Hysteria versus Reality: The Secular Left has killed over 100 Million People

[pedrocon]

luchabee I don’t know what your smoking, but presence or lack of presence of christianity has nothing to do with autocratacy,centralization, totalitarianism yadayada.

Ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition? Totalitarianism how about the monarchic (christian based) system that lasted in europe for 2000 years? How about the spread of Christianity in the americas via the jesuits etc. Pretty bloody stuff.

Its funny how people conveniently pick and choose certain eras to fit their argument and ignore the entire picture. All I need is one counter example to nullify your argument. I think I’ve made my point.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I’d have to go with Option #3, which is not to respond at all. If you do choose to respond, you have to follow the rules of the road and accord luchabee the same courtesy he should show you.

Fair is fair, amigo. I think it’s safe to say that you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, politically speaking, and yet we haven’t exchanged a single profanity or ad hominem between us. And I know we both feel very strongly about our respective positions, so it is possible to conduct a respectful dialogue and argument (in the pure sense of the term) without resorting to mud slinging or name calling.

As a Catholic, I strongly disagree with luchabee’s positions, but he has asserted them and he continues to argue them in the face of strong opposition. I also strongly disagree with larrylujack, who seems to think all of us spiritual types are blithering idiots and incapable of formulating a thought, let alone a coherent sentence.

You stake out your position and argue your points and see who is standing when the dust settles. Then go have a beer or some nice Bogel vino (good choice, BTW).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I’d have to go with Option #3, which is not to respond at all. If you do choose to respond, you have to follow the rules of the road and accord luchabee the same courtesy he should show you.

Fair is fair, amigo. I think it’s safe to say that you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, politically speaking, and yet we haven’t exchanged a single profanity or ad hominem between us. And I know we both feel very strongly about our respective positions, so it is possible to conduct a respectful dialogue and argument (in the pure sense of the term) without resorting to mud slinging or name calling.

As a Catholic, I strongly disagree with luchabee’s positions, but he has asserted them and he continues to argue them in the face of strong opposition. I also strongly disagree with larrylujack, who seems to think all of us spiritual types are blithering idiots and incapable of formulating a thought, let alone a coherent sentence.

You stake out your position and argue your points and see who is standing when the dust settles. Then go have a beer or some nice Bogel vino (good choice, BTW).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I’d have to go with Option #3, which is not to respond at all. If you do choose to respond, you have to follow the rules of the road and accord luchabee the same courtesy he should show you.

Fair is fair, amigo. I think it’s safe to say that you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, politically speaking, and yet we haven’t exchanged a single profanity or ad hominem between us. And I know we both feel very strongly about our respective positions, so it is possible to conduct a respectful dialogue and argument (in the pure sense of the term) without resorting to mud slinging or name calling.

As a Catholic, I strongly disagree with luchabee’s positions, but he has asserted them and he continues to argue them in the face of strong opposition. I also strongly disagree with larrylujack, who seems to think all of us spiritual types are blithering idiots and incapable of formulating a thought, let alone a coherent sentence.

You stake out your position and argue your points and see who is standing when the dust settles. Then go have a beer or some nice Bogel vino (good choice, BTW).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I’d have to go with Option #3, which is not to respond at all. If you do choose to respond, you have to follow the rules of the road and accord luchabee the same courtesy he should show you.

Fair is fair, amigo. I think it’s safe to say that you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, politically speaking, and yet we haven’t exchanged a single profanity or ad hominem between us. And I know we both feel very strongly about our respective positions, so it is possible to conduct a respectful dialogue and argument (in the pure sense of the term) without resorting to mud slinging or name calling.

As a Catholic, I strongly disagree with luchabee’s positions, but he has asserted them and he continues to argue them in the face of strong opposition. I also strongly disagree with larrylujack, who seems to think all of us spiritual types are blithering idiots and incapable of formulating a thought, let alone a coherent sentence.

You stake out your position and argue your points and see who is standing when the dust settles. Then go have a beer or some nice Bogel vino (good choice, BTW).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I’d have to go with Option #3, which is not to respond at all. If you do choose to respond, you have to follow the rules of the road and accord luchabee the same courtesy he should show you.

Fair is fair, amigo. I think it’s safe to say that you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, politically speaking, and yet we haven’t exchanged a single profanity or ad hominem between us. And I know we both feel very strongly about our respective positions, so it is possible to conduct a respectful dialogue and argument (in the pure sense of the term) without resorting to mud slinging or name calling.

As a Catholic, I strongly disagree with luchabee’s positions, but he has asserted them and he continues to argue them in the face of strong opposition. I also strongly disagree with larrylujack, who seems to think all of us spiritual types are blithering idiots and incapable of formulating a thought, let alone a coherent sentence.

You stake out your position and argue your points and see who is standing when the dust settles. Then go have a beer or some nice Bogel vino (good choice, BTW).

[TemekuT]

[quote=arraya]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria

Patients diagnosed with female hysteria would sometimes undergo “pelvic massage” — manual stimulation of the woman’s genitals by the doctor to “hysterical paroxysm”, which is now recognized as orgasm.[1][/quote]

As shown in a scene in “The Road to Wellville” (1994 movie)

[TemekuT]

[quote=arraya]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria

Patients diagnosed with female hysteria would sometimes undergo “pelvic massage” — manual stimulation of the woman’s genitals by the doctor to “hysterical paroxysm”, which is now recognized as orgasm.[1][/quote]

As shown in a scene in “The Road to Wellville” (1994 movie)

[TemekuT]

[quote=arraya]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria

Patients diagnosed with female hysteria would sometimes undergo “pelvic massage” — manual stimulation of the woman’s genitals by the doctor to “hysterical paroxysm”, which is now recognized as orgasm.[1][/quote]

As shown in a scene in “The Road to Wellville” (1994 movie)

[TemekuT]

[quote=arraya]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria

Patients diagnosed with female hysteria would sometimes undergo “pelvic massage” — manual stimulation of the woman’s genitals by the doctor to “hysterical paroxysm”, which is now recognized as orgasm.[1][/quote]

As shown in a scene in “The Road to Wellville” (1994 movie)

[TemekuT]

[quote=arraya]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria

Patients diagnosed with female hysteria would sometimes undergo “pelvic massage” — manual stimulation of the woman’s genitals by the doctor to “hysterical paroxysm”, which is now recognized as orgasm.[1][/quote]

As shown in a scene in “The Road to Wellville” (1994 movie)

[TemekuT]

Allan, my position is that if one wants to blast the opponent, please be clever and witty when thrusting the rapier. Don’t resort to lowest common denominator words and phrases.

Gandalf, just trying to elevate you a bit. After all, you have set an example for the kids.

[TemekuT]

Allan, my position is that if one wants to blast the opponent, please be clever and witty when thrusting the rapier. Don’t resort to lowest common denominator words and phrases.

Gandalf, just trying to elevate you a bit. After all, you have set an example for the kids.

[TemekuT]

Allan, my position is that if one wants to blast the opponent, please be clever and witty when thrusting the rapier. Don’t resort to lowest common denominator words and phrases.

Gandalf, just trying to elevate you a bit. After all, you have set an example for the kids.

[TemekuT]

Allan, my position is that if one wants to blast the opponent, please be clever and witty when thrusting the rapier. Don’t resort to lowest common denominator words and phrases.

Gandalf, just trying to elevate you a bit. After all, you have set an example for the kids.

[Author]

Posts