• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
  • Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.

Dallas Texas Ebola Case

New posts
No, I was fully and thoughtfully offended. It mattered not the subject, merely that you stooped to such an absurd low to push your agenda. Take religion out of it: Look, a baby is dead. Let me use this to bash people I disagree with. Doesn't seem so amusing, does it?

Take religion out of it? It happened in a church for Christ's sake, that was the whole point. We may as well take the water out of the fact he drowned.
 
God allows a toddler to drown in a baptismal and m1ma1mg gets pissed at me, amazing.
You flatter yourself. It didn't "piss" me at all.

I thought it was a very low of any human being to use the death of a child to forward their agenda. Maybe if I say that several more times, you'll actually grasp the concept and try to understand why I didn't like the post. It wasn't the God part. It wasn't the baptismal part. It was the stooping so low to make points with your agenda.

Not that you will acknowledge this. I think you just like to hear yourself type.
 
You flatter yourself. It didn't "piss" me at all. I thought it was a very low of any human being to use the death of a child to forward their agenda. Maybe if I say that several more times, you'll actually grasp the concept and try to understand why I didn't like the post. It wasn't the God part. It wasn't the baptismal part. It was the stooping so low to make points with your agenda. Not that you will acknowledge this. I think you just like to hear yourself type.

I hate hearing myself type. My phone key pad is set on silent. Get back to me when you start complaining about religion using tragedy to advance their agenda.
 
Last edited:
You flatter yourself. It didn't "piss" me at all.

I thought it was a very low of any human being to use the death of a child to forward their agenda. Maybe if I say that several more times, you'll actually grasp the concept and try to understand why I didn't like the post. It wasn't the God part. It wasn't the baptismal part. It was the stooping so low to make points with your agenda.

Not that you will acknowledge this. I think you just like to hear yourself type.

Kid dies as an indirect result of an absurd cleansing ritual intended to save him. Ift's no less deserving of ridicule than if he had been bitten by a rattler in a snake handler church.
 
Kid dies as an indirect result of an absurd cleansing ritual intended to save him. Ift's no less deserving of ridicule than if he had been bitten by a rattler in a snake handler church.

A tip of the hat to you. That is one heck of an analogy. Well done.
 
Are the pro-life folks just as absurd for using dead babies in their propaganda?

Yes!


and thank you for the intellectual honesty in admitting that in fact those are dead babies they are using
on the signs, and not just tissue or zygotes or any other nonsense the pro-abortion crowd tries to call
them, at least now there's some truth to discuss by admitting all abortion creates a dead baby.

also thanks for bringing their disgusting thread topic to the level of discourse it deserves,
they truly do belong with the same shrieking, petty, exploitative, disgraceful scum that
would use dead babies to advance any kind of ridiculous self-serving, narcissistic nonsense.

unless of course your question/comment was just more liberal cognitive dissonance...
[h=1][/h]
 
Yes!


and thank you for the intellectual honesty in admitting that in fact those are dead babies they are using
on the signs, and not just tissue or zygotes or any other nonsense the pro-abortion crowd tries to call
them, at least now there's some truth to discuss by admitting all abortion creates a dead baby.

also thanks for bringing their disgusting thread topic to the level of discourse it deserves,
they truly do belong with the same shrieking, petty, exploitative, disgraceful scum that
would use dead babies to advance any kind of ridiculous self-serving, narcissistic nonsense.

unless of course your question/comment was just more liberal cognitive dissonance...

Yeah, the pro-life movement is self-serving, that much we agree on.
 
Yes!


and thank you for the intellectual honesty in admitting that in fact those are dead babies they are using
on the signs, and not just tissue or zygotes or any other nonsense the pro-abortion crowd tries to call
them, at least now there's some truth to discuss by admitting all abortion creates a dead baby.

also thanks for bringing their disgusting thread topic to the level of discourse it deserves,
they truly do belong with the same shrieking, petty, exploitative, disgraceful scum that
would use dead babies to advance any kind of ridiculous self-serving, narcissistic nonsense.

unless of course your question/comment was just more liberal cognitive dissonance...

I am trying find where Local admits all abortions create dead babies. Since you are making the accusation, maybe you could help me out here. I'm reading a single sentence post claiming the pro-life movement uses dead babies in their propaganda. I see nothing that would lead to your interpretation.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top