Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Have you ever been on a night out, or just had a laugh in your life?
Could Hugh Hefner & Donald Trump Be Homosexual?
- Thread starter Arthur Brain
- Start date
Have you ever been on a night out, or just had a laugh in your life?
I did. Factually, rationally. Neither of those terms has much value to you. I understand that.
They are if you understand the position our founders took.
You lecturing anyone on understanding is like being lectured on humility by the president elect.
Me too?I find that rather offensive...
lain:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
You used a notion that since women helped men in the household, they deserve the rights to the keys of the whole kingdom.
That's not factual or rational- it is however textbook feminist lunacy.
The Founding Fathers would think you all were as big a moron as I've ever stated you all to be- on a good day
He was called sexist because he doesn't take jive from women.
He was called racist for addressing the reality of illegal immigration.
He was called xenophobic for vouching to keep dubious Arabs into the country who have repeatedly for years killed people in their own cities.
Liberals called everyone against them the same, and labeled half the country as bigots, and then try to act like there's some conspiracy against them when they lose an election which their party had rigged from the get go.
And
A moderate is a 'pro gun liberal' as far as I've always seen- that's basically what I deduce with those like yourself. You're all otherwise as liberal as Arthur Brain.
You all need a bit more than a lecture.
As in, you should all be kicked out of the country
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
And
A moderate is a 'pro gun liberal' as far as I've always seen- that's basically what I deduce with those like yourself. You're all otherwise as liberal as Arthur Brain.
You all need a bit more than a lecture.
As in, you should all be kicked out of the country
Oh, wow, what a crank!
:rotfl:
Here's a clear example of what feminism has done to America:
Unsheltered homeless:
-Women: 12000
-Men: 240,000
Gender specific shelters:
-Men: 12
-Women: 502
They're all useless people, [MENTION=10403]Arthur Brain[/MENTION], who don't actually care about the good of society. They simply use specialty groups to perpetuate their hatred for America, and even throw their own under the bus to do so- black men have gotten a mighty taste of that supporting Democrats all this time.
I think these folk would do very well over their in Britain, it may as well be their own little Promised Land :wave2:
Unsheltered homeless:
-Women: 12000
-Men: 240,000
Gender specific shelters:
-Men: 12
-Women: 502
They're all useless people, [MENTION=10403]Arthur Brain[/MENTION], who don't actually care about the good of society. They simply use specialty groups to perpetuate their hatred for America, and even throw their own under the bus to do so- black men have gotten a mighty taste of that supporting Democrats all this time.
I think these folk would do very well over their in Britain, it may as well be their own little Promised Land :wave2:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
"Over their" in Britain?
Yeah dude, I hate America. The whole country sucks and everyone in it...
lain:
No, but it's simplistically distorted of you to say so.
lain:I think Jefferson in particular would be stunned by that summary...or at least by the grammar.The Founding Fathers would think you all were as big a moron as I've ever stated you all to be- on a good day
I omit the "he" bit. It's equal parts vague and goofy. I'd happily note your not so subtle indications of position relating to racism and misogyny. I'd say the Muslim bit was an extension of the former.
I've already spoken to the sad irrationality of "everyone who doesn't agree with me agrees on X" bit. And the use of conspiracy theory as a charge right before you join in a conspiracy theory on the election is a little funny.
Meaning when you can't reconcile a position the left would never subscribe to you just ignore that and include it anyway. Meanwhile this moderate is both pro gun rights and against abortion, the latter being another of your peculiar stances for anyone outside of the liberal camp. Or is that one a gimme you give yourself?
You need more than just an education, but it would be a good start.
:rotfl:As in, you should all be kicked out of the country
No, but it's simplistically distorted of you to say so.
Nah, that's pretty much the gist of what you stated- you fail to acknowledge why women didn't have said rights in the first place despite the that most men were not 'misogynists'- your feminists situate their entire bias on the lie that women were systematically oppressed before they stepped in.
As if their influence could actually change a state with such oppression.
But carry on with your myth of 'empowerment'
I think the fact that you all reinterpret their writings to mean something they obviously did not intend for it to mean- by their very own standing as 18th Century men- shows all that needs to be seen of you folk.
You all misinterpret them by the same exact measure as you misinterpret biblical scripture- producing legal fictions of them.
Feminists force you to make up meaningless numbers? Those fiends!
The fact that only 5% of those on the street are women and yet only 2% of shelters are exclusively for men is part of the insanity of your obsession with feminist nonsense.
You're a moron, quite simply
2 Thess 3:10, 1 Ti 5:8 KJV, 16
No. What I noted were a series of presumptive errors about women's roles in the growth of the nation, the sharing of risk, etc. Anyway, if there's one thing that exchange taught me it's that you aren't interested in learning and repeating it here would simply waste more of my time.
It's a bit like suggesting slavery existed though most weren't racist. In any event, the system was and the impact of the system bore the seal and agreement of those who sustained it. If you deny half your population the right to vote or own land whether you hold them in contempt by your own understanding is a point of no particular interest.
They're right, in the main. It took the concerted work of women over time to achieve the vote, by way of.
Of course it could and did, though as with slavery or any social change here it required the enlightened participation of a growing number of men who, faced with a movement rooted in reason and integrity were compelled to respond in kind. And some gave ground because they understood the course. You think the British simply decided to give India back to it's people? Are you under the impression that whites here simply woke up and decided it would be a good idea for blacks to have the unrestricted access to power that voting entails?
Continue with your myth of rationality...or trolling. We both know that's the real ticket to your amusement park.
I think that, beyond the particular error, the way you can't divorce yourself from sweepingly singular thinking is mostly evidence of your own problem, both in approach and in understanding others.
Last edited:
-You're trying to say that they were oppressed and couldn't do anything, and also that they did a lot and deserve it all.
-You're trying to conflate women's status with slavery.
-You're trying to act as though more than 10% of women at any given time in American history were ever supporters of it.
All of those things are nonsense and they contradict each other altogether. You simply revise history to justify the unjustifiable- women were given those rights out of men's compassion for them despite that they did not warrant them.
It's as simple as that, and what they got in return is a bunch of misery and malcontents who, a century later, are adversarial to men.
And you defend that, why?
Because you're a damn idiot, that's why, looking to use it to make yourself look holy.
A fraud
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
town, to cruci:
:think:
:think:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
You've got four pages of you using troll or trolling, and no doubt plenty more beyond that. I don't feel like going through them so here's the whole batch:
http://theologyonline.com/search.php?searchid=296466
Have fun.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
:chuckle: Nice red herring, but the fact remains that you're a regular user of the word, and you're a hypocrite for calling out someone for something you do yourself.
I don't mind using it when it fits though, so I'll use it again. You're a troll.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
you thought i was calling him out for using the word?
nah
i had another reason for my post