first ten replies in this thread regarding the 100 laws and motions against people of faith, were completely side stepping the issue.
and many of those people who sidestepped were not christian anyhow.
so what does that tell you about how non christians deal with christians?
three of the 7 in the first seven replies were admitted athiests, denying that Obama was anti-christian.
but again, why the interest, it's not their religion?
right?
I was just curious...
again, if an athiest has no religious preference, why to to a christian forum and tell them that others are not REALLY persecuting them for their belief....when in reality they may or may not even have experience believe at all, regarding christianity?
The facts contained in what they said were ignored (because they couldn't be disputed) and instead, the posters were dismissed because of who they were. Classic!ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
- 1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"vicious ad hominem attacks"- 2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"
Bill Clinton caught on film suddenly switching from a laugh to a cry when realizes someone is filming him
I have zero sympathy with people who have fake sympathyHow do you get off topic in your own topic?
Bill Clinton caught on film suddenly switching from a laugh to a cry when realizes someone is filming him
What's that got to do with...I have zero sympathy with people who have fake sympathy
to be honest with you all, you gave up talking about the op weeks ago.What's that got to do with...
You know what? Nevermind.
see last post,Kind of like all those people who claim to be "Worried about Sec. Clinton's health!"?
tulc(isn't sure what this has to do with the OP)
here's one:to be honest with you all, you gave up talking about the op weeks ago.
point to the last post where it is spoken of,
and I will comment on it.
just for good ol time sake.
(snip)
So if you could point out say...15 of the 100 that were found to be true that could get the conversation started.#346 said:Oh! Were any of those "100" ever found to be true?
tulc(is just wondering)
(Aug. 31st
it's only take one lie to be a liar. One murder to be a murderer, one affair to show infidelity, and to be a cheater, etc, etc, etc. One petty theft to be a theaf, one felony to be a felon. One DUI to be a criminal.here's one:
So if you could point out say...15 of the 100 that were found to be true that could get the conversation started.
tulc(would settle for 10 if 15 can't be found)
Amazing! This post is a perfect example of the ad hominem logical fallacy!
The facts contained in what they said were ignored (because they couldn't be disputed) and instead, the posters were dismissed because of who they were. Classic!
tulc(is a Christian who is pointing: out the OP list has been shown to be untrue in every instance)
it's only take one lie to be a liar. One murder to be a murderer, one affair to show infidelity, and to be a cheater, etc, etc, etc. One petty theft to be a theaf, one felony to be a felon. One DUI to be a criminal.
yet for some reason when it comes to obama, it take 15 offenses for him to be found guilty.
hhhmmm why is that?
Actually every time it was shown one of the 100 was wrong it was ignored. And much like the above there was an attempt to change the subject of the thread. If you can't find even 15 true ones out of the list you could just admit it and stop trying to change the subject,since ya'll are not interested in refuting the op...nor even talking about it...
I guess I may as well show this video while I wait for response.
in this video it shows how hillary is so scripted in what she says that she literally will not answer a question like....."how's the apple pie", or "what about the pumpkins?"
if the video does not show, use this link:
https://www.startpage.com/do/search?q=Hillary+Clinton's+real+(rude)+self
at least we know one thing about trump, he aint scripted thats for sure.
now, please lets get back to op and discuss this stuff, like gentleman, and gentlewoman.
lets rationalize, I love rational debate, not attacks on character or simply belittling or insulting, everything I provide I give at least one source, many times multiple sources.
but no response.
why is that?