|
Lawdog on Separation of Church and State | by DesertRat66 | 2009-08-26 07:37:13 |
|
At some point... | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 08:18:11 |
|
THE DOCTERINE OF RELATIVE FILTH | by SnArL | 2009-08-26 08:46:04 |
|
Nobody SHOULD be doing it. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 09:16:50 |
|
[CITATION NEEDED] | by SnArL | 2009-08-26 09:20:55 |
|
Oh, how short the memory. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 11:10:20 |
|
How does Snarl saying something equate to | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 11:12:44 |
|
Snarl didn't say what he thought was conjecture. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 11:24:58 |
|
Your "picked something", to me at least, | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 11:27:48 |
|
What am I supposed to be advancing? | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 11:45:30 |
|
My point is that if you want to debate and discuss | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 11:57:11 |
|
I don't want to debate and discuss. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 12:12:07 |
|
What good would that do? | by MatthewDBA | 2009-08-26 12:13:14 |
|
One word... | by DesertRat66 | 2009-08-26 12:20:57 |
|
And yet when somebody brings up the death penalty | by SnArL | 2009-08-26 12:22:48 |
|
Exactly. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 12:31:27 |
|
Who is "the right"? | by MatthewDBA | 2009-08-26 12:35:11 |
|
Them. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 12:46:54 |
|
"Them" isn't very definitive. (n/t) | by MatthewDBA | 2009-08-26 12:51:47 |
|
Of course not. | by SnArL | 2009-08-26 12:55:16 |
|
See, I knew you'd get it. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 13:10:31 |
|
So let me make sure I am understanding | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 13:37:53 |
|
More or less. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 14:01:56 |
| Stated that way you are making much more sense |
by Classic_Jon |
2009-08-26 14:20:09 |
I do still disagree with you that they are the "same thing."
If Bush, Clinton, Reagan or any other president had done what Obama just did, I would be saying the same thing. This is not a party issue, this is an ethics issue and one that seriously dips into an area of things where religion and state get very muddled...and that alone makes me *very* uncomfortable.
The key thing you said here that you did not say previously that makes it make more sense is this. "Either it's bad for both sides, in which case it should be universally decried when any sort of impropriety occurs, or it's okay for both sides, in which case everyone should be quiet."
Before that, you were contradicting yourself as well as, to be blunt, using "because I said so" arguments to prop up what you were saying, when if you had said what you just did...a lot of what happened above...would not have happened...make sense?
Even thought Snarl was pretty *snarktastic*, he does have a point about the "because I said so" part.
In my opinion, some of what you were doing, unintentional or not, was coming close to being a troll. I was stating things the way I was in hopes that you would start making more sense if I could get you back to factual and not "because I said so" so that we ALL could have a PRODUCTIVE discussion and not devolve into a mess that is exactly what we were talking about was bad.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
I'm tired of... | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 14:37:11 |
|
Honestly, if you had said it that way | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 14:45:30 |
|
And a lot of people wouldn't have gotten it. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 14:51:18 |
|
I *strongly* disagree. I think you hurt your | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 15:01:18 |
|
Actually, you're agreeing with me. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 15:09:26 |
|
No, I think that if that was your end goal | by Classic_Jon | 2009-08-26 15:18:16 |
|
It was not to cause a fight. | by kelli217 | 2009-08-26 15:33:10 |
|
I think there are probably | by MatthewDBA | 2009-08-26 16:30:10 |
|
True, but with the object lesson | by Nightwind | 2009-08-26 19:21:45 |
|
I think most people already knew it. (n/t) | by MatthewDBA | 2009-08-26 19:43:17 |
