Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Town Quixote's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I have a confession...sometimes, when I read through forum or FB posts I find myself wishing more people were illiterate...and when it gets really bad I include myself in that number.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life






    Comment


    • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
      I have a confession...sometimes, when I read through forum or FB posts I find myself wishing more people were illiterate...and when it gets really bad I include myself in that number.


      Wait, what? Don't laugh, I read that 'literate.'
      My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
      Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
      Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
      Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
      No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
      Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

      ? Yep

      Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

      ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

      Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
        From a friend of mine elsewhere on the topic of PC speech and whether, as another friend suggested, it was a call for censorship:

        "It's not the words that are politically incorrect [that is the problem] it's the implied meaning they are given when used in a certain context. For example, if someone says, "Black lives matter," and another person responds with, "All lives matter," they are using that phrase to diminish the first statement [and not to uplift the larger group]. It's not calling for censorship, it's calling for decency." John Michael Daw
        Replied to this in another thread (this thread is more of snippets like a blog). Our experiences make a difference too as to how we respond to these. I'm convinced if more were like you and I, these concerns would have better resolve in our nation. -Lon
        My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
        Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
        Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
        Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
        No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
        Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

        ? Yep

        Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

        ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

        Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

        Comment


        • Thinking of my old friend today and one of his favorite bits...so this is for Patrick.

          The Wrap
          on Nostalgia


          Was momentarily, if pleasantly surprised in a new guy thread...
          Originally posted by jjohnson7773 View Post
          I am interested in discussing religion, politics, science, history, and any other sensible subject.
          Man, for a second I read that last part as "any sensual subject" and it was one of the funnier things I'd read around here for a while...so...welcome aboard.

          Tried my hand at a few more one sentence movie reviews...
          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
          Captain Marvel: a heartwarming tale of illegal immigrants.

          Glass: paneful.

          Which led to fisticuffs...okay, conversation, but with a real edge...okay, vocabulary then...
          Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post


          Why does Universal block here but not in the UK?
          It's all Big Pharma. Somehow. They just ruin everything.

          Good to see a few familiar faces about. I mean on separate people.

          And there's AB too...which is...well, you know.


          Happened upon chrys being chrys and...
          Originally posted by chrysostom View Post
          I get three times the views when you [anna] reply.
          I know town loves that sort of thing
          You seem pretty fond of it too.

          Then there was politics and religion in the mix...literally...
          Originally posted by TrumpTrainCA View Post
          Then you obviously know nothing at all about Christianity.
          That's what the 7th Day Adventist said to the Baptist.

          God forgives those who repent of their sins.
          To be sure.

          Homosexual activity is a grievous sin
          As opposed to a what sort of alternative sin?

          Democrats = The party of infanticide, sexual perversion...
          ...As for the party of perversion title, I think there are enough practical examples of immoral behavior and blind eyed living to embarrass either party. I mean, look who leads the right these days and consider his sexual congress (either, though you'd have to capitalize).

          So anna said...
          Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
          With all due respect and affection to my friends, I've got maybe a bit more Hatfield and McCoy blood in my veins than you do. There's a fine line between sparring and aggressive or passive aggressive - and between observation of a poster's behavior and ripping them to shreds. I'd like to hope I walk on the civil side more often than not, but there are times when I'm more than willing to give as good as I get.
          Reported.


          Which took a dark and ugly turn, as you'd expect when we tie up...
          Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post


          I really feel like we're getting somewhere with this conversation. And that can only mean one thing.

          Back Alley, here we come!

          Answered Jacob on the death penalty...
          Originally posted by Jacob View Post
          If you have determined no death penalty, either in general for all cases or a specific case (either a situation or a command/commandment/instruction/law), what is your position and/or reasoning?
          I'm against it because we know that we've executed the innocent. We have the capacity to incarcerate people for life. During that incarceration some of those innocent may be freed and some remedy applied. But once we take a man's life we cannot offer any remedy and cannot in any sense undo the injustice.

          While elsewhere, JR noted...
          Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
          Congratulations, your post is number 666.
          Man...that's going to leave a mark.

          Then there was the forlorn look on Trump's youngest at the inaugural, captured by photo...
          Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
          I never see him smiling. I've often wondered what life for him is like.
          When you're his age your father is the smartest, strongest guy in the world.

          Think about how depressing that assumption must be for the little guy.

          Noted in anna's circus thread...
          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
          This Just In:

          According to NY Magazine, the White House has taken the position that cutting Meals on Wheels funding is actually compassionate.

          I mean, think of all the exercise those people will get foraging for food.


          And on the problematic nature of partisanship...
          Originally posted by ffreeloader View Post
          So, you're the one that made the argument that Muler is a good guy because of his having a purple heart
          It demonstrates courage and devotion to duty outside of the rhetorical.

          and I demonstrate how foolish that reasoning is
          A declaration isn't a demonstration. It's a stump speech.

          Mueller was involved in a case in New York where 3 guys were railroaded into jail because the FBI wanted to protect Whitey Bulger, a mass murderer. Mueller wrote letters saying those guys needed to stay in jail because they were guilty, and he knew they weren't.https://www.newsmax.com/politics/ala.../08/id/853235/
          At least your proffering something to consider now.

          An allegation by Alan Dershowitz? And what action was taken and sustained against Muller in a court of law?

          Originally posted by ffreeloader View Post
          Here's more on Muler and his dirty past.

          https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...fbi-officials/
          That's just more allegation on the same story about Whitey. This time we have accusations from Louie Gohmert.

          Louie Gohmert, who is essentially a wind sock for the far right with a propensity to believe and speak some curious notions. Here are a few nuggets by former birther believing Representative Gohmert:

          On the Court.
          "The Supreme Court said…‘We are your God. Forget what God, Moses, Jesus ever said, we are your God now, the five of us in the majority, you do as we tell you.’ We have two of them [Ginsburg and Kagan] who had done same-sex marriages before they participated, they were disqualified, but they illegally participated, it’s an illegal decision, and it’s time to start impeaching judges and remove them from the Supreme Court.”

          On homosexuals in the military.
          “I’ve had people say, ‘Hey, you know, there’s nothing wrong with gays in the military. Look at the Greeks.’ Well, you know, they did have people come along who they loved that was the same sex and would give them massages before they went into battle. But you know what, it’s a different kind of fighting, it’s a different kind of war and if you’re sitting around getting massages all day ready to go into a big, planned battle, then you’re not going to last very long.”


          So, he has a history of saying all sorts of things.


          Then someone brought up the EC...
          Originally posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
          So what. That's not how you win elections. That's like a football team saying, "Well you got more touchdowns but we ran more yards."
          Actually, you have that backwards, since the EC has largely given geography more power than the people.

          LOL. Who gives a crap.
          A little over half the electorate, for starters.

          Wake up and learn how elections work.
          And how they sometimes don't.


          So chrys said...
          Originally posted by chrysostom View Post
          who do you want to protect?
          ...An immigrant who won't stay and fight for his country?

          And anna wondered...
          Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
          What do you mean by this?
          A ban on pacifist immigration?

          An end to Amish anchor babies?

          Before AB ruined everything...
          Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
          And some people think Catholicism is heretical, plenty on here in fact. Not interested in "organised religion" thanks.
          Another vote for "disorganized religion" then...we just keep losing folks to the Methodists.

          Tomorrow? I'm not promising anything.



          And goodnight sweet prince. May flights of angels sing thee, and never route you through Atlanta.
          You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

          Pro-Life






          Comment


          • So I'm on this thread in FB where a guy who is identified as an IHOP cook is answering the question, "Are you an atheist?"

            And he says, "I"m not an atheist per se, but I don't believe in the God everyone else believes in."

            I asked, "Is it because you work in an IHOP?"

            I can tell you, there's no fun in making an IHOP cook cry.


            Okay, he appreciated the jibe (a very young guy, summer job) but still...there are jobs that make you wonder. That has to be one of them.

            Like proctologists. You know they have to be nihilists.
            You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

            Pro-Life






            Comment


            • LOL! You gotta wonder about some folks. I have run across some interesting characters on Facebook too.

              June is Gay Pride Month.Tolerance and diversity? ☞ More like tolerate perversity.☠

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                From a friend of mine elsewhere on the topic of PC speech and whether, as another friend suggested, it was a call for censorship:

                "It's not the words that are politically incorrect [that is the problem] it's the implied meaning they are given when used in a certain context. For example, if someone says, "Black lives matter," and another person responds with, "All lives matter," they are using that phrase to diminish the first statement [and not to uplift the larger group]. It's not calling for censorship, it's calling for decency." John Michael Daw
                Here's me trying to distinguish between this, and actual censorship. What is censorship if it isn't the expunging of certain language that we don't like to be written or said, regardless of the supposed intent of the language? In the above, is the author arguing that forbidding "All lives matter," even in the context of responding to "Black lives matter," is Not censorship? Because here's me trying to distinguish between this, and real censorship.
                "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

                @Nee_Nihilo

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Idolater View Post
                  Here's me trying to distinguish between this, and actual censorship. What is censorship if it isn't the expunging of certain language that we don't like to be written or said, regardless of the supposed intent of the language? In the above, is the author arguing that forbidding "All lives matter," even in the context of responding to "Black lives matter," is Not censorship? Because here's me trying to distinguish between this, and real censorship.
                  He's not arguing for censorship at all. He's saying that it's the sort of thing a person says who isn't so much concerned that people might have forgotten the majority matters as they are in attempting to dismiss the minority interest in promoting an inequity of treatment contrary to the idea of a just society.
                  You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                  Pro-Life






                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                    I have a confession...sometimes, when I read through forum or FB posts I find myself wishing more people were illiterate...and when it gets really bad I include myself in that number.
                    I have a confession... usually the first thing I do when I log on to TOL is close the chat box.

                    Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                      "It's not the words that are politically incorrect [that is the problem] it's the implied meaning they are given when used in a certain context. For example, if someone says, "Black lives matter," and another person responds with, "All lives matter," they are using that phrase to diminish the first statement [and not to uplift the larger group]. It's not calling for censorship, it's calling for decency." John Michael Daw

                      Was there anyone on the right going around saying "all lives matter" before there was a "Black lives matter?"

                      Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
                        I have a confession... usually the first thing I do when I log on to TOL is close the chat box.
                        I renamed it...and find that if I feel obliged to insert "nude" into the comments at some point it really changes my level of interest and the entertainment value of reading it.

                        Take Truster's, "If you shake the bushes one always pops up." Now it could be, if you shake the bushes nude...or one nude always pops up...or pops up nude...there are usually a few variations.

                        Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
                        Was there anyone on the right going around saying "all lives matter" before there was a "Black lives matter?"
                        Of course not, just as there was never a call for White Entertainment Television, or less diversity in film. Most of these people appear to be voicing the resentment of a comfortable majority having to put up with a suddenly vocal minority they once only had to consider when they could assume a vaguely messianic role, if then. You hear worse resentment aimed at minority members who do it from a position of wealth and power, reminding many that they've been lapped in the previously determined oval of social order.
                        You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                        Pro-Life






                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I renamed it...and find that if I feel obliged to insert "nude" into the comments at some point it really changes my level of interest and the entertainment value of reading it.

                          Take Truster's, "If you shake the bushes one always pops up." Now it could be, if you shake the bushes nude...or one nude always pops up...or pops up nude...there are usually a few variations.
                          I would imagine suggest opine that if you insert "nude" into the comments the effect would be similar to what happens when you drop a fish stunner in a pond...

                          Coincidentally, there was a nudist camp question in the RWA quiz yesterday. Just curious, do you remember how you answered the question?


                          Of course not, just as there was never a call for White Entertainment Television, or less diversity in film. Most of these people appear to be voicing the resentment of a comfortable majority having to put up with a suddenly vocal minority they once only had to consider when they could assume a vaguely messianic role, if then. You hear worse resentment aimed at minority members who do it from a position of wealth and power, reminding many that they've been lapped in the previously determined oval of social order.
                          I'm way past giving them the benefit of "appear to be."

                          I know it's better to word it that way, and why, but we're dealing with people who've completely sabotaged - you know what, it just occurred to me that the "revolutionaries" they needed to fear were themselves. They've appropriated for their own use every tactic they once ascribed to "the left." I've mentioned their rightist adaptation of Alinksky, but there are more comparisons than just that.

                          Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
                            I would imagine suggest opine that if you insert "nude" into the comments the effect would be similar to what happens when you drop a fish stunner in a pond...
                            Substituting works about as well. I love the imagery though...speaking of...

                            Coincidentally, there was a nudist camp question in the RWA quiz yesterday. Just curious, do you remember how you answered the question?
                            I enthusiastically supported the notion. If I ever happened upon one I'd be game to blend in. At least for now. Ask me again in ten years. Likely a very different answer, brimming with moral outrage and a strong sense of how I've let things go...and how things go on their own.

                            I'm way past giving them the benefit of "appear to be."
                            Well, you know, you have to hold out hope for the exception.

                            I know it's better to word it that way, and why, but we're dealing with people who've completely sabotaged - you know what, it just occurred to me that the "revolutionaries" they needed to fear were themselves. They've appropriated for their own use every tactic they once ascribed to "the left." I've mentioned their rightist adaptation of Alinksky, but there are more comparisons than just that.
                            That's about it, right there...which I'm seriously considering as the eventual title of my autobiography or could double as the title of sex tape from somewhere in Minnesota (I may watch too much Brooklyn Nine-Nine).

                            One of those.
                            You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                            Pro-Life






                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                              He's not arguing for censorship at all. He's saying that it's the sort of thing a person says who isn't so much concerned that people might have forgotten the majority matters as they are in attempting to dismiss the minority interest in promoting an inequity of treatment contrary to the idea of a just society.
                              So you think that a just society is one that practices censorship? Or is it your friend who does?
                              "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

                              @Nee_Nihilo

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
                                Was there anyone on the right going around saying "all lives matter" before there was a "Black lives matter?"
                                Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                                Of course not, just as there was never a call for White Entertainment Television, or less diversity in film. Most of these people appear to be voicing the resentment of a comfortable majority having to put up with a suddenly vocal minority they once only had to consider when they could assume a vaguely messianic role, if then. You hear worse resentment aimed at minority members who do it from a position of wealth and power, reminding many that they've been lapped in the previously determined oval of social order.
                                They called themselves "Pro-Life." Back then.
                                "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

                                @Nee_Nihilo

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X