Search results

So, now it's all okay to have way more than two or three witnesses to establish guilt and use the utmost stringency before sentencing someone to death? They are just the minimum required all of a sudden? You can judge all you like but it's hardly right when you claim that I want criminals to...

Unsubstantiated nonsense.

Ah, the "saved". Okay then.

What a shocker...

Already was and am. Your opponent in your own OP made a direct and salient point and one that holds merit. Regurgitating the same verse isn't helping you or anyone any... It would absolutely and it's utterly naive for you to state otherwise. You can't have your bread buttered on both sides on...

Bet she doesn't have any pity for those who she's scammed for a load of dollars after her defeat... And hey, she obviously wants to stay on Trump's good side...(figuratively speaking of course).

Find any post of mine that posits that I would want to see murderers and rapists go free or that I have an agenda where I support that happening. Good luck although you'd need way more than that. If you and others can't defend your position without recourse to flat out lying or being mind...

I'll live with such a 'loss' quite gladly thanks and if you could actually dismantle an argument then needless parsing would hardly be a requirement. In your initial OP your opponent was right on the money. Using bronze age methods or rigidly literal parameters as you insist upon would only...

They are if they choose to lie and/or lack understanding. Anyone who accuses me of wanting to see murderers and rapists go free is one or both of those things. Simple as that.

I am not wading through the entirety of this mega parsed out response, why do you do that? I'll pick up on certain points and compact it from there. The context was obvious or certainly should have been at any rate. So there's no retraction forthcoming from me. If you want to insist that...

Unsubstantiated nonsense.

Take it up with TPP. He's the one who continually says that the democrats are the party that embraces homosexuality while failing to address the fact that Trump supported gay/transgender rights through his presidency. Bit of a double standard going on there don't ya think?

Some people confuse observations with ad homs. In no way do I support or have an "agenda" where I would want murderers and rapists to walk free or given any reason for such a contention. Those that claim so are willfully dishonest or have a rock in their head or possibly both.

Ironic that you yourself are reduced to childish ad homs and immaturity here. Anyone who says I have an agenda whereby I would want rapists and murderers to walk free is either a complete liar and/or thick. You'd have to be completely bereft of honesty or critical thinking skills to construe...

If you can't recognize context which was actually qualified with my post then that's not trolling on my part, it's a failure of reading on yours. Of course they had logic and reason but they were severely limited in how it could be applied in comparison to today. Why does this continually need...

Fair enough. Being gullible and buying into conspiracy bunk isn't in there so how about you respect the majority of American people who voted and wanted Biden as president over Trump?

Anyone who accuses me of having an agenda as you describe has shown themselves to be a complete liar and/or utterly thick. You are a waste of time and if you want to waste your own some more then crack on with it. You're getting no more responses from me. You are frankly, pathetic.

Prediction: Crickets from TPP.

Says the guy who when perpetually reminded that his beloved former president supported gay/transgender rights continually shies away from addressing the fact. None too bright are ya?

Oh, the irony. You have to be especially dumb to think that I'd want murderers and rapists to walk free, either that or just flat out dishonest. Either way you're a waste of time.