Anyone Who Thinks Another Person Deserves To Be Raped Is A Knob
- Thread starter Arthur Brain
- Start date
- Status
That does seem to be the case ... :think:
I spent most of my career as a poverty lawyer working for people who couldn't afford me otherwise. I did work for a money firm early on and I have handled a variety of criminal cases, but we were largely a civil concern and I had the luxury of never being told I had to take a case I didn't believe in. I left a partnership offer to do work that I thought was more important.
I think speculating on the disposition of a person's soul and relationship with Christ is above our paygrade, absent a rejection of the cross. So if someone embraces Christ as their lord and savior they're family, even if I think they do a horrible job of manifesting it...because, really, one way or the other we all mangle it now and again. So thank God for grace.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
if someone claims to embrace Christ and rejects scripture, I doubt his sincerity
glorydaz
Well-known member
I suppose it's like beauty....in the eye of the beholder. I thought it quite clever, myself. Of course I've never claimed to have a normal sense of humor. :idunno:
glorydaz
Well-known member
glorydaz
Well-known member
This is why little girls should not be allowed to post in this thread.
No, I said you made a dishonest comment. That's distinguishing between the habitual and a poor decision. Or maybe I was just being optimistic.I'm sure glad I went back to what I'd missed, else I'd have missed this little gem. Town would never question my faith, but he has no qualms accusing me of being "dishonest". (That's polite talk for LIAR)
That's encouraging. Who knows what you'll realize if you spend more time considering a thing.
Only to people with a reading comprehension problem...I'm kidding, you got it. But I didn't add to your words or attempt to mislead anyone. The nature of the mistake makes that plain enough.
And I didn't realize the mistake until you went on about it. If I had I'd have corrected it. The last thing I'd ever want is for anyone to attribute your writing to me.
That's called reading. Does that mean before you mostly skipped that and went right into whatever you wanted to say next? That would explain a few things.
See, that's actually dishonest, since I did nothing of the sort. I didn't know you were referencing a mistake I didn't realize I'd made until you finally said exactly what you meant by the early remark. Who has a problem admitting to mistakes? I went further and noted additional things I do now and then, like you're/your. That sort of thing.
Your complaint was dishonest. You tried to play an honest error I wasn't aware of as some attempt to add to or manipulate your writing. There was no reason for you to do that seeing the error plainly enough. So...nuts to you, I guess.
It wasn't added to your comment. The attempt at close quote was there for anyone to read and understand. You did. I bet anyone who bothered to read it did too.
No, what you said about the error was and is dishonest, a willful mischaracterization.
Try literally quoting me. It wasn't the fault of any machinery. I spell out the initial close quote. I made an errant keystroke. The wraps thereafter worked fine. Sometimes I muck up the last quote for the same reason I routinely muck up the first one. The "t" gets out of place. Ususally in the beginning and I usually run a preview and catch it. I think the volume of back and forth changed the habit. Such is life.
It does, if not the way you meant it to, doofi. Now, you got what you clearly wanted by passing notes in my CP. And that's more than it warranted, but it's close to Christmas.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
town beats his chest and roars:
what a tiresome, self-impressed pile of mess you are :nono:
if you had anything of Christ in you, you'd stop this crap and spend the rest of the week in prayer
No, I said you made a dishonest comment. That's distinguishing between the habitual and a poor decision. Or maybe I was just being optimistic.
That's encouraging. Who knows what you'll realize if you spend more time considering a thing.
Only to people with a reading comprehension problem...I'm kidding, you got it. But I didn't add to your words or attempt to mislead anyone. The nature of the mistake makes that plain enough.
And I didn't realize the mistake until you went on about it. If I had I'd have corrected it. The last thing I'd ever want is for anyone to attribute your writing to me.
That's called reading. Does that mean before you mostly skipped that and went right into whatever you wanted to say next? That would explain a few things.
See, that's actually dishonest, since I did nothing of the sort. I didn't know you were referencing a mistake I didn't realize I'd made until you finally said exactly what you meant by the early remark. Who has a problem admitting to mistakes? I went further and noted additional things I do now and then, like you're/your. That sort of thing.
Your complaint was dishonest. You tried to play an honest error I wasn't aware of as some attempt to add to or manipulate your writing. There was no reason for you to do that seeing the error plainly enough. So...nuts to you, I guess.
It wasn't added to your comment. The attempt at close quote was there for anyone to read and understand. You did. I bet anyone who bothered to read it did too.
No, what you said about the error was and is dishonest, a willful mischaracterization.
Try literally quoting me. It wasn't the fault of any machinery. I spell out the initial close quote. I made an errant keystroke. The wraps thereafter worked fine. Sometimes I muck up the last quote for the same reason I routinely muck up the first one. The "t" gets out of place. Ususally in the beginning and I usually run a preview and catch it. I think the volume of back and forth changed the habit. Such is life.
It does, if not the way you meant it to, doofi. Now, you got what you clearly wanted by passing notes in my CP. And that's more than it warranted, but it's close to Christmas.
what a tiresome, self-impressed pile of mess you are :nono:
if you had anything of Christ in you, you'd stop this crap and spend the rest of the week in prayer
I assume you were not raped and caged in an attic ?
lifeisgood
New member
Don't you have a TV at home? They have all kinds of juicy details on those soap operas.
Nah, don't like soap operas. Sorry to disappoint.
1PeaceMaker
New member
He shouldn't have claimed to have been raped without being willing to admit that the encounters met the actual full DOJ definition.
It's not a trivial fact that one must be penetrated to legally have been raped. The one in the passive or reception position for penetration (under the influence or otherwise) is the one at risk of being violated in the sense of rape.
The passive one cannot be the rapist. Or else a drunk guy could rape a woman and claim she was culpable for his actions because she wasn't drunk but he was. But clearly the receiver is the one in a vulnerable position requiring protection.
lifeisgood
New member
:nono:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
You accuse everybody of not being Christian, maybe you are fake.
lifeisgood
New member
I guess ok doser did not know he needed you to translate for his comprehension.
You aren't saved, you're going to hell for bearing false witness
1PeaceMaker
New member
Says the guy who called his ex-wife a rapist over a misunderstood technicality.
lifeisgood
New member
Isn't God awesome that He is still on His throne and He is the ONLY one who really decides who is or who is not saved and not you?
Yes, God is awesome! Praise be to His holy name.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Wow. It took you seven whole minutes go from "maybe you are fake" to "you aren't saved".
Oh yeah, and the going to hell part is the perfect touch. :thumb:
- Status