Logical fallacy. Assuming the premise.

I know plenty of people who do exactly that. If God tells them to or if it's their own idea I can't honestly say.

All arguments assume the premises. Assuming the conclusion is fallacious, though.

Anyone " who pats themselves on the back" for being saved doesn't understand the Gospel.

And if one doesn't understand the Gospel, one probably isn't saved from Hell.

I don't see why we should automatically understand your reference to a heretofore unmentioned 1963 O'Hare Supreme Court case. It's not like this is common knowledge; people on the street or even in the average political forum aren't chatting about O'Hare.

Anyway, here's what you said: "None of those definitions [of theocracy] accurately describe the United States. If they did, we'd still allow prayer in public schools"

Would you agree that "we'd still allow prayer in public schools", is an incorrect statement, since prayer IS still allowed in schools in many contexts?

On a related note, would you at least agree that SOME forms of prayer are always inappropriate in a place like a public school? I know some religious people feel compelled to do the whole crazy, speaking in tongues, handling snakes routine, surely you'd agree that that is, at least, a huge distraction to other students and should not be permitted?

I agree that the US is not technically a theocracy, but it definitely contains theocratic elements, and if the wishes of a large section of right-wingers came true, it would become a full theocracy in a hurry.

Wait, I thought Pascal's Wager was refuted like 300 years ago...

Damn laggy.

So you're opinion regarding children or mentally challenged people who die is they're likely in Hell ?

You see why you're not actually preaching anything remotely related to what Jesus may have, right ?

And more to the topic, this is exactly why religion needs to be kept out of the public square. It's just not something that joins people together in the way that a modern society needs to function.

The conclusion here is unremarkable.
Obviously if your understanding of salvation is correct then any rational human would worry about it every waking moment as life is literally meaningless at that point. It's just something to be endured until your real existence begins.

The conclusion that the quip is based on is what's easily disputed.

Yes.

As a rule of thumb, I'm fine with each individual school district determining what to allow or disallow.

Agreed.

You thought wrong:


https://www.amazon.com/Taking-Pascal.../dp/0830851364

No.

Please read better:

Note well the word probably.

Complex Question Fallacy.

So, do you advocate repealing the First Amendment?

We can discuss it in RGT if you want.

Sure, why not ?
It's not like there are any rules. The judges are just politicians making rulings that suit their donors like every other politician.

Let's burn this m-f-er down !!!

As far as your preaching of The Good News...lol. It's not very good, is it ?

I think you are guilty of broad-brushing here.

Are you being serious? If so, I'm a bit surprised that you are advocating violence. If you're not serious, what are you babbling about?

The Gospel is Great News for those who choose to trust and obey Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior!

I'm not broad brushing at all. Unless you're worried that I'm besmirching the reputation of some of the judges appointed by Dems. They do seem to be a bit more respectful of the traditions and norms at this stage.

Figurative language LT. This is why you shouldn't be trying to figure out what God is trying to tell you via a 2000 year old book written by men who thought the world was flat. (just sayin)

But since we do live in a time where politicians don't hold themselves to any laws the place is probably going to burn sooner or later.

Since you're mostly just trolling at this point, I'll leave you be for a while.

So you don't think the conservative justices are politicians taking money from donors ?

You're one of the few I guess. Keep the faith.

Welcome to Libtard University!


Libtard mission No 1 -


pretend to help the poor. In actuallity, dont help the poor, but get their votes. Then let all crimes happen, and argue wildly on all channels how to fix it. Immediately cause a disturbance on all social channels, then offer a solution, and start mission money grab. When done, rinse, repeat. works in all areas.
Best example: California.


Libtard mission No 2 - make houses and all real estate unaffordable to the average person.
Make California and all libtard areads so expensice that nobody, except superrich libtards can live there. Get rid of all homeless and poor people, let them live in the streets and pretend you care.

Dems work?? who elses? They rule this state for more than 20 years imo.

You lippytards, in the meantime children are starving and so hungry they start to eat their own hands in Yemen and nobody is talking about it. The USA is in this war for over a decade. We are busy with transgender in sports and the insanity around that and Putin that we forget everything else around us. If its not covid insanity, its trans insanity or ukraine and if its not that its something else but never the real atrocites and f ups we are really causing. By the way the russians and cowboys are getting at eatch other in wars around the planet for a long time. Trump killed many russians in Syria and Biden right now in Mali, Africa, stop pretending its something new.

I realize they probably view it as temporary and hopefully so but if I ever found myself stuck in a situation where living in a tent in the middle of an expensive city was the possible long haul I'm taking my tent and attempting to live like the guy did in that movie "Into the Wild". All those people living there close together in the middle of the street, I think it's a great suggestion for them to consider in my eyes. They could seemingly all venture off into the wild and start a small society together in more peace and live off the land.

Is there a coherent point you can make here rather than just repeating "libtards" (and lippytards?!?) over and over again, and posting almost 2 hours of video?

I'll have the temerity to answer for washoe: No!

The utter inability to use 'trans' in a grammatically correct way by certain types on this forum will never cease to amaze me.

By the way, the Johnny Harris liberal hypocrisy video I recall actually being really good, washoe's antics aside.