Protect children from churches
- Thread starter dbjork6317
- Start date
If you need a firm “no” to sleep better at night… here it is... I’m not a bot.
1. So you're not a MAGA guy? You certainly had the rest of us fooled, given your many statements espousing classic MAGA positions, extolling your Orange Master as "God's imperfect instrument," claiming to be a scientific expert, asserting that those who disagree with you are somehow wanting both intellectually and morally, and reeking of (unwarranted) condescension. As I mentioned before, you are one big, walking logical fallacy.
2. So you weren't accusing those who disagree with you of "moral relativism?" BWAHAHAHAHA!!! You can't be dumb and deluded enough to believe that. On second thought, yes you can.
Did any of notice the Bot literally replied to both my comments with the exact same post ... And still didn't admit that he's copying and pasting from AI.
It was basically the same comment. So why change it up when I can copy and paste and save myself time. You really are a dumbass.
Says the "guy" posting AI comments on a message board.
Where did you come to us from? Who are you a fan of?
You can call me whatever label makes you feel better, but responding to ideas with name-calling and lazy stereotypes doesn’t make your argument stronger... it just shows you’ve run out of substance. I’ve consistently made reasoned points grounded in logic, science, and moral consistency. If that reads as “condescension,” maybe the issue isn’t the tone... it’s the discomfort of facing a well-supported viewpoint. Also, calling someone “one big, walking logical fallacy” without identifying even one fallacy… is ironically a textbook fallacy itself.
Yes, I did point out moral relativism. Because when your version of “morality” changes with the situation or the audience, that’s literally moral relativism. It’s not complicated. And mocking it with a “BWAHAHA” doesn’t magically turn it into a valid argument. If you have a better response, make it. Otherwise, thanks for proving my point so loudly.
I’m a Clemson grad and have been a member of this board since I finished school in 2001... back when I was no longer a broke college kid (just a broke working one, but at least I could afford the annual fee). I used to post regularly on the football side until I took a break around 2016. Came back in 2018 (check the join date under my name) but haven't posted much.
Reading some of the posts in the politics board, it needed a strong conservative voice (I'm not even a huge MAGA), so I've been having some fun jumping in... and honestly, I was not expecting this many responses, but here we are. I’ll post more on the football side once the season gets rolling. Looking forward to it.
lol i missed the "God's imperfect instrument" line in his many walls of AI text.
definitely doesn't sound cultish or someone interested in moral relativism.
definitely doesn't sound cultish or someone interested in moral relativism.
Executive at Nonprofit Overseeing Ministries for Children Charged With Production and Possession of Child Sex Abuse Material
An executive at a youth ministry nonprofit in Pennsylvania, Daniel Reed, has been arrested on multiple child sex abuse material charges.
julieroys.com
Classic liberal move. Once you’ve been out-argued, out-debated, and out-smarted, you toss out labels like “AI” or “cultish” because that’s all you’ve got left. You can’t refute the points, so you go for the drive-by sarcasm and name-calling.
Regarding, "God's imperfect instrument". This is where reading comprehension and ability to utilize critical thought comes in... and post after post shows you fail miserably at these skills. You're really, really bad at both. I never said that Trump was God's imperfect instrument. What I did say is that the Bible shows countless examples of God using flawed people to fulfill His purposes. Dismissing Christians who support Trump shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Scripture and how God has worked through imperfect individuals throughout history. You don’t have to like it, but at least know what you’re arguing against.
Calling faith-based conviction “cultish” while tossing around moral relativism like it’s a virtue? That’s a special kind of irony. Maybe try addressing the actual argument instead of running the same tired liberal playbook.
Don't you ever give up?! Why not give your hubris a minute or two off? Your ceaseless efforts to proclaim yourself as this Board's savant, and everyone else utterly unworthy of your pearls of wisdom, grew stale pretty quick. OK, if was good for some laughs at the outset, but the humor faded as we realized you were serious, and the full extent of your delusion became obvious.
I have to hand it to you, though. Your coming up with (what?) six different categories of "logical fallacy" was just awesome. To call it guffaw inducing doesn't do it justice. Keep up God's work.
He makes really insightful posts....instead of telling him to be quiet..you liberals should fight back..go toe to toe..point for pointDon't you ever give up?! Why not give your hubris a minute or two off? Your ceaseless efforts to proclaim yourself as this Board's savant, and everyone else utterly unworthy of your pearls of wisdom, grew stale pretty quick. OK, if was good for some laughs at the outset, but the humor faded as we realized you were serious, and the full extent of your delusion became obvious.
I have to hand it to you, though. Your coming up with (what?) six different categories of "logical fallacy" was just awesome. To call it guffaw inducing doesn't do it justice. Keep up God's work.
If you cannot do that...maybe concede that he is correct
You can't reason with someone who is delusional. You can give him "attaboys," but then that makes you delusional as well. I'm just sayin' ...
Pete Hegseth just came out in favor of eliminating womens' right to vote. He did so while praising a video of a prominent evangelical nut job (name of Doug Wilson) who was expounding on this point. I'm not joking. Here is a link on the subject:
Pete Hegseth amplifies pastors with a message: Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote
The Pentagon chief already had a reputation as a far-right culture warrior. Then he promoted a video featuring pastors opposed to women voting.
www.msnbc.com
Do you agree with Hegseth? WWJD in this case?
Last edited:
Clearly in bad faith he says.
Why in bad faith? I'm being deceptive or dishonest? About what? I honestly have no clue what you would be talking about. So... seems like you misunderstand my motives. But if you want to have some high level discussion on issues, then address the issues and stop clutching your pearls.
We disagree about moral relativism. We only have to look at the bible to find examples, like eating shellfish and pork in the bronze age was 'WRONG' while now its morally acceptable. Are you saying thats not true? Are you saying moral relativism isn't real? Because you will lose that argument very quickly.
"Because it’s abortion absolutism that demands zero restrictions, no questions asked. That’s not freedom... that’s license with no responsibility." What? Now you are going off on an extreme stating its either control or the wild west. Roe v Wade was a compromise, because people's personal freedoms and the moral relativism of health care met and decided it was best to leave it up to the individual in these cases.
If your outlook were applied 'consistently' you would then be ok with denying Jehovah witnesses' of their freedom of religion. For example: They do not accept life saving blood transfusions. If you are consistently applying your moral absolutism, then denying them their freedom of choice in this matter is what should happen. Yes?
"BTW, FTR - Your post is packed with logical fallacies... Strawman, Appeal to Extremes, False Dilemma, and Ad Hominem, just to name a few. And I get it… pointing that out probably gets under your skin. But it also proves the point... when you can’t build a coherent, fact-based argument grounded in truth, you default to emotion, feelings, and moral relativism."
I'm not sure you've mastered the meaning of the words you are throwing around. Also, I don't think just denying that moral relativism's existence helps you in this debate.
Moral relativism is very much a real thing and is documented over and over again. What you seem to think is that your personal beliefs are better than someone else's. Which is why I state you wish to control people.
You think hes delusional? Well....you obviously know there are roughly 80 million people in Anerica....much more worldwide. who would say youre delusional...who cares
You cant reason with him??.
OR..
You cant change his opinion to align with yours??..that is the REAL reason you want him to quit posting. ...AND...he constantly whips you fellas in debates
Why not ALLOW EVERYONE to speak on this open message board...not just the libs?
My issue is he is clearly copying and pasting from AI sites. He isn't making arguments of his own.
He also hasn't denied this when I've called him on it.
jhallen: Changing anyone's mind is not among the reasons I post on this Board, or other internet Boards. That would be the most outlandish of objectives. I post on Boards where there is a majority of Conservative posters, because I want to be entertained. These Trump Cultists are typically so dumb and deluded that they refuse to accept even basic facts if they run counter to their Orange Master's narrative. For that, and for their mockery of liberals, they deserve mockery. I'm only too glad to extend them that courtesy.
And please explain how I am preventing anyone from speaking.
Last edited: