Women...how's feminism working out for you? Man crowned Miss Nevada......LOL.....

[Slade3200]

It's always bene a very strong, consistent pattern with Incel Joe, that it always openly, unabashedly takes the side of the very lowest filth of subhumnaity, against decent human beings. Always.

Wherever you find the interests of criminals, perverts, terrorists, traitors, other other subhuman filth, in conflict with the interests of actual human beings, Incel Joe is there, standing with the subhuman filth.

In a way, its intense hatred of my faith is a compliment to it. If my faith were really as degenerate and depraved as Incel Joe tries to paint it as being, then it would be one of our most enthusiastic supporters.

What “faith” are you talking about?!

 

[JoeB131]

What “faith” are you talking about?!

He's a Mormon cultist.

It's funny, when I first started talking to his sorry ass, he was all upset that I didn't think going after Roman Polanski was that big of a deal... Even though Joseph Smith fucked far more 14 year olds than Polanski did.... and he didn't even give them a cover on a magazine.

 

[Slade3200]

He's a Mormon cultist.

It's funny, when I first started talking to his sorry ass, he was all upset that I didn't think going after Roman Polanski was that big of a deal... Even though Joseph Smith fucked far more 14 year olds than Polanski did.... and he didn't even give them a cover on a magazine.

Ahh, interesting. He has so much hate in his heart. Don’t see anybody who acts like that representing any kind religion

 

[JoeB131]

It's always been a very strong, consistent pattern with @Incel Joe, that it always openly, unabashedly takes the side of the very lowest filth of subhumnaity, against decent human beings. Always.

Wherever you find the interests of criminals, perverts, terrorists, traitors, other other subhuman filth, in conflict with the interests of actual human beings, @Incel Joe is there, standing with the subhuman filth.

Uh, the interests of actual human beings is to fix the societal problems that creates criminals. I don't like sharing my streets with criminals any more than you do. The difference is, I look for solutions that work as opposed to just giving you a murder-chubby.

Then again, you want to murder women for having abortions, which is all manner of fucked up.

In a way, its intense hatred of my faith is a compliment to it. If my faith were really as degenerate and depraved as @Incel Joe tries to paint it as being, then it would be one of our most enthusiastic supporters.

Well, your faith cult deserves the hatred it gets because of it's rather sleazy history. It was started by a two bit con man who saw religion as a way to rip off the unsuspecting. Joseph Smith was a natural born grifter. Then at some point, he started believing his own bullshit. You see that with cult leaders. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshall Applewhite, where feeding their extreme narcissism leads to really bad results.

The only difference is, the good citizens of Navou Illinois shot him before he could lead you all into mass suicide.

 

[JoeB131]

Ahh, interesting. He has so much hate in his heart. Don’t see anybody who acts like that representing any kind religion

Well, a good point. I've had conversations with lots of Mormons, and while very few of them appreciate my criticism of their faith, none of them really are the hateful little fucks that Bob is.

It's almost like I shattered his whole self-image when I pointed out Joseph Smith was a kiddy-diddler, he ran off to some Mormon website and found out, yeah, Smith was a kiddy diddler.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It's funny, when I first started talking to his sorry ass, he was all upset that I didn't think going after Roman Polanski was that big of a deal... Even though Joseph Smith fucked far more 14 year olds than Polanski did.... and he didn't even give them a cover on a magazine.

It's funny how desperate you are to cling to a lie that a historical figure who died more than a century before you were born was a “kiddy diddler”, and yet you openly defend Roman Polanski who is unquestionably guilty of drugging and raping a young girl, who fled the country to avoid being held to account for his crime.

But it only goes to your own character. You are a deeply evil piece of subhuman shit, and will tell whatever lies you think will serve to condemn anything that is or was good, while openly siding with actual, obvious evil.

Ultimately, it all comes down to this: Everywhere that the conflict is visible between good and evil, between reason and madness, there you are, standing staunchly on the side of evil and madness.

 

[JoeB131]

It's funny7 how desperate you are to cling to a lie that a historical figure who died more than a century before you were born was a “kiddy diddler”, and yet you openly defend Roman Polanski who is unquestionably guilty of drugging and raping a young girl, who fled the country to avoid being held to account for his crime.

We've been over this. He plead guilty to his crime and served his sentence the prosecutors agreed to. My issue is a judge deciding that he wasn't going to honor a deal. Our system falls apart if you can't trust the state to keep it's agreements. Also, it was pretty clear that the girl and her mother were trying to shake him down for money.

Joseph Smith married teenage girls because he had them and their parents so brainwashed they believed his obvious bullshit. This is why cults kind of suck. Just because he died before I was born doesn't mean there isn't a historical record of his fraud.

The only question I have about Smith is how much of his schtick did he know he was scamming people, and how much did he start to believe his own BS?

But it only goes to your own character. You are a deeply evil piece of subhuman shit, and will tell whatever lies you think will serve to condemn anything that is or was good, while openly siding with actual, obvious evil.

Again, how can Joseph Smith be "good" and Roman Polanski be "evil" if they both essentially did THE SAME THING. I could argue that Smith was probably a little bit worse because he did it multiple times and his influence over these girls removed any agency they might have had.

There is nothing "Good" about religion. Religion is just people giving up their free will and ability to reason. I think there are some sincere religious people out there who want to do good, but there are just as many pieces of human garbage that use it for selfish means.

Parish I grew up in, two Catholic priests were credibly accused of abusing the children they were in charge of. That's how messed up religion is.

 

[surada]

That's a very pretty man. But..it's still a man.

Get rid of whitey. Get rid of real women.

It's Nevada.

 

[Slade3200]

It's funny how desperate you are to cling to a lie that a historical figure who died more than a century before you were born was a “kiddy diddler”, and yet you openly defend Roman Polanski who is unquestionably guilty of drugging and raping a young girl, who fled the country to avoid being held to account for his crime.

But it only goes to your own character. You are a deeply evil piece of subhuman shit, and will tell whatever lies you think will serve to condemn anything that is or was good, while openly siding with actual, obvious evil.

Ultimately, it all comes down to this: Everywhere that the conflict is visible between good and evil, between reason and madness, there you are, standing staunchly on the side of evil and madness.

Why are you so angry Bobby boy? I can’t imagine that being a positive element in your life

 

[surada]

Says the guy who supports building abortion clinics in black neighborhoods.

Up until roe v wade every small town had a black lady on the wrong side of the tracks who performed abortions.

 

[JoeB131]

Why are you so angry Bobby boy? I can’t imagine that being a positive element in your life

Logic and reason hurt him as a child.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Again, how can Joseph Smith be "good" and Roman Polanski be "evil" if they both essentially did THE SAME THING. I could argue that Smith was probably a little bit worse because he did it multiple times and his influence over these girls removed any agency they might have had.

It's very simple.

You're flat-out lying about Joseph Smith; and you know damn-well that you're lying. It's such a bad lie that I cannot imagine that you are fooling anyone with it. No, there is no evidence whatsoever that he had any sexual relations with any fourteen-year-old girls.

You're also lying about Roman Polanski having served any sentence for his crime. He admitted to having drugged, raped, and sodomized a thirteen-year-old girl, pled guilty, then fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.


And in any event, there is no question about what Roman Polanski did, nor about what it tells us about your depraved immoral character that you would defend him. Joseph Smith is now on the other side. Whatever good he has done, whatever wrong he has done, he has been held to answer for. Roman Polanski is still very much alive, and has evaded justice for nearly all of his life. There is no question about what he did, or that he did it; not can there be any question about what your defense of him tells us about your own depraved character (not that we don't already know, anyway, what you are). And even if all your lies about Joseph Smith were true, even if he was guilty of everything that you falsely accuse him of, and worse, it would not, in any way, diminish what Roman Polanski did, what that tells us about his character, and what your defense of him tells us about your character.

Ultimately, this all gets back down to the point I have said about you before—that you always take the side of evil against good, the side of madness against reason, the side of perverts, criminals, and other subhuman filth against the side of human beings. You delusionally pretend that you are standing on some high ground to look down and judge others, when in fact, you are on the lowest ground that is anywhere to be found.

Anyway, your hateful lies against my religion are not relevant to the topic of this thread, and I will leave you to continue to rant and rave and post whatever lies and related filth you will to try to convince yourself that you are an actual human being and not the lying, hateful, evil, insane, Godless subhuman piece of shit that everyone here can clearly see that you are.

 

[Slade3200]

It's very simple.

You're flat-out lying about Joseph Smith; and you know damn-well that you're lying. It's such a bad lie that I cannot imagine that you are fooling anyone with it. No, there is no evidence whatsoever that he had any sexual relations with any fourteen-year-old girls.

You're also lying about Roman Polanski having served any sentence for his crime. He admitted to having drugged, raped, and sodomized a thirteen-year-old girl, pled guilty, then fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.


And in any event, there is no question about what Roman Polanski did, nor about what it tells us about your depraved immoral character that you would defend him. Joseph Smith is now on the other side. Whatever good he has done, whatever wrong he has done, he has been held to answer for. Roman Polanski is still very much alive, and has evaded justice for nearly all of his life. There is no question about what he did, or that he did it; not can there be any question about what your defense of him tells us about your own depraved character (not that we don't already know, anyway, what you are). And even if all your lies about Joseph Smith were true, even if he was guilty of everything that you falsely accuse him of, and worse, it would not, in any way, diminish what Roman Polanski did, what that tells us about his character, and what your defense of him tells us about your character.

Ultimately, this all gets back down to the point I have said about you before—that you always take the side of evil against good, the side of madness against reason, the side of perverts, criminals, and other subhuman filth against the side of human beings. You delusionally pretend that you are standing on some high ground to look down and judge others, when in fact, you are on the lowest ground that is anywhere to be found.

Anyway, your hateful lies against my religion are not relevant to the topic of this thread, and I will leave you to continue to rant and rave and post whatever lies and related filth you will to try to convince yourself that you are an actual human being and not the lying, hateful, evil, insane, Godless subhuman piece of shit that everyone here can clearly see that you are.

That reply reeks of hypocrisy. You’re doing exactly what you’re trying to demonize Joe for doing.

 

[JoeB131]

It's very simple.

You're flat-out lying about Joseph Smith; and you know damn-well that you're lying. It's such a bad lie that I cannot imagine that you are fooling anyone with it. No, there is no evidence whatsoever that he had any sexual relations with any fourteen-year-old girls.

What do you mean there's no evidence? He MARRIED them. They wrote about their marriage to him, especially Fanny Alger, who was his second wife. furthermore, that was the underlying cause of the conflict that ended with him getting killed. A newspaper exposed the polygamy, he destroyed the newspaper's offices, he was arrested, and then a mob broke into the jail and lynched him. This is ALL ESTABLISHED HISTORICAL RECORD.

Fanny Alger - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Helen Mar Kimball - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You're also lying about Roman Polanski having served any sentence for his crime. He admitted to having drugged, raped, and sodomized a thirteen-year-old girl, pled guilty, then fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.

Actually, he did...

He was sentenced to 90 days, and was released after 42 days when prison psychiatrists determined he wasn't a habitual offender. He only fled the country after an unethical judge reneged on the deal the prosecutors had reached.

Roman Polanski sexual abuse case - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Describing the event in his autobiography, Polanski stated that he did not drug Geimer, that she "wasn't unresponsive", and that she did not respond negatively when he inquired as to whether or not she was enjoying what he was doing.[27] The 28-page probation report submitted to the court by Kenneth Fare (signed by deputy Irwin Gold) concluded by saying that there was evidence "that the victim was not only physically mature, but willing." The officers quoted two psychiatrists' denial of Roman being "a pedophile" or "sexual deviant".[28]

Claiming to protect Geimer from a trial, her attorney arranged a plea bargain.[3] Polanski accepted, and, under the terms of the agreement, the five initial charges were dismissed. Instead, Polanski pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.[29]

Under the terms of the plea agreement, the court ordered Polanski to report to a state prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation, but granted a stay to allow him to complete his current project. Under the terms set by the court, he traveled to Europe to complete filming.[30] ... He was subsequently ordered to return to California and reported to Chino State Prison for the evaluation period beginning on December 19, 1977, and was released after 42 of the 90 scheduled days.[32] Polanski's lawyers expected that Polanski would receive probation at the subsequent sentencing hearing, with the probation officer, examining psychiatrist, and the victim all recommending against prison time.[33]

In short, everyone agreed that the sentence was just, until a judge decided he could nail a celebrity scalp to his wall.

And this is my objection. Our system depends on plea bargains. Otherwise, we'd have trials for everyone, which would be expensive because most criminal offenses don't require trials, facts are established and reasonable penalties are agreed to. But once the state says, "Naw, we won't honor our agreement we reached with you in good faith", the system falls apart.

And in any event, there is no question about what Roman Polanski did, nor about what it tells us about your depraved immoral character that you would defend him. Joseph Smith is now on the other side. Whatever good he has done, whatever wrong he has done, he has been held to answer for. Roman Polanski is still very much alive, and has evaded justice for nearly all of his life. There is no question about what he did, or that he did it; not can there be any question about what your defense of him tells us about your own depraved character (not that we don't already know, anyway, what you are). And even if all your lies about Joseph Smith were true, even if he was guilty of everything that you falsely accuse him of, and worse, it would not, in any way, diminish what Roman Polanski did, what that tells us about his character, and what your defense of him tells us about your character.

Well, first, there is no "other side". Joseph Smith isn't off ruling a planet in the Celestial Heaven, nor is he in the Outer Darkness, or whatever it is you cultists believe in.

Second, I don't defend Polanski. I don't even like his movies. What he did was stupid. What I oppose is the use of the Criminal justice system to persecute a man for 40 years for a petty offense few people get jail for.

Third, there a lot of question about what he did, and about how willing the girl involved (who was not a virgin) was, whether or not she and her mother were trying to shake him down for money. It was a stinker case, because Polanski was a sympathetic defendant, (holocaust survivor, wife murdered by an insane cult, because cults suck.).

(I could put in a REAL cheap shot here and point out that the Manson Cult only killed 8 people in the Tate-Labianca murders, but the Mormon Cult killed 140 people at the Mountain Meadow Massacre).

Fourth, it really does matter if Joseph Smith was guilty of the stuff he has been HISTORICALLY PROVEN to have been involved in, the polygamy, the fraud, the terror attacks in Missouri that inspired the governor to issue an extermination order. Because your whole religion Cult is based on the premise that he was talking to God. Unlike Jesus or Mohammed, whose histories are so obscure we can't say for certain they were real people, Joseph Smith's history is heavily documented

You really can't defend Joseph Smith and condemn Roman Polanski and maintain any kind of moral high ground, buddy. Either what they both did was wrong, or what they both did was acceptable. I don't think what Polanski did was okay, I object to the abuse of the legal system to excessively punish him. I also think it was wrong for an angry mob to shoot Smith. He should have gotten his day in court. (which probably would have involved a conviction for property crimes and bigamy, then they could have extradited him to Missouri where Gov. Boggs could hang him!)

Ultimately, this all gets back down to the point I have said about you before—that you always take the side of evil against good, the side of madness against reason, the side of perverts, criminals, and other subhuman filth against the side of human beings. You delusionally pretend that you are standing on some high ground to look down and judge others, when in fact, you are on the lowest ground that is anywhere to be found.

Um, not, really. I think everyone should be treated decently, and I'm not a sociopath like you are. You want to murder gays, trans, women who have abortions, people who commit minor property crimes. I mean, as much as I like to riff on Mormons, I can't even entirely blame Mormonism for this. You have some serious anger issues. You should probably see someone about that before you hurt someone.

Anyway, your hateful lies against my religion are not relevant to the topic of this thread, and I will leave you to continue to rant and rave and post whatever lies and related filth you will to try to convince yourself that you are an actual human being and not the lying, hateful, evil, insane, Godless subhuman piece of shit that everyone here can clearly see that you are.

Okay, buddy, so you are going to prove I'm bad by coming off completely unhinged? Um... yeah, how does that work again?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Um, not, really. I think everyone should be treated decently, and I'm not a sociopath like you are.

Has there been any instance, ever, in which you have taken the side of a human being against the side of a subhuman criminal piece of shit?

I've certainly never seen it. I've always seen you taking the side of subhuman criminal piece of shit, against the side of human beings; defending and making excuses for the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit.

Where the opportunity presents itself to side with good or with evil, with reason or with madness, you always take the side of evil and madness. Always. I cannot say that I have ever seen so much as a single exception from you.

What makes you think that this puts you in any position to call me a “sociopath”, or to cast any aspersions at all on my moral character?

 

[Slade3200]

Has there been any instance, ever, in which you have taken the side of a human being against the side of a subhuman criminal piece of shit?

I've certainly never seen it. I've always seen you taking the side of subhuman criminal piece of shit, against the side of human beings; defending and making excuses for the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit.

Where the opportunity presents itself to side with good or with evil, with reason or with madness, you always take the side of evil and madness. Always. I cannot say that I have ever seen so much as a single exception from you.

What makes you think that this puts you in any position to call me a “sociopath”, or to cast any aspersions at all on my moral character?

Your own words and angry rants coupled with the hypocrisy of referring to yourself as a person of faith is what casts the aspersions on your moral character. You bring this upon yourself

 

[JoeB131]

Has there been any instance, ever, in which you have taken the side of a human being against the side of a subhuman criminal piece of shit?

First, I don't see people who've broken the law as "sub-human". Not even Joseph Smith who broke a LOT of laws, including being part of the attempt to assassinate Governor Boggs.

I've certainly never seen it. I've always seen you taking the side of subhuman criminal piece of shit, against the side of human beings; defending and making excuses for the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit.

Because it's not a zero sum game. In fact, quite the contrary, helping criminals to reform and ending poverty actually benefits what you'd call the "good people".

Where the opportunity presents itself to side with good or with evil, with reason or with madness, you always take the side of evil and madness. Always. I cannot say that I have ever seen so much as a single exception from you.

Um, okay, the problem is, someone who believes that he's wearing magic underwear doesn't get to arbitrate "sanity".

What makes you think that this puts you in any position to call me a “sociopath”, or to cast any aspersions at all on my moral character?

Well, the fact you want to kill people over things no sane person would want to kill someone over. That's what makes you a sociopath.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Well, the fact you want to kill people over things no sane person would want to kill someone over. That's what makes you a sociopath.

Criminals are not people. They are criminals. That you refuse to acknowledge the distinction, except when you openly take the side of criminals against that of human beings, is what makes you something much, much worse than a mere sociopath.

A true sociopath is oblivious to the distinction between good and evil. You do not have that excuse. You know the distinction between good and evil, and consistently, willfully take the side of evil.

 

[JoeB131]

Criminals are not people. They are criminals.

Nope, they are people. Frankly, Crime is something that is uniquely human... only humans create laws that other humans break. The animal kingdom doesn't care that much.

That you refuse to acknowledge the distinction, except when you openly take the side of criminals against that of human beings, is what makes you something much, much worse than a mere sociopath.

No, I just recognize that crime is a reflection of our social failure. There are probably a few people out there who commit crimes because they are truly desperate.

The majority commit crimes because they are in a bad place in their lives.

Frankly, you live a nice, lily white lifestyle and never have gone to bed hungry once in your life, yet you STILL come off as a sociopath. I would truly hate to see what would happen if you suffered any real setback or problem.

A true sociopath is oblivious to the distinction between good and evil.

Exactly my point. You rant about wanting to kill trannies and gays because they are "evil", even though you can't tell me why they are evil other than "My Imaginary Friend in the Sky says it's bad" and "I think it's icky".

You do not have that excuse. You know the distinction between good and evil, and consistently, willfully take the side of evil.

GUy, you belong to cult started by a kiddy diddling con man.
You want to murder people who don't share your values.
You are perfectly fine with letting people go hungry because they are poor.

Know them by their acts, as Jesus said.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It is amazing that women can't see the scam the democrat party has been running on them for decades....

Democrat men......women, you need sexual freedom so kill the babies so we don't have to pay for support.

Democrat men.....women, men who say they are women get to compete against you in women's sports, taking your awards and scholarships....

Democrat men......women, men can now not only compete, but win beauty contests that used to be just for women....

You have been played for fools....but keep playing, the democrat men appreciate your participation in your humiliation...

Man Crowned Miss Nevada USA Because Men Are Apparently Better Women Than Real Women

pjmedia.com

YES!!!

Women need to pay the price for this idiotic nonsense. I hope everything they have gets destroyed and they remember who is to blame for it.