[talaniman]

I reserve the right to express myself as best I can. If you want to flunk my grammar, go ahead teach, hardly would be my first grammar error or last if indeed it's a error or me just being me! Doesn't change the fact that the dufus has yet again sparked controversy and contention with LAST WEEKS bizarro lunatic dangerous comments fueled by a lack of knowledge. That was last week! Did you see his presser yesterday from the WH with Pence by his side?

This dude learned nothing, so he just straight up blows his own horn with the usual lies and blame game misdirection's and distractions. If anybody can tell me what true thing this dude has said or done since this crisis started, I would love to hear it so I can blast you back to reality!

PS, We have already discussed the slow full of holes travel ban was after the airlines stopped flights.

[Athos]

That's already been straightened out. This discussion is not about that. If any of you want to believe that a quote is a paraphrase, then go for it. When WG claims that words within quotation marks are a paraphrase, and you consider that to be correct, then that's a fantasy world I don't want to live in.

Then please go to another world of your choosing. We'll be glad to see you go. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[Wondergirl]

That's already been straightened out. This discussion is not about that. If any of you want to believe that a quote is a paraphrase, then go for it. When WG claims that words within quotation marks are a paraphrase, and you consider that to be correct, then that's a fantasy world I don't want to live in.

JL claims words within quotation marks "can't be a paraphrase."

[jlisenbe]

JL claims words within quotation marks "can't be a paraphrase."

I haven't said exactly that. I can quote another person's paraphrase and that's fine, but it must be his/her exact words. But I'll tell you what. If you know of some way to paraphrase another person's words and put that within quotation marks, thus misrepresenting your own paraphrase of that person's statement as being that person's exact words, the tell us all how it works. I'm all ears. Let's hear it. Not copying and pasting something from the internet, but your own explanation.

Athos, if you don't want to read my posts, then block them. Fine with me, but I'm not going to live in that make believe world you have in your head. I'm not going to simply bow low and accept what you say. You have to make some appeal to authority.

I'm still convinced you are running from the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

[Wondergirl]

I haven't said exactly that. I can quote another person's paraphrase and that's fine, but it must be his/her exact words. But I'll tell you what. If you know of some way to paraphrase another person's words and put that within quotation marks, thus misrepresenting your own paraphrase of that person's statement as being that person's exact words, the tell us all how it works. I'm all ears. Let's hear it. Not copying and pasting something from the internet, but your own explanation.

I did.

You said: When WG claims that words within quotation marks are a paraphrase....

I said: JL claims words within quotation marks "can't be a paraphrase."

I didn't quote you exactly but paraphased what you had said and enclosed that paraphrase in quote marks.

[talaniman]

1. So when we break, bend, or change the rules, you get to punish us in forever? Boy you need a life.

2. Get a room!

3. WOW, truly fascinating how you make a different point of view into a judgmental condemnation the inquisition would be proud of.

[jlisenbe]

I didn't quote you exactly but paraphased what you had said and enclosed that paraphrase in quote marks.

"A direct quotation is a report of the exact words of an author or speaker and is placed inside quotation marks in a written work."

www.thoughtco.com/direct-quotation-composition-1690461

You did exactly what you are not supposed to do. And if you look at your quoted paraphrase, you will note that you misrepresented my statement. That's why you don't represent a paraphrase as being a direct quote.

This is such a stupid discussion. Surely we can drop this now. Next we'll discuss how you can put a comma in place of dollar sign.

1. So when we break, bend, or change the rules, you get to punish us in forever? Boy you need a life.

Why do you insist at directing such a sarcastic comment only at me? Are you so blind you cannot see that several people are keeping this alive? I'm perfectly happy to let them believe their strange grammar ideas. By all means let's let it go.

WOW, truly fascinating how you make a different point of view into a judgmental condemnation the inquisition would be proud of.

You mean a judgmental comment like this one you just made? If it's OK for you, then why not for everyone else?

[talaniman]

You know I take most digs and slaps as humor, but I have been told that I'm not very sensitive or empathetic, which is strange for those that say I'm a bleeding heart liberal. Go figure. I think though that anyone who stands alone against popular wisdom will be a target, and on these topics that's you.

You have to see us two are not the only ones here who know how to throw rocks. Plus you're easy, you never duck, even when we yell DUCK!

You mean a judgmental comment like this one you just made? If it's OK for you, then why not for everyone else?

You can chunk your rocks any time. I know how to duck.

[jlisenbe]

I would not accuse you of being insensitive or unsympathetic. I do think you care about people.

I think though that anyone who stands alone against popular wisdom will be a target, and on these topics that's you.

Yeah. It's just me and the entire internet. Somehow I feel like a super-majority!

The rocks you guys throw are mere grains of sand. There is no reason to duck.

[talaniman]

1. I have limitations.

2. You're not!

3. Noted, so stop complaining!

[jlisenbe]

OK

I'm pretty sure I am.

I will if you will.

[Athos]

Athos, if you don't want to read my posts, then block them.

Then I and others would not be able to correct you.

not going to live in that make believe world you have in your head.

As much as you would like, you can't create worlds (make believe or real) simply by wishing it. When you can't reply in a civil or logical fashion, you start again with your insults. Your reputation suffers with such posts.

I'm not going to simply bow low and accept what you say.

I never asked you to. Any beliefs I may have will be revealed as necessary in these discussions.

You have to make some appeal to authority.

Ah, there's your major problem. Your dependence on the authority of a literal interpretation of the Bible. I, and others, have been saying that very thing for months now. Someday, you may listen.

I'm still convinced you are running from the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Sorry, but I don't buy into this fundamentalist jargon. They are trigger words for your ilk - used to exclude.

[paraclete]

I'm still convinced you are running from the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Careful Jl, blasphemy. Why would you bring the Holy Spirit into this? are you losing the argument with an unbeliever?

[jlisenbe]

Ah, there's your major problem. Your dependence on the authority of a literal interpretation of the Bible. I, and others, have been saying that very thing for months now. Someday, you may listen.

You posted earlier that the NT teaches love for God, love for others, and love for self. That is based upon a completely literal acceptance of the words of Jesus. Why is it that you accept literally the parts you like, and completely reject the notion of coming judgment which is clearly spelled out (every bit as clearly as love for God, neighbor, and self) in Matthew 25? What objective standard are you applying?

Sorry, but I don't buy into this fundamentalist jargon. They are trigger words for your ilk - used to exclude.

The conviction of the Holy Spirit is "fundamentalist jargon"? Huh. I thought it was the words of Christ. I suppose that's another NT concept you don't accept as literal since you don't like it?

I am tempted to say that your approach to the acceptance of the words of the Bible is inconsistent, but then it occurred to me that it actually is very consistent. When you read a passage which agrees with your ideas and strikes you as reasonable, then you accept it as true. When you read a passage which does not agree with your ideas, well then it must be taken metaphorically, or the text had been corrupted, or hundreds of thoroughly professional Bible translators all got it wrong, or the NT canon was politically motivated, or someone else is stupid and a fundamentalist, and on and on it goes. So I will say that it certainly seems that at least you are consistent in your inconsistency.

[talaniman]

We all can make our own choices about faith in the words of ancient man and voice them. You have so why can't others. I mean are we required to recognize the legitimacy and authority of the NT to have a personal relationship with a God that we understand? Or is it blasphemy to even question ancient man and his writings?

How do you square your faith with acceptance and support for a cruel unrepentant liar? That I still don't get. Just yesterday he removed liability for meat packing plants so could stay open despite the ravages of corvid19 on the workers and their families while the CDC, and OSHA while suggesting safety measures not requiring compliance to stay open. Seems sort of strange to me.

[jlisenbe]

You have so why can't others.

When have I sad you can't? We are questioning each other here, just as you have just now.

I mean are we required to recognize the legitimacy and authority of the NT to have a personal relationship with a God that we understand? Or is it blasphemy to even question ancient man and his writings?

You have to recognize the authority of something. Take your pick, but you better pick wisely. If I understand correctly, you have recognized the authority of your own ideas about a god. Make sure you're right. For me, after decades of study, I have come to love the Bible for its accuracy and its clear and logical message of a God who is saving undeserving sinners (like me) from judgment.

How do you square your faith with acceptance and support for a cruel unrepentant liar? That I still don't get. Just yesterday he removed liability for meat packing plants so could stay open despite the ravages of corvid19 on the workers and their families while the CDC, and OSHA while suggesting safety measures not requiring compliance to stay open. Seems sort of strange to me.

Oh stop the holier than thou stuff. There was no bigger, "unrepentant liar" out there than HC. Biden doesn't even know where he is half the time, and his life is littered with wrong doing. Disagree with his policies if you want to, but the business of politics is a dirty one and you know it. How do you support a political party that proudly flies the flag of unrestricted abortion up to nine months of pregnancy? Nearly a million deaths a year of the unborn, but you want to complain about keeping meat facilities open? How is that consistent?

[talaniman]

When have I sad you can't? We are questioning each other here, just as you have just now.

It was my turn! 8D

You have to recognize the authority of something. Take your pick, but you better pick wisely. If I understand correctly, you have recognized the authority of your own ideas about a god. Make sure you're right. For me, after decades of study, I have come to love the Bible for its accuracy and its clear and logical message of a God who is saving undeserving sinners (like me) from judgment.

I do recognize something greater than myself, and I hope you understand I can put NOTHING between my self and that authority. I believe I have chosen wisely in that.

Oh stop the holier than thou stuff. There was no bigger, "unrepentant liar" out there than HC. Biden doesn't even know where he is half the time, and his life is littered with wrong doing. Disagree with his policies if you want to, but the business of politics is a dirty one and you know it.

I disagree with his policies his cruelty his incompetence, his lies, and his cheating. I judge him hardest by his never admitting his wrongs and doubling down on them. Let's see HC, Biden, and the dufus and everybody is worse than the dufus in your view.

How do you support a political party that proudly flies the flag of unrestricted abortion up to nine months of pregnancy? Nearly a million deaths a year of the unborn, but you want to complain about keeping meat facilities open? How is that consistent?

A misrepresentation of facts and exaggeration to boot, and your usual lumping different subjects together makes you very consistent for sure, but abortions are lawful with restrictions, and the meet supply and the virus are happening NOW! I will never be holier than thou, nor do I try too be.

[jlisenbe]

I do recognize something greater than myself, and I hope you understand I can put NOTHING between my self and that authority. I believe I have chosen wisely in that.

How did you come to know of the existence of that god? How do you know that god's will?

Let's see HC, Biden, and the dufus and everybody is worse than the dufus in your view.

I didn't say that.

A misrepresentation of facts and exaggeration to boot,

In what way? My statement was entirely accurate.

I never cease to be amazed at your attempts to justify abortion by saying that, after all, it is "lawful". Slavery was legal for decades. Jim Crow laws were legal. School segregation was legal. White political dominance was legal. Would you have suggested everyone back then just accept that because, after all, it was lawful? Does being lawful equate to being right? What a strange position you hold on that. It strikes me as the political position of convenience. "It might be a moral outrage, but its lawful, so its OK." Is that your thinking?

[talaniman]

1. FAITH, just like yours. I looked within through prayer and meditation, and started listening and recognizing the blessings that I had been ignoring a long time. Changed my whole perspective and my life.

2. I stand corrected as you said HC was a bigger unrepentant liar, and Biden was old and clueless. We don't know what kind of president HC would have been nor Biden will be if he wins but we know what kind of prez the dufus has been. Good or bad depending on which side of the fence you're on.

3. There was NO accuracy at all in your rather broad statement, and like me saying all conservatives are racist slugs. Untrue, unproven, and false as all get out.

I never cease to be amazed at your attempts to justify abortion by saying that, after all, it is "lawful". Slavery was legal for decades. Jim Crow laws were legal. School segregation was legal. White political dominance was legal. Would you have suggested everyone back then just accept that because, after all, it was lawful? Does being lawful equate to being right? What a strange position you hold on that. It strikes me as the political position of convenience. "It might be a moral outrage, but its lawful, so its OK." Is that your thinking?

Minorities back then as now, had no choice but accept those things they could not control, and while lawful was felt as wrong, and I respectfully submit that changing the laws is a helluva struggle that still goes on. Changing minds and hearts is even harder, so be aware of those truths in your struggles at the changes you want to see.

Practical EXPERIENCE is what guides my thinking. I have no need to justify anything, and that includes abortion, and admit I do struggle to deal with it's reality, and recognize I cannot control others, only MYSELF. I do object to your constant yammering about the million abortions a year by women in dire straits, and inadequately resourced, but say nothing of the 10's of millions that have the resources to pursue their options privately and safely with their own OBYGYN provider. That makes you a bully in my book who targets the least, and most defenseless amongst us, that you justify with your concern for the unborn which you quickly abandon after they are born. You whine all the time about being forced to support them, just like a deadbeat dad!

That's my think that I have consistently expressed.

[jlisenbe]

FAITH, just like yours. I looked within

But another person could "look within" and come up with ideas completely the opposite of yours about god. Is there any authority outside of your own ideas and impressions you appeal to?

Minorities back then as now, had no choice but accept those things they could not control, and while lawful was felt as wrong, and I respectfully submit that changing the laws is a helluva struggle that still goes on.

Of course they had a choice! They marched in the streets. They appealed to the government. They changed laws. Why do you just accept abortion as fine since it's "lawful", but not other areas?

There was NO accuracy at all in your rather broad statement,

What was inaccurate?

I do object to your constant yammering about the million abortions a year by women in dire straits, and inadequately resourced, but say nothing of the 10's of millions that have the resources to pursue their options privately and safely with their own OBYGYN provider.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Both groups are part of the nine hundred thousand. In your mind protesting the destruction of innocent human life is "yammering". That's really sad.

That makes you a bully in my book who targets the least, and most defenseless amongst us, that you justify with your concern for the unborn which you quickly abandon after they are born.

Completely, totally, 100% false. We have talked about this repeatedly in the past. Practically every PRIVATE organization set up to support single moms is conservative based, many of them Christian. In my own area there are MANY churches that are willing to reach out and help single moms. Your statement is just despicable.