LogFAQs > #959995014

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Church is called EVIL for NOT allowing MASKLESS MAN Pray and caused a BRAWL!!!
SKARDAVNELNATE 11/14/21 2:44:37 PM #78:	adjl posted... Man, if only somebody else in this discussion had tried to make that point already. You're snarkily implying here that you did that. Let's chalk it up to the length that this has been going on that I don't recall that happening. adjl posted... So they're deliberately acting in a manner that places those around them at unnecessary risk? As I've explained, not everyone is at risk. If individuals are concerned that they are at risk then they should take precaution. They should not impose those precautions on others who don't share their concern. adjl posted... but you've previously indicated that you think traffic laws are an immoral infringement on personal freedom I recall not having a position on that until you argued that was the case. Don't hold me at fault that you managed to be persuasive that one time. adjl posted... You go and dig up actual statistics I'll add that to my to do list after I interview the preacher and find those medical records. Oh wait, one of those are your task. I'm noticing a pattern in how you demand more of others than you demand of yourself. adjl posted... It's axiomatically true. I don't think that word means what you think it means seeing as how I can challenge the validity of everything you've applied it to. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:959995014] in Church is ... [t:79731933]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Man, if only somebody else in this discussion had tried to make that point already.</quote>You're snarkily implying here that you did that. Let's chalk it up to the length that this has been going on that I don't recall that happening. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>So they're deliberately acting in a manner that places those around them at unnecessary risk?</quote>As I've explained, not everyone is at risk. If individuals are concerned that they are at risk then they should take precaution. They should not impose those precautions on others who don't share their concern. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>but you've previously indicated that you think traffic laws are an immoral infringement on personal freedom</quote>I recall not having a position on that until you argued that was the case. Don't hold me at fault that you managed to be persuasive that one time. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>You go and dig up actual statistics</quote>I'll add that to my to do list after I interview the preacher and find those medical records. Oh wait, one of those are your task. I'm noticing a pattern in how you demand more of others than you demand of yourself. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>It's axiomatically true.</quote>I don't think that word means what you think it means seeing as how I can challenge the validity of everything you've applied it to. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1