Two! Four! Six! Eight! JaySecrets Prevaricates!

I do believe you just violated forum rules of harassment with that thread title. Shall we see what the mods think?
Splendid Idea! I figured since you hijacked my thread to promote your own brand of Fundie Christianity and was doing such a poor job defending your position (seriously, using "Answers in Genesis" as a source? What is this? 1998?) I concluded that a thread name change was not only desirable but necessary.
 
I make statements based on the facts of behavior and stated beliefs. You attack based on assumptions and presuppositions, and then devolve into profanity. If you can't tell the difference, you are in a bad way.
Here's what you're failing to grasp, probably on purpose: we could say exactly - down to the letter precisely - the same thing about you.
 
Observing, that's all. See, I challenge an idea or a worldview, you insult a person. What I do is a sign of intellect. What you do is a sign of ignorance. It's why your side never proposes ideas with any depth of thought. You just attack and malign people, and use pathetic tropes and lies to do it. Just as you have done with me. All you have done is expose your own ignorance to everyone not brainwashed like you.
I don't give a shit about whiners.

Sorry you whine
 
Here's what you're failing to grasp, probably on purpose: we could say exactly - down to the letter precisely - the same thing about you.
See, except that's not true. I don't use profanity at you. I don't attack you personally. I don't do anything except draw the natural conclusion from your stance and call out the position for what it is. You on the other hand go juvenile, lazy, and profane almost immediately.
 
Splendid Idea! I figured since you hijacked my thread to promote your own brand of Fundie Christianity and was doing such a poor job defending your position (seriously, using "Answers in Genesis" as a source? What is this? 1998?) I concluded that a thread name change was not only desirable but necessary.
I answered a challenge. The answer was challenged. I answered that challenge. And so on. So maybe talk to your buddies about hijacking your thread.

As for my sources, you still cite CNN, politifact, and MSNBC, all long discredited. AIG has never been discredited or shown to be lying, as your sources have been. You just have people who don't like what they have to say.

And as for the thread title change, that is in direct violation of harassment policy here. You don't get to do that to anyone, no matter how much you dislike them or how much you disagree with their views.
 
See, except that's not true. I don't use profanity at you. I don't attack you personally.
Yes you do. You call me a baby killer and a Marxist. No matter how sincerely you may believe those things, it's still an attack.
I don't do anything except draw the natural conclusion from your stance and call out the position for what it is. You on the other hand go juvenile, lazy, and profane almost immediately.
It just sounds that way to you because you can't defend your opinions. That's why you always respond with those silly videos.
 
I answered a challenge. The answer was challenged. I answered that challenge. And so on. So maybe talk to your buddies about hijacking your thread.

As for my sources, you still cite CNN, politifact, and MSNBC, all long discredited. AIG has never been discredited or shown to be lying, as your sources have been. You just have people who don't like what they have to say.

And as for the thread title change, that is in direct violation of harassment policy here. You don't get to do that to anyone, no matter how much you dislike them or how much you disagree with their views.
There is no harassment policy. If you don’t like what someone is doing ignore them . Please read the forum guidelines.
 
Yes you do. You call me a baby killer and a Marxist. No matter how sincerely you may believe those things, it's still an attack.

It just sounds that way to you because you can't defend your opinions. That's why you always respond with those silly videos.
I respond with videos and papers from experts and those expert at making the point. Kinda what you ask for with your demands to cite the source (kinda a pain to do on mobile, btw, especially when you gang up like jackals and don't give a person time to respond to one point at a time).

Second, if you support killing babies in the womb, you support baby murder. That's not hyperbole. That's what the facts mean. If you espouse beliefs that line up with what Marx wrote and taught, no matter how you color it, you are a Marxist. That's not name-calling or personal attack. And it's not juvenile profanity. It's simply stating facts.
 
I respond with videos and papers from experts and those expert at making the point. Kinda what you ask for with your demands to cite the source (kinda a pain to do on mobile, btw, especially when you gang up like jackals and don't give a person time to respond to one point at a time).
Seems you don't understand what we're asking for, we want citations to the peer reviewed scientific papers proving what you claim. Not someone on youtube saying shit with no evidence to back it up.
Second, if you support killing babies in the womb, you support baby murder. That's not hyperbole. That's what the facts mean. If you espouse beliefs that line up with what Marx wrote and taught, no matter how you color it, you are a Marxist. That's not name-calling or personal attack. And it's not juvenile profanity. It's simply stating facts.
How is supporting a woman's right to control their body to be seen as an "act of murder"? Should we start blaming you for all the murders and rapes and other deaths that the Crusaders unleashed on the Muslims? You support Christianity after all.
 
I answered a challenge. The answer was challenged. I answered that challenge. And so on. So maybe talk to your buddies about hijacking your thread.
A hijack is a hijack, no matter your altruistic motives.

As for my sources, you still cite CNN, politifact, and MSNBC, all long discredited..
"Discredited"? By who? Pat Robertson? Tucker Carlson? The 700 Club.
None of those sources have been "discredited", except perhaps in your own mind.

AIG has never been discredited or shown to be lying, as your sources have been. You just have people who don't like what they have to say.
AIG presents a toxic Christian worldview as "fact". It is a laughable "source", and a favorite of low-information and/or Christian Fundamentalist demographic. Belief =/= Science.

And as for the thread title change, that is in direct violation of harassment policy here. You don't get to do that to anyone, no matter how much you dislike them or how much you disagree with their views.
I'm not harassing you, my snowflaky friend. I mock your answers and your beliefs, as they are contrary to American freedom.
 
I respond with videos and papers from experts and those expert at making the point.
No you don't, you respond with propaganda that you believe is from experts. That is quite different. And you have demonstrated repeatedly that you will believe absolutely anything you come across if it fits your argument.
Kinda what you ask for with your demands to cite the source (kinda a pain to do on mobile, btw, especially when you gang up like jackals and don't give a person time to respond to one point at a time).
Cry me a river. Besides, it's usually the same points we're asking you to provide cites for.
Second, if you support killing babies in the womb, you support baby murder. That's not hyperbole. That's what the facts mean.
Yes, but the fact is that neither I nor anyone else here supports killing babies in the womb. See how easy that is?

If you espouse beliefs that line up with what Marx wrote and taught, no matter how you color it, you are a Marxist.
True, but I don't, and I don't think I've seen anyone else here do so either. Again, you just think of it that way because it's easier than actually making an effort to defeat your opponent's points. (Which I have NEVER seen you try to do - you always just respond with other people's propaganda, which you seem to believe is irrefutable truth. it isn't.)
That's not name-calling or personal attack. And it's not juvenile profanity. It's simply stating facts.
Well, it wouldn't be if that were what you actually were doing. But it isn't.
 
A hijack is a hijack, no matter your altruistic motives.


"Discredited"? By who? Pat Robertson? Tucker Carlson? The 700 Club.
None of those sources have been "discredited", except perhaps in your own mind.


AIG presents a toxic Christian worldview as "fact". It is a laughable "source", and a favorite of low-information and/or Christian Fundamentalist demographic. Belief =/= Science.


I'm not harassing you, my snowflaky friend. I mock your answers and your beliefs, as they are contrary to American freedom.

No you don't, you respond with propaganda that you believe is from experts. That is quite different. And you have demonstrated repeatedly that you will believe absolutely anything you come across if it fits your argument.

Cry me a river. Besides, it's usually the same points we're asking you to provide cites for.

Yes, but the fact is that neither I nor anyone else here supports killing babies in the womb. See how easy that is?


True, but I don't, and I don't think I've seen anyone else here do so either. Again, you just think of it that way because it's easier than actually making an effort to defeat your opponent's points. (Which I have NEVER seen you try to do - you always just respond with other people's propaganda, which you seem to believe is irrefutable truth. it isn't.)

Well, it wouldn't be if that were what you actually were doing. But it isn't.

These ^ two posts are the definitive Daily Verbal Beatdown of JaySecretions daily verbal nonsense.

Well done.

👍

👏

🏆

🇺🇸
 
No you don't, you respond with propaganda that you believe is from experts. That is quite different. And you have demonstrated repeatedly that you will believe absolutely anything you come across if it fits your argument.
I respond with information from experts the propagandists in the mainstream sources call propaganda because they can't deal with being exposed.
Cry me a river. Besides, it's usually the same points we're asking you to provide cites for.
Then give a person, who has a busy job, by the way and can't sit on the threads all day waiting to pounce anytime a conservative speaks, time to respond to the point or the citation before attacking as a group throwing more questions than anyone would have time to answer all at once in an attempt to silence opposition because you don't want opposing views from yours heard.
Yes, but the fact is that neither I nor anyone else here supports killing babies in the womb. See how easy that is?
If you support abortion, you support killing a tiny, innocent human life in the womb. That tiny human life is a baby. Ergo, you support murdering babies.
True, but I don't, and I don't think I've seen anyone else here do so either. Again, you just think of it that way because it's easier than actually making an effort to defeat your opponent's points. (Which I have NEVER seen you try to do - you always just respond with other people's propaganda, which you seem to believe is irrefutable truth. it isn't.)
I have actually read Marx. The social and political views you and your mob have expressed over and over echo Marx almost perfectly. Ergo, whether you call it that or not, you are a Marxist.
Well, it wouldn't be if that were what you actually were doing. But it isn't.
It is precisely what you are doing.
 
Seems you don't understand what we're asking for, we want citations to the peer reviewed scientific papers proving what you claim. Not someone on youtube saying shit with no evidence to back it up.

How is supporting a woman's right to control their body to be seen as an "act of murder"? Should we start blaming you for all the murders and rapes and other deaths that the Crusaders unleashed on the Muslims? You support Christianity after all.
Sure... If I were Catholic and considered Catholicism Christianity. But I am not and it isn't.

And before you go making the Muslims the victims, look at the history of how they got into the Holy Land to begin with, and the slaughter and rape they did to the inhabitants based, all on the commands from the Quran to kill all non-Muslims.
 
AIG presents a toxic Christian worldview as "fact". I mock your answers and your beliefs, as they are contrary to American freedom.
The founders of America, including the majority who were abolitionists, would be surprised to hear that, seeing as they didn't see a Christian worldview as toxic. In fact, that was THEIR worldview. And even ambassadors from other nations commented on the Bible being the basis of American freedom.

So, first, give specific examples of how a Christian worldview is toxic. Second, give specific examples of how it is against a historically accurate, constitutional based understanding of the Founders' vision of American freedom.
 
Seems you don't understand what we're asking for, we want citations to the peer reviewed scientific papers proving what you claim. Not someone on youtube saying shit with no evidence to back it up.

How is supporting a woman's right to control their body to be seen as an "act of murder"? Should we start blaming you for all the murders and rapes and other deaths that the Crusaders unleashed on the Muslims? You support Christianity after all.
And I am not opposed to a woman controlling her own body. I am opposed to her destroying the innocent life of another's body who happens to be in her body because that is what her womb was designed to do: nourish and protect a separate new life.
 
The founders of America, including the majority who were abolitionists, would be surprised to hear that, seeing as they didn't see a Christian worldview as toxic. In fact, that was THEIR worldview. And even ambassadors from other nations commented on the Bible being the basis of American freedom.

So, first, give specific examples of how a Christian worldview is toxic. Second, give specific examples of how it is against a historically accurate, constitutional based understanding of the Founders' vision of American freedom.
Other than the freedom the Bible gave American women & African-Americans?
 
I respond with information from experts the propagandists in the mainstream sources call propaganda because they can't deal with being exposed.
Aren't we a little old for "I know you are but what am I"?
More to the point, from the very first time you ever posted here, you have always been prone to posting poorly sourced, easily debunked propaganda - which you invariably insist is the work of "experts". That ain't the way it works.
Then give a person, who has a busy job, by the way and can't sit on the threads all day waiting to pounce anytime a conservative speaks, time to respond to the point or the citation before attacking as a group throwing more questions than anyone would have time to answer all at once in an attempt to silence opposition because you don't want opposing views from yours heard.
First of all, I speak only for myself. It IS true that other progressives will also respond to your bullshit in similar ways - it's just so easy to do! - but we don't coordinate it. Besides, I have a job too. I just consider this my breaktime stuff. It's fun to knock down your straw men!
And if I "didn't want opposing views heard", I wouldn't come to this forum in the first place!

If you support abortion, you support killing a tiny, innocent human life in the womb. That tiny human life is a baby. Ergo, you support murdering babies.
No, it is not a baby. It's a clump of tissue. It has the potential to become a baby, but it is not a baby. Now, if I can recognize that you believe it's a baby from the point of conception, you can recognize that we do not. If you refuse to do that and you call us murderers, that amounts to hurling insults. Your own beliefs don't change that.
I have actually read Marx. The social and political views you and your mob have expressed over and over echo Marx almost perfectly.
No, they don't. More to the point, you've never even tried to prove they do. You just say that over and over again.

The founders of America, including the majority who were abolitionists, would be surprised to hear that, seeing as they didn't see a Christian worldview as toxic. In fact, that was THEIR worldview. And even ambassadors from other nations commented on the Bible being the basis of American freedom.
Actually, most of them were Deists.
So, first, give specific examples of how a Christian worldview is toxic.
A true Christian worldview is anything but toxic. The problem is, what you think is a Christian worldview is actually something very, very different.
 
Sure... If I were Catholic and considered Catholicism Christianity. But I am not and it isn't.
Murderer!!!! You support Christianity, it doen't matter what branch....it's all the same and you're a fucking murderer...
And before you go making the Muslims the victims, look at the history of how they got into the Holy Land to begin with, and the slaughter and rape they did to the inhabitants based, all on the commands from the Quran to kill all non-Muslims.
Yah Muslim's are murders too.....Muslim's just a branch of Christianity, don't think your whatboutism works here murderer. Child killer, rape supporter. .
 
And I am not opposed to a woman controlling her own body. I am opposed to her destroying the innocent life of another's body who happens to be in her body because that is what her womb was designed to do: nourish and protect a separate new life.
Bullshit, murderer, you just want to control women. If they make a choice, that's for them to face if there is a God..not fucking yours you child killer.
 
Other than the freedom the Bible gave American women & African-Americans?
Actually, it was Christianity and Bible teachings that drove the abolitionists. In fact it was that all men are made in God's image that was the foundational argument. Evolution, on the other hand has been at the root of slavery in the West, the treatment of Jews in Germany, the slaughter of Native Americans, and the treatment of the American POWs in the Japanese war camps; in every case one of the justifications was that the target was lesser evolved.
 
Back
Top