Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-) - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-) - Linux ; On Nov 5, 9:37*pm, Snarky wrote: (snip) > >> Arguments like "scientific merit" are wasted on this sort of nutter. > > > Interesting that you are calling people 'nutters' as you simultaneously > > disregard what the google record ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

  1. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    On Nov 5, 9:37*pm, Snarky wrote:

    (snip)

    > >> Arguments like "scientific merit" are wasted on this sort of nutter.

    >
    > > Interesting that you are calling people 'nutters' as you simultaneously
    > > disregard what the google record shows to be reality. This really puts
    > > your comment in the perspective it belongs.

    >
    > OK, feel free to show a scientific basis for your claim that gay couples
    > who raise children are "parasites".



    Why would I show support for something that Snit has claimed on my
    behalf? I never even used the word "parasites" in my statement so why
    are you quoting it as if I had? Are you Snit's cousin?

    From a "scientific" viewpoint any kind of childless couple who raises
    the
    child of another couple are dependent upon the hetero couple
    procreating
    for the chance to raise that child. In a very real sense, due to
    situational
    dependency, the childless couple is unquestionably "living off
    another"
    **with respect to having access to a life to raise**.

    Poor Snit fell off the context wagon on this, see if you can stay
    mounted

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasitic
    3. "living off another;"


    Perhaps you should ask Snit why he not only thanked me for my
    clarification to the out of context statement of mine he's quoted,
    but he also made it perfectly clear that he didn't consider me a
    bigot over this issue... the same issue for which he just finished
    using terms like: "grossly offensive and a clear sign of bigotry".

    Strange how I don't see you asking Snit about this, isn't it? Why
    do you suppose that is?

    Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that


  2. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    "Demon Lord Benedict Hussein Snodgrass Jr of Confusion"
    stated in
    post pan.2008.11.07.06.06.56.336221@teh.usenets.bullie on 11/6/08 11:07 PM:

    ....
    >> Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that

    >
    > So, instead of calling gay couples who raise children "parasites", you
    > call them something that *means* parasites. Gee, that's so much
    > betterer!!!


    Gee, if I ignore all North and West bound traffic, all the traffic I see is
    going South or East. So? That does not mean all traffic is going only the
    directions I "see."

    Gay parents both get and give. They are not by any non-bigoted definition
    "parasites." To ignore what they give and then say they only get and are
    thus "parasites", as Steve is doing, is simply dishonest and twisted... the
    type BS one would expect from a bigot who is refusing to acknowledge that
    gays are *not* parasites.

    Come on, Steve, why not just admit that gay parents are *not* parasites? If
    you are not a bigot that would be an easy thing to acknowledge.

    But you will not. 100% predictable.

    --
    Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
    conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.


  3. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    On Nov 6, 11:07*pm, Demon Lord Benedict Hussein Snodgrass Jr of
    Confusion
    wrote:
    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:12:07 -0800, Steve Carroll attempted to confuse the
    > issue further by squeaking:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Nov 5, 9:37*pm, Snarky wrote:

    >
    > > (snip)

    >
    > >> >> Arguments like "scientific merit" are wasted on this sort of nutter..

    >
    > >> > Interesting that you are calling people 'nutters' as you
    > >> > simultaneously disregard what the google record shows to be reality.
    > >> > This really puts your comment in the perspective it belongs.

    >
    > >> OK, feel free to show a scientific basis for your claim that gay couples
    > >> who raise children are "parasites".

    >
    > > Why would I show support for something that Snit has claimed on my behalf?
    > > *I never even used the word "parasites" in my statement so why are you
    > > quoting it as if I had? Are you Snit's cousin?

    >
    > > From a "scientific" viewpoint any kind of childless couple who raises the
    > > child of another couple are dependent upon the hetero couple procreating
    > > for the chance to raise that child. In a very real sense, due to
    > > situational
    > > dependency, the childless couple is unquestionably *"living off another"
    > > **with respect to having access to a life to raise**.

    >
    > > Poor Snit fell off the context wagon on this, see if you can stay
    > > mounted

    >
    > >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasitic3. "living off another;"

    >
    > > Perhaps you should ask Snit why he not only thanked me for my
    > > clarification to the out of context statement of mine he's quoted, but he
    > > also made it perfectly clear that he didn't consider me a bigot over this
    > > issue... the same issue for which he just finished using terms like:
    > > "grossly offensive and a clear sign of bigotry".

    >
    > > Strange how I don't see you asking Snit about this, isn't it? Why do you
    > > suppose that is?

    >
    > > Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that

    >
    > So, instead of calling gay couples who raise children "parasites", you
    > call them something that *means* parasites. Gee, that's so much
    > betterer!!!



    What part of "living off another" confused you? And why are you
    singling out gays?



  4. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    On Nov 7, 1:48*am, Snit wrote:
    > "Demon Lord Benedict Hussein Snodgrass Jr of Confusion"
    > stated in
    > post pan.2008.11.07.06.06.56.336...@teh.usenets.bullie on 11/6/08 11:07 PM:
    >
    > ...
    >
    > >> Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that

    >
    > > So, instead of calling gay couples who raise children "parasites", you
    > > call them something that *means* parasites. Gee, that's so much
    > > betterer!!!

    >

    (snip medicinal droolings by Snit)

    > Gay parents both get and give.


    This is as irrelevant for gay couples it is for the childless hetero
    couples that do the same... that I am also talking about.

    > They are not by any non-bigoted definition "parasites."


    Why do you keep quoiting the word "parasites" as if I used it?

    >*To ignore what they give and then say they only get and are
    > thus "parasites", as Steve is doing, is simply dishonest and twisted...



    What's "dishonest and twisted" here is what you're trying to do...
    which is why only trolls are behind you. I clearly didn't single gay
    people out so to claim I am a bigot based on that is ""dishonest and
    twisted"... the very definition of you.

    By the way, do you still bear your wife, Snit?

  5. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    "Steve Carroll" wrote in message
    news:dfed8601-1cfd-4409-8e7e-c7cc601b8df1@u29g2000pro.googlegroups.com
    > On Nov 6, 11:07 pm, Demon Lord Benedict Hussein Snodgrass Jr of
    > Confusion
    > wrote:
    >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:12:07 -0800, Steve Carroll attempted to
    >> confuse the issue further by squeaking:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> On Nov 5, 9:37 pm, Snarky wrote:

    >>
    >>> (snip)

    >>
    >>>>>> Arguments like "scientific merit" are wasted on this sort of
    >>>>>> nutter.

    >>
    >>>>> Interesting that you are calling people 'nutters' as you
    >>>>> simultaneously disregard what the google record shows to be
    >>>>> reality. This really puts your comment in the perspective it
    >>>>> belongs.

    >>
    >>>> OK, feel free to show a scientific basis for your claim that gay
    >>>> couples who raise children are "parasites".

    >>
    >>> Why would I show support for something that Snit has claimed on my
    >>> behalf? I never even used the word "parasites" in my statement so
    >>> why are you quoting it as if I had? Are you Snit's cousin?

    >>
    >>> From a "scientific" viewpoint any kind of childless couple who
    >>> raises the child of another couple are dependent upon the hetero
    >>> couple procreating for the chance to raise that child. In a very
    >>> real sense, due to situational
    >>> dependency, the childless couple is unquestionably "living off
    >>> another" **with respect to having access to a life to raise**.

    >>
    >>> Poor Snit fell off the context wagon on this, see if you can stay
    >>> mounted

    >>
    >>> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasitic3. "living off
    >>> another;"

    >>
    >>> Perhaps you should ask Snit why he not only thanked me for my
    >>> clarification to the out of context statement of mine he's quoted,
    >>> but he also made it perfectly clear that he didn't consider me a
    >>> bigot over this issue... the same issue for which he just finished
    >>> using terms like: "grossly offensive and a clear sign of bigotry".

    >>
    >>> Strange how I don't see you asking Snit about this, isn't it? Why
    >>> do you suppose that is?

    >>
    >>> Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that

    >>
    >> So, instead of calling gay couples who raise children "parasites",
    >> you call them something that *means* parasites. Gee, that's so much
    >> betterer!!!

    >
    >
    > What part of "living off another" confused you? And why are you
    > singling out gays?


    Gays hold down jobs, pay taxes, and do all the other things that allow them
    to be self sufficient. They give and they take in the world. Just like
    most do. You clearly just take you ****ing bigot.



  6. Re: What will happen if the sun rises -AGAIN ;-)

    "Steve Carroll" wrote in message
    news:68855722-ac91-46e3-b9d2-5ba9241a98ce@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.com
    > On Nov 7, 1:48 am, Snit wrote:
    >> "Demon Lord Benedict Hussein Snodgrass Jr of Confusion"
    >>
    >> stated in post pan.2008.11.07.06.06.56.336...@teh.usenets.bullie on
    >> 11/6/08 11:07 PM:
    >>
    >> ...
    >>
    >>>> Don't worry, no one *really* expects you to answer that

    >>
    >>> So, instead of calling gay couples who raise children "parasites",
    >>> you call them something that *means* parasites. Gee, that's so much
    >>> betterer!!!

    >>

    > (snip medicinal droolings by Snit)
    >
    >> Gay parents both get and give.

    >
    > This is as irrelevant for gay couples it is for the childless hetero
    > couples that do the same... that I am also talking about.
    >
    >> They are not by any non-bigoted definition "parasites."

    >
    > Why do you keep quoiting the word "parasites" as if I used it?
    >
    >> To ignore what they give and then say they only get and are
    >> thus "parasites", as Steve is doing, is simply dishonest and
    >> twisted...

    >
    >
    > What's "dishonest and twisted" here is what you're trying to do...
    > which is why only trolls are behind you. I clearly didn't single gay
    > people out so to claim I am a bigot based on that is ""dishonest and
    > twisted"... the very definition of you.
    >
    > By the way, do you still bear your wife, Snit?


    Snit quoted you talking about gay parents as parasites. You are a ****ing
    bigot.




+ Reply to Thread