|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Feb 24, 2017 18:36:23 GMT
was a well respected biblical scholar and Catholic priest.But he's not a respected Catholic priest. He teaches heresy. You left that part out. Not debating theology with a retard like you Blade. Perhaps you should make that case to the Vatican as they haven't defrocked him. Or are you saying you are in a better position to judge what constitutes heresy than the pope or his cardinals. Now run along and go hump somebody else's leg for attention Have you noticed Blade has got two accounts? This one and the crazyeyedbastard one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 18:50:32 GMT
Not debating theology with a retard like you Blade. Perhaps you should make that case to the Vatican as they haven't defrocked him. Or are you saying you are in a better position to judge what constitutes heresy than the pope or his cardinals. Now run along and go hump somebody else's leg for attention Have you noticed Blade has got two accounts? This one and the crazyeyedbastard one. Yes Eddy I reported his crazy one eyed bastard account because it was carrying a photo of a previous RFS board poster as its avatar,without that persons consent or permission. Since the admins are pro active here,my guess is he got some type of warning from them. He created the Blade sock soon afterwards
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Feb 24, 2017 18:58:06 GMT
Have you noticed Blade has got two accounts? This one and the crazyeyedbastard one. Yes Eddy I reported his crazy one eyed bastard account because it was carrying a photo of a previous RFS board poster as its avatar,without that persons consent or permission. Since the admins are pro active here,my guess is he got some type of warning from them. He created the Blade sock soon afterwards Ah, I thought that might have been the case. Cheers!
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 20:21:55 GMT
The information is published. If you are interested I suggest a bit of reading. And I don't "think". Science states. But surely you can tell us which cell structures you mean and where you read it ..... Surely. I can even comment (modestly) on the material I examined, but I won't. I've seen this game before and I don't play it. If you were really concerned for the truth of things regardless of which truth it might be, then I might bother. I try to avoid worthless pursuits. I read peer-reviewed journals, good in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Feb 24, 2017 20:28:17 GMT
But surely you can tell us which cell structures you mean and where you read it ..... Surely. I can even comment (modestly) on the material I examined, but I won't. I've seen this game before and I don't play it. If you were really concerned for the truth of things regardless of which truth it might be, then I might bother. I try to avoid worthless pursuits. I read peer-reviewed journals, good in my opinion. Is this guy DT? Same evasion tactics.
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Feb 24, 2017 20:34:06 GMT
But surely you can tell us which cell structures you mean and where you read it ..... Surely. I can even comment (modestly) on the material I examined, but I won't. I've seen this game before and I don't play it. If you were really concerned for the truth of things regardless of which truth it might be, then I might bother. I try to avoid worthless pursuits. I read peer-reviewed journals, good in my opinion. You can if exists, I just did a pubmed and google scholar search and it came up with nothing. Why don't you help us out and be more specific?
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Feb 24, 2017 20:34:50 GMT
Surely. I can even comment (modestly) on the material I examined, but I won't. I've seen this game before and I don't play it. If you were really concerned for the truth of things regardless of which truth it might be, then I might bother. I try to avoid worthless pursuits. I read peer-reviewed journals, good in my opinion. Is this guy DT? Same evasion tactics. It did sound vaguely familiar
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 20:42:35 GMT
Are you always a dumbshit? Another fool.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 20:44:05 GMT
I think they have it inside. I've seen this attitude before. Yeah, why would gays be angry about pieces of shit like you and blade denying their humanity? That's just so unreasonable. Same with why would blacks not like the Ku Klux Klan or Jews the Nazis. Fuck, you're a dumbshit. Truth stands.
|
|
blade
Junior Member
@blade
Posts: 2,005
Likes: 636
|
Post by blade on Feb 24, 2017 20:44:19 GMT
Are you always a dumbshit? Another fool.
Yeah, vernuf follows Christian posters around this board and calls them names. He's usually good for a laugh at best.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 20:47:28 GMT
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 21:01:51 GMT
Surely. I can even comment (modestly) on the material I examined, but I won't. I've seen this game before and I don't play it. If you were really concerned for the truth of things regardless of which truth it might be, then I might bother. I try to avoid worthless pursuits. I read peer-reviewed journals, good in my opinion. You can if exists, I just did a pubmed and google scholar search and it came up with nothing. Why don't you help us out and be more specific? Why should I?
|
|
j2
Sophomore
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
|
Post by j2 on Feb 24, 2017 21:03:31 GMT
Yeah, vernuf follows Christian posters around this board and calls them names. He's usually good for a laugh at best.
Good to spot'em. Thanks.
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Feb 24, 2017 21:12:03 GMT
You can if exists, I just did a pubmed and google scholar search and it came up with nothing. Why don't you help us out and be more specific? Why should I? You don't have to, I'm sure those cellular structures - lysosomes, mitotic spindles and my personal favourite the Weibel-Palade bodies, along with the von Willebrand factors - are perfectly safe from Homosexuals.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Feb 24, 2017 21:17:23 GMT
Yeah, because you're a troll.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:22:34 GMT
53 pages ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:35:14 GMT
I apologize in advance if I've already responded in this thread. I do care if gays are given the right to marry and am against it only because it would change the definition of "marriage". "Between one man and one woman" is appropriately restrictive and prevents legal challenges defending all kinds of "marriages" which would be detrimental to society. To change the definition of marriage is to invite legal arguments that anyone should be able to marry anyone or anything, it would give pedophilia and incestuousness and all imaginable arguments legal grounds.
I favor and support legal bonds between gays. What gay people do together is not an issue for me.
|
|
artcurus
Sophomore
@artcurus
Posts: 292
Likes: 79
|
Post by artcurus on Feb 24, 2017 21:43:04 GMT
Try ones that were over 300!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:53:55 GMT
I apologize in advance if I've already responded in this thread. I do care if gays are given the right to marry and am against it only because it would change the definition of "marriage". "Between one man and one woman" is appropriately restrictive and prevents legal challenges defending all kinds of "marriages" which would be detrimental to society. To change the definition of marriage is to invite legal arguments that anyone should be able to marry anyone or anything, it would give pedophilia and incestuousness and all imaginable arguments legal grounds. I favor and support legal bonds between gays. What gay people do together is not an issue for me. Who cares what you support, you sound like a semi-homosexual bigot with your reasoning. A Union between two people needs to carry the same stipulation and equality. It's the archaic notion and definition of what marriage is supposed to represent that DOES need re-defining. You sound like a brainwashed activist dipsh!t. F^ck you. Make no mistake, your insults don't upset or intimidate me; they simply tire me. People like you are just too stupid to try to deal with. You're brick walls.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 24, 2017 22:15:30 GMT
I apologize in advance if I've already responded in this thread. I do care if gays are given the right to marry and am against it only because it would change the definition of "marriage". "Between one man and one woman" is appropriately restrictive and prevents legal challenges defending all kinds of "marriages" which would be detrimental to society. To change the definition of marriage is to invite legal arguments that anyone should be able to marry anyone or anything, it would give pedophilia and incestuousness and all imaginable arguments legal grounds. I favor and support legal bonds between gays. What gay people do together is not an issue for me. First, the definition of marriage "between one man and one woman" is only one definition. Another is "the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law". Second, there's no evidence that changing the definition of marriage would be detrimental to society. Actually, since the definition obviously has changed and society still exists, there's evidence that changing the definition of marriage is not detrimental to society. And third, slippery slope arguments have been around at least since allowing interracial marriages. This does not make slippery slope arguments right.
|
|