 | | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) Shouldn't that be "declaimed", and not "disclaimed"? On no! Your entire argument now has now been forfeited! Nyahh. Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. ;-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) What is a religion, if not a "belief system"? Just because atheism is not an organized religion doesn't mean it's not a religion at all. (...) You must have missed my lengthy discussion with Mr. Schuler regarding the fundamental differences (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) I did not rip you. I cautioned you against the use of a Straw Man falacy in misapplying the definition of tolerance, but that's a discussion of rhetoric. If you perceived my addressing of your rhetorical shortcomings as a "rip" on you (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) SNIPPED in order to meet post req's (...) SNIP for post req (...) Dave, this discussion is a total joke. You rip me for assuming you're a moral relativist because you don't come out and say you are, and then proceed to use every type of moral (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) I don't assume anything about Dave - his own statements show he is a moral relativist. Nobody else here apparently has problems calling things as they see them when it goes against their own positions. I'm no different. And I am just about (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
