"Did you explain to the arsonist that burning down your house is objectionable before they poured the gas??"dontfeartheringo wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 12:33 pm +1 on "You should watch this movie, 'What is a Woman?'."
"You should get the fuck out of my house."
I don't negotiate with terrorists.
Re: Politics
982What you've presented is not a cohesive argument. There's nothing to evaluate.hbiden@onlyfans.com wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 11:33 am that's why i saidi don't blame you if you don't want to argue.hbiden@onlyfans.com wrote: Sat Jan 20, 2024 9:14 pm If you want to argue, you have to have thick skin.
trust me, i get it.
I think the problem is that you *think* what you've presented is novel and worth discussion. It's not. Like all bad ideas, the problem is people entertaining seriously any bad idea in service of "fairness", or the people presenting them insisting that others engage with bad ideas.
As I indicated earlier - A fool's errand.
Re: Politics
983I am pro soft-porn.dontfeartheringo wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 12:33 pm "You should watch this movie, 'What is a Woman?'."
Re: Politics
984have it your way.dontfeartheringo wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 12:33 pm +1 on "You should watch this movie, 'What is a Woman?'."
"You should get the fuck out of my house."
I don't negotiate with terrorists.
that is the point. they want to divide us.zorg wrote: To HB's point, personal convictions are bleeding into discussions on policy, making defining (especially American) "politics" a total morass. Thinking of this as the necessary separation between Church and State. If you are a gun lover, there should be a way to talk to you about your secular love of firearms, AND separately a governing policy that serves all. These things might not always align to your personal preference, and a reasoning person should be prepared to make that concession. I see this kind of thing as basically irreconcilable any more. Thus, statis....and a whole lot of useless hollering. 2024 is going to be awesome.
Re: Politics
985Just to be clear, you think if I shun a friend or family member for not only espousing the views of Charlie Kirk, but actively fighting to elect politicians who share in his worldview, I am doing myself a disservice while helping our nation become more divisive.hbiden@onlyfans.com wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2024 9:26 pmi'm not afraid of charlie kirk. the question is can he deal with me?rsmurphy wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2024 7:57 pm I don't wish to build a bridge, nod 'sup, or passively let people like this exist without pushback
We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. - Charlie Kirk
If you'd like to fraternize with those types FM Inmysoul@onlyfans.com, I certainly won't stop you!
Justice for Randall Adjessom, Javion Magee, Destinii Hope, Kelaia Turner, Dexter Wade and Nakari Campbell
Re: Politics
986Politics are informed specifically by the worldview of a human. They are inextricably linked in the practical world.
Re: Politics
987so far we've escalated from "actively arguing" to "actively fighting" and i still don't think that charlie kirk is more important than your friends or family, the people who will be by your side until you die.rsmurphy wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 1:54 pmJust to be clear, you think if I shun a friend or family member for not only espousing the views of Charlie Kirk, but actively fighting to elect politicians who share in his worldview, I am doing myself a disservice while helping our nation become more divisive.hbiden@onlyfans.com wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2024 9:26 pmi'm not afraid of charlie kirk. the question is can he deal with me?rsmurphy wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2024 7:57 pm I don't wish to build a bridge, nod 'sup, or passively let people like this exist without pushback
We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. - Charlie Kirk
If you'd like to fraternize with those types FM Inmysoul@onlyfans.com, I certainly won't stop you!
also this is the 3rd time someone has accused me of being someone else and i don't know what that says about me. maybe you think it's funny?
zack got his problems, but being me ain't one of them.
Re: Politics
988In terms of the national dialogue, I'd 100% argue that Charlie K. is more important than any one in my family. Don't know how anyone couldn't.
Is this a serious position you're presenting?
Is this a serious position you're presenting?
Re: Politics
989Is your answer yes or no? I'll repeat myself:hbiden@onlyfans.com wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 2:17 pmso far we've escalated from "actively arguing" to "actively fighting" and i still don't think that charlie kirk is more important than your friends or family, the people who will be by your side until you die.
Am I wrong to shun people in my life who espouse the politics of Charlie Kirk?
Justice for Randall Adjessom, Javion Magee, Destinii Hope, Kelaia Turner, Dexter Wade and Nakari Campbell
Re: Politics
990Am I wrong to shun people in my life who espouse the politics of Charlie Kirk?
i'm not your boss. do whatever you want. i'm just telling you how i treat these situations.Frankie99 wrote: Mon Jan 22, 2024 2:30 pm In terms of the national dialogue, I'd 100% argue that Charlie K. is more important than any one in my family. Don't know how anyone couldn't.
Is this a serious position you're presenting?