out of self-rligious indignation.
So, the mental thought factory of the religious indoctrination haters have them irrationally hating something religion-based, foreskin cutting off, that they simply cant handle because it is based entirely out of their hate for a religious indoctrination practice. Can you explain yourselves in a way they can understand you are important to? Or we can continue on hating each other and fighting over perceived individuals injustices.
DutchJazzer
Banned
maybe you should delve into it and read about it. then you miught be more informedi myself believe in both. as well explained and thought out in the book genesis and the big bang. how creationism and the big bang are the same. do i have unrefutable Proof? no i do not! do you no you do not
tell me your position on global cooling ooh wait global warming ooh no climate chance again. a psuedo science. that is alarmist about a 0.03% ris ein temperature in 100 years which is within the margin of erorr. and extremly stbale even though we went from a billion to 7 billion people. and we built way more cities. yet we are supposed do give the government power because of this junk science!\
gopod to know you finally a gree that scientific studies dont mean anything!
fact is fgm is wrong and not comparable to male circumcisionand ha sonly negative effects not one nuetral or health benefit
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
The antis have never been able to explain to me how the Genesis story follows the evolution theory 100 percent. Whales firsish, the entire timeline... it follows identically the creation story and/or evolution. It's a flawed book 5000 years or so old, give or take, that still somehow managed to nail down to a tee the evolutionary process in the timeline tale. That day frame of evolution is identical to what scientists have discovered. How is that possible from a flawed book 5000 years in the making, back in the time when recorded history was flawed, verbal transmitting error problems and what not? And yet Genesis, key in on the word meaning of genesis, somehow managed to explain creation 5000 years in advance. At a time when there were translation and verbal problems and what have you. The first very book in the Bible still got the evolutionary aspects 100 correct. 5000 years before modern science was adapted enough to figure things out.q
Explain to me religious people like @colton @jazzspazz or whatever your name is now, @LogGrad98 @TroutBum or anyone else religious if that is a reasonable possibility. I've asked people from UTC but they are hyper religious and dont think evolution exists so cant relate to the question at all.
Red
Well-Known Member
I've always made my positions clear, but I am not in the habit of developing bald face lies.
I meant exactly what I said.
Last edited:
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Red
Well-Known Member
Indeed, curiouser and curiouser, as Alice might say. Couldn't help it. You did a remarkably good job of mimicking in that thread. I mean, bravo and all, a masterful job. You convinced me entirely, and then came that "admission", and of course I laughed and said "aha!" Impossible to read that long exchange without wondering, you have to admit that much, and lol and behold, you did admit that much.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Red
Well-Known Member
Lol, forget it. I think, you, babe, and myself were the only ones reading your exchange with babe. The two of you did a remarkable job of sounding like babe is all. You had to be there, but wait, you were, lol.
But, as for Reagan's name appearing in bold type in my quote from that link, well, I'm gonna say may God strike me dead if I'm lying, I swear on my mother's grave, I did not use bold type. I tried yesterday to figure out how that happened, but had to give up. When I started to think only a paranormal explanation would work, I gave up, lol.
Following Dutch's post, the next logical thing to do was look up the judge in question. Not as a " gotcha", although of course it is difficult to visualize a judge appointed by Reagan as matching Dutch's description. But that's not my fault.
I'm deleting the link to that old thread I referenced. That was petty of me to post that.
Last edited: