Ron Paul on Michele Bachmann: ‘She Hates Muslims’ - Page 15

kokonut · 12-21-2011, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheWriteAlex

He posted an inflammatory and inaccurate comparison. It needed to be corrected. So yes he "started" it.

And you "corrected" it. Ok. Fine.

**TWA** · 12-21-2011, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

And you "corrected" it. Ok. Fine.

Umad?

kokonut · 12-21-2011, 06:12 PM

There was no context in that correction. It was just another added layer to R7's response. Nothing was really corrected. Which is why it's fruitless to discuss religion because of the nature these unctuous responses who go after those who believe in the Bible. AD does not allow religious discussion which in of itself not exactly always proselytizing. And so, it ends here. SWK does not want to discuss it. If he chooses to discuss it at a later date then so be it.

jillio · 12-21-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogmom

ok, so I do wonder, if the show was called "All-American Christian" or "All-American Southerners", would Lowe's have responded the same way?

I think some people prefer to remain blindfolded because may feel easier...

Oh yes. Much easier to pretend not to see. That doesn't require follow up effort to correct the wrong.

jillio · 12-21-2011, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saywhatkid

Exactly. What is there to gain? As soon as anyone discusses their reasons, you or your posse will holler "post reported" and sit around smugly. I prefer to make my comments without defending them. Too bad, so sad.

Given your response, as edited, I think you must have missed the meaning of "can't discuss".

jillio · 12-21-2011, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

He or anybody else get to choose the time to express their right to have a religious opinion.

Consistently brought up the subject of Christianity? I don't see that.

Then you are either unable to read or are deliberately ignoring what is there. I'd say it's probably a combination of the two, given your past history.

jillio · 12-21-2011, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

There was no context in that correction. It was just another added layer to R7's response. Nothing was really corrected. Which is why it's fruitless to discuss religion because of the nature these unctuous responses who go after those who believe in the Bible. AD does not allow religious discussion which in of itself not exactly always proselytizing. And so, it ends here. SWK does not want to discuss it. If he chooses to discuss it at a later date then so be it.

No, he's more of the take a cheap shot and try to walk away from it kind of guy, it would appear.

**TWA** · 12-21-2011, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

There was no context in that correction. It was just another added layer to R7's response. Nothing was really corrected. Which is why it's fruitless to discuss religion because of the nature these unctuous responses who go after those who believe in the Bible. AD does not allow religious discussion which in of itself not exactly always proselytizing. And so, it ends here. SWK does not want to discuss it. If he chooses to discuss it at a later date then so be it.

Um, I think I pretty much proved R7's comparison was a fallacy and provided FACTS to back it up. FACTS which were intentionally left unaddressed. So, I that pretty much settles it.

**TWA** · 12-21-2011, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saywhatkid

Exactly. What is there to gain? As soon as anyone discusses their reasons, you or your posse will holler "post reported" and sit around smugly. I prefer to make my comments without defending them. Too bad, so sad.

I've invited you to PM me your response. Your choice to ignore that simply invalidates your reasoning behind not responding.

kokonut · 12-21-2011, 06:50 PM

Sure.

No problem.

12-21-2011, 06:12 PM	#423 (permalink)
kokonut Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 15,348	There was no context in that correction. It was just another added layer to R7's response. Nothing was really corrected. Which is why it's fruitless to discuss religion because of the nature these unctuous responses who go after those who believe in the Bible. AD does not allow religious discussion which in of itself not exactly always proselytizing. And so, it ends here. SWK does not want to discuss it. If he chooses to discuss it at a later date then so be it. __________________ Before AD. After AD. "Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." -Thurgood Marshall, former Supreme Court Justice "... turns out they are telling the truth."

12-21-2011, 06:50 PM	#430 (permalink)
kokonut Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 15,348	Sure. No problem. __________________ Before AD. After AD. "Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." -Thurgood Marshall, former Supreme Court Justice "... turns out they are telling the truth."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com