Thread for Artie's question.

Status
Not open for further replies.

musterion

Well-known member
It was never my 'case' to start with. You provided a definition that made no sense.

What is your definition of homosexual? If yours is better, I'll adopt it.

When called on it you decided to make it about faith as to why your own definition couldn't be applied to you.

It NEVER applied to me because I didn't lust after another dude. Had the opportunity...didn't. I even conceded to you for argument's sake that if considering it FOR TWO MINUTES before dismissing it made me a homo FOR TWO MINUTES, then fine, I was a homo FOR TWO MINUTES.

This must be where we've got a problem -- you know what my definition of homo is, but I have no idea how you define it. If you tell me, we'd probably get somewhere.

Then you argue that faith itself isn't necessary

Necessary for what?

and completely upended your own entire definition to begin with.

Like seeing a chimney implode.

:AMR:

There are people on this thread who have and would call me out RIGHT HERE if they saw what you see, and I'd thank them for it.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Eh, crack on with it. Pointless to expect genuine debate here as it is.

FTR, Musty, I have never gone around here claiming that you are a homosexual after your admissions about college, and anna certainly hasn't either despite you trying to maintain that. Get on with it and your usual. SOD will no doubt happily follow suit.
 

musterion

Well-known member
Eh, crack on with it. Pointless to expect genuine debate here as it is.

FTR, Musty, I have never gone around here claiming that you are a homosexual after your admissions about college, and anna certainly hasn't either despite you trying to maintain that. Get on with it and your usual. SOD will no doubt happily follow suit.

Ah, now old evasive AB kicks in.

So the bottom line is, your question was never genuine but was just a trap you thought you'd lay for me. That about it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top