"Yes, Gay Marriage Hurts Me Personally"

[daws101]

More accurately, I simply don't accept your personal opinion and subjective assumptions...

Now I said that Relativism rejects the existence of objectivity... and the Relativist comes to reject the existence of objectivity.

You citing your subjective personal opinion isn't objective anything. As subjective isn't objective.

You can't get around that.

Ahhh... a teachable moment.

Skylar, please provide the board with what it is that you mean to convey, when you use the word "Objective".

(Reader, this will conclude this line of discussion, as Skylar has no means to understand what objectivity IS...

For instance, objectivity means: the quality of being objective.

Objective means: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts: not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.

Now even though I post the formal meaning of the words here... Skylar will be unable to define the words because to do so traps her into demonstrating her position as truthful, now that she is bound to the soundly reasoned absolute of what the words mean.

Not a comfortable place for a Relativist, thus the reason that they will not Go THERE.)

there's that we fallacy again and the appealing to a non existent higher intellect fallacy.
last time I checked no body appointed you as lord god king and teacher. How do you fit through doors with a head the large and a cock so small?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

More accurately, I simply don't accept your personal opinion and subjective assumptions...

Now I said that Relativism rejects the existence of objectivity... and the Relativist comes to reject the existence of objectivity.

You citing your subjective personal opinion isn't objective anything. As subjective isn't objective.

You can't get around that.

Ahhh... a teachable moment.

Skylar, please provide the board with what it is that you mean to convey, when you use the word "Objective".

Objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

What you call 'objective' is nothing but your opinion and personal feelings. Your insanely violent and disturbingly specific murder fantasies, your imaginary 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals', even your conception of god is your subjective opinion and personal feeling.

Which establishes nothing objectively.

You're stuck, Keyes. As your entire basis of argument desperately needs us to accept whatever hapless nonsense you imagine as 'objective truth'. Without our willingness to play along with your fantasy, you've got nothing.

Just your feelings......and your subjective personal opinions. Which are objectively meaningless.

Well there ya go...

She cites the definition, then professes that objectivity is not possible. (Understand that its claiming that anything stated Is subjective, thus there is no means to convey objectivity...

See how that works?)

 

[daws101]

your idea of what is right is just as warped as your pov on everything else.

Based upon what? And Please... Be specifc. At least as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

your intentional or ignorant misinterpretation of your belief system aka pseudo Christianity.
if it's the former, you are one sick fuck .
if the latter, you are one pathetic fuck
either way, you are fucked.

OH! So you're separating yourself from Skylar's position? (Can't say that this comes as a surprise... Rats/Ships and all...)

So, tell me, where specifically does my position conflict with that of Christ?

(Again Reader, you're going to find that this line of discussion is going to dry up on the other side of that query... and that is because to answer the question, one must apply objective thought. What will happen is that it will apply subjective thought, by advancing straw reasoning with regard to Christ.., likely pinning such up as a welcome matt, where all behavior is accepted and no standard exists which precludes anyone from participation... as such is the common misnomer that is advanced by Relativism with regard to Christ.

This in contrast to a man who to pay for the sins of humanity, willingly allowed himself to be CRUCIFIED after being unmercifully tortured... having violated no law, offended no one and having ever sinned against God.

This is a being who not only recognizes standards, but who put himself on the line to pay for the SINS OF OTHERS, declaring that where those people merely recognize his gift, admit their own sins and ask his forgiveness, that they will be forgiven and given to fellowship with the Father, through him, enjoying everlasting life.

That is hardly the makings of what this individual must concoct... to tie its disembodied feelings together.

making false assumptions and conclusions and talking irrelevant to the subject biblical tripe.is by no standard reasoned or reasonable.
and it violates the definition of objectivity and analytical discourse.
making it the worst kind of bigoted proselytizing.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

your idea of what is right is just as warped as your pov on everything else.

Based upon what? And Please... Be specifc. At least as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

your intentional or ignorant misinterpretation of your belief system aka pseudo Christianity.
if it's the former, you are one sick fuck .
if the latter, you are one pathetic fuck
either way, you are fucked.

OH! So you're separating yourself from Skylar's position? (Can't say that this comes as a surprise... Rats/Ships and all...)

So, tell me, where specifically does my position conflict with that of Christ?

(Again Reader, you're going to find that this line of discussion is going to dry up on the other side of that query... and that is because to answer the question, one must apply objective thought. What will happen is that it will apply subjective thought, by advancing straw reasoning with regard to Christ.., likely pinning such up as a welcome matt, where all behavior is accepted and no standard exists which precludes anyone from participation... as such is the common misnomer that is advanced by Relativism with regard to Christ.

This in contrast to a man who to pay for the sins of humanity, willingly allowed himself to be CRUCIFIED after being unmercifully tortured... having violated no law, offended no one and having ever sinned against God.

This is a being who not only recognizes standards, but who put himself on the line to pay for the SINS OF OTHERS, declaring that where those people merely recognize his gift, admit their own sins and ask his forgiveness, that they will be forgiven and given to fellowship with the Father, through him, enjoying everlasting life.

That is hardly the makings of what this individual must concoct... to tie its disembodied feelings together.

making false assumptions and conclusions and talking irrelevant to the subject biblical tripe.is by no standard reasoned or reasonable.
and it violates the definition of objectivity and analytical discourse.
making it the worst kind of bigoted proselytizing.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Skylar]

your idea of what is right is just as warped as your pov on everything else.

Based upon what? And Please... Be specifc. At least as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

your intentional or ignorant misinterpretation of your belief system aka pseudo Christianity.
if it's the former, you are one sick fuck .
if the latter, you are one pathetic fuck
either way, you are fucked.

OH! So you're separating yourself from Skylar's position? (Can't say that this comes as a surprise... Rats/Ships and all...)

So, tell me, where specifically does my position conflict with that of Christ?

Elaborate murder fantasies involving decapitation and placing the heads of 'leftists' on pikes? The 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals'? Your obsession with civil war?

I've read the Sermon on the Mount. None of that is in there. That's just you.

And remember, you have no rational nor logical basis for your conception of god. Merely your subjective belief as the basis of your subjective belief.

Notice a pattern yet?

(Again Reader, you're going to find that this line of discussion is going to dry up on the other side of that query... and that is because to answer the question, one must apply objective thought. What will happen is that it will apply subjective thought, by advancing straw reasoning with regard to Christ.., likely pinning such up as a welcome matt, where all behavior is accepted and no standard exists which precludes anyone from participation... as such is the common misnomer that is advanced by Relativism with regard to Christ.

You....you do realize that you're just talking to yourself again, Keyes? Right?

As your 'reader' is just you talking to you as you cite yourself, while quoting yourself as a source. Which you bizarrely label 'objective'. Despite the fact that your sources, your authorities, even your audience.....is just you.

Is there ever anything to your arguments but you citing yourself?

 

[Skylar]

More accurately, I simply don't accept your personal opinion and subjective assumptions...

Now I said that Relativism rejects the existence of objectivity... and the Relativist comes to reject the existence of objectivity.

You citing your subjective personal opinion isn't objective anything. As subjective isn't objective.

You can't get around that.

Ahhh... a teachable moment.

Skylar, please provide the board with what it is that you mean to convey, when you use the word "Objective".

Objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

What you call 'objective' is nothing but your opinion and personal feelings. Your insanely violent and disturbingly specific murder fantasies, your imaginary 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals', even your conception of god is your subjective opinion and personal feeling.

Which establishes nothing objectively.

You're stuck, Keyes. As your entire basis of argument desperately needs us to accept whatever hapless nonsense you imagine as 'objective truth'. Without our willingness to play along with your fantasy, you've got nothing.

Just your feelings......and your subjective personal opinions. Which are objectively meaningless.

Well there ya go...

She cites the definition, then professes that objectivity is not possible.

Nope. I cite the definition and then recognize that your subjective opinions and personal feelings aren't objective. But subjective.

You citing your personal opinion and feelings defines nothing objectively. Nor do you have any rational basis of evidence, logic, or reason to back your violent murder fantasies. You can't even back up your conception of god. From top to bottom.....your entire argument is pure subjectivity. Where you offer your feelings as objective, universal truth.

And still can't establish so much as basic causation. Where you insist that any society that embraces homosexuality eventually collapses.......because you say so. All while ignoring the fact that societies that don't embrace homosexuality eventually collapse too.

Your 'effect' exists even when your 'cause' doesn't. Demonstrating elegantly that your cause, isn't.

This is basic cause and effect, rudimentary logic....and yet it completely confounds you.

 

[Skylar]

your idea of what is right is just as warped as your pov on everything else.

Based upon what? And Please... Be specifc. At least as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

your intentional or ignorant misinterpretation of your belief system aka pseudo Christianity.
if it's the former, you are one sick fuck .
if the latter, you are one pathetic fuck
either way, you are fucked.

OH! So you're separating yourself from Skylar's position? (Can't say that this comes as a surprise... Rats/Ships and all...)

So, tell me, where specifically does my position conflict with that of Christ?

(Again Reader, you're going to find that this line of discussion is going to dry up on the other side of that query... and that is because to answer the question, one must apply objective thought. What will happen is that it will apply subjective thought, by advancing straw reasoning with regard to Christ.., likely pinning such up as a welcome matt, where all behavior is accepted and no standard exists which precludes anyone from participation... as such is the common misnomer that is advanced by Relativism with regard to Christ.

This in contrast to a man who to pay for the sins of humanity, willingly allowed himself to be CRUCIFIED after being unmercifully tortured... having violated no law, offended no one and having ever sinned against God.

This is a being who not only recognizes standards, but who put himself on the line to pay for the SINS OF OTHERS, declaring that where those people merely recognize his gift, admit their own sins and ask his forgiveness, that they will be forgiven and given to fellowship with the Father, through him, enjoying everlasting life.

That is hardly the makings of what this individual must concoct... to tie its disembodied feelings together.

making false assumptions and conclusions and talking irrelevant to the subject biblical tripe.is by no standard reasoned or reasonable.
and it violates the definition of objectivity and analytical discourse.
making it the worst kind of bigoted proselytizing.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

And your tell, yet again. Your little white flag, where you abandon your every argument, summarily declare victory....and then run.

Color me shocked.

 

[Syriusly]

And THAT is how the the Licensing of Degeneracy will hurt us ALL.

But wouldn't it be nice if Actions did not have consequences and people could just reject the Laws of Nature that govern human behavior?

Oh well... Reality can be SUCH a PAIN.

how could you possibly know that?
everything you post is based on a twisted fantasy about how the world works.

ROFLMNAO!

Yes... Cause and Effect is just SO FANTASTICALLY TWISTED.

But you haven't established 'cause and effect'.

Nonsense... I've established it myself, a half dozen times; in this thread and hundreds of times t.

As a complete nut.

You have established yourself as the King of USMB Loons- and that is an accomplishment.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

More accurately, I simply don't accept your personal opinion and subjective assumptions...

Now I said that Relativism rejects the existence of objectivity... and the Relativist comes to reject the existence of objectivity.

I say it HERE... and it comes out ^ THERE! ^

And again, the Concession of the Relativist is duly noted and summarily accepted.

false
ethical relativism definition

In ethics, the belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong and that the definition of right or wrong depends on the prevailing view of a particular individual, culture, or historical period.


objectively
[ ob jéktivlee ]
ADVERB

1. without being influenced by personal feelings
   synonyms: impartially · dispassionately · neutrally · independently ·
   disinterestedly · fairly
   More
   antonyms: subjectively · subjectively
2. on the basis of fact, experience, or some measurable quality

you've proven spectacularly that you are not and cannot objective or are the least bit ethical.
btw O castrated one when YOU'VE bested me I'll let you know it.
on the other hand the odds of you ever doing that about the same as you being buttfuck by bikers and winning the lottery in the same day.

ROFLMNAO!

Now isn't that PRECIOUS?

Relativism is just that... The left loves to carve things up with the pretense being that "the issue is relevant to these specific things...", when in truth, a Relativist does not reason subjectively only in matters of ethics, or morality or socially. A Relativist is one who REJECTS the existence of OBJECTIVITY... as you've witnessed in this thread, the ONLY thing that is relevant to a Relativist, is THEM and THEIR SUBJECTIVE NEEDS. Every issue, every topic, every thing is about them, or it does not matter.

As I said, they can cite the formal definition, but they will turn from it in their very next breath.

And yes... they're quite mad. As a great American once said: "These Fuckers are crazier than a shit-house rat at a community colon cleansin'." Git'erdone!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Now I said that Relativism rejects the existence of objectivity... and the Relativist comes to reject the existence of objectivity.

You citing your subjective personal opinion isn't objective anything. As subjective isn't objective.

You can't get around that.

Ahhh... a teachable moment.

Skylar, please provide the board with what it is that you mean to convey, when you use the word "Objective".

Objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

What you call 'objective' is nothing but your opinion and personal feelings. Your insanely violent and disturbingly specific murder fantasies, your imaginary 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals', even your conception of god is your subjective opinion and personal feeling.

Which establishes nothing objectively.

You're stuck, Keyes. As your entire basis of argument desperately needs us to accept whatever hapless nonsense you imagine as 'objective truth'. Without our willingness to play along with your fantasy, you've got nothing.

Just your feelings......and your subjective personal opinions. Which are objectively meaningless.

Well there ya go...

She cites the definition, then professes that objectivity is not possible.

Nope. I cite the definition and then recognize that your subjective opinions and personal feelings aren't objective. But subjective.

ROFLMNAO!

I say it HERE and it comes out ^ THERE ^ !!!

Be AMaaAAAZED!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again Reader, understand that the key to defeating a Leftist rest upon two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to speak.

 

[Skylar]

You citing your subjective personal opinion isn't objective anything. As subjective isn't objective.

You can't get around that.

Ahhh... a teachable moment.

Skylar, please provide the board with what it is that you mean to convey, when you use the word "Objective".

Objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

What you call 'objective' is nothing but your opinion and personal feelings. Your insanely violent and disturbingly specific murder fantasies, your imaginary 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals', even your conception of god is your subjective opinion and personal feeling.

Which establishes nothing objectively.

You're stuck, Keyes. As your entire basis of argument desperately needs us to accept whatever hapless nonsense you imagine as 'objective truth'. Without our willingness to play along with your fantasy, you've got nothing.

Just your feelings......and your subjective personal opinions. Which are objectively meaningless.

Well there ya go...

She cites the definition, then professes that objectivity is not possible.

Nope. I cite the definition and then recognize that your subjective opinions and personal feelings aren't objective. But subjective.

ROFLMNAO!

I say it HERE and it comes out ^ THERE ^ !!!

Be AMaaAAAZED!

And your reply is predictably gibberish.

Sorry, Keyes....but you citing your subjective opinion and personal feelings isn't 'objectivity'. But subjectivity. Nor can you factually establish your claims, your conception of god, or even basic causation.

Which is why you failed.

 

[Skylar]

Again Reader, understand that the key to defeating a Leftist rest upon two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to speak.

Again, Keyes......you do realize that you're talking to yourself, right? Your 'reader' is just you talking to you as you quote you, while citing yourself as a source. You are literally your own audience.

Which begs the question: do we even need to be here?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again Reader, understand that the key to defeating a Leftist rest upon two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to speak.

Again, Keyes......you do realize that you're talking to yourself, right? Your 'reader' is just you talking to you as you quote you, while citing yourself as a source. You are literally your own audience.

Which begs the question: do we even need to be here?

And yet another classic demonstration of the rancid subjectivism that is common to the lowly Relativist.

Thank you, Skylar.

And your concession is again, Duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again... let's review to bring the issue back to point.

A lack of respect for God and God's Laws have stifled the Spirit of God within the Degenerate.

Absent the Spirit of God, the Degenerate lacks access to the light of God's Reason, thus is limited to mirky filth of subjectivism... or that which is OKA: Relativism...

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's own cultural, societal, historical and personal context and, as such, can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes.

It is through this, perversion of reason, wherein relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity that is essential to TRUTH.

And by lacking kinship with and, the means to recognize Truth, this cripples the means of the Relativist to TRUST; as truth is essential to trust...

Lacking the means to trust, there is no basis on which those so afflicted can come to agreement upon a soundly reasoned MORALITY...

And absent a soundly reasoned morality... there is no basis in Relativism from which to serve JUSTICE.

And THAT is the greater outline of Degeneracy and how it HARMS EVERYONE...

The US has now come to the point where the Judiciary is crowned: The Supreme Legislature, wherein the Majority of Judicial Votes supersede Sound (Objective) Reason, The Constitution (Objective) and The Law (Objective); thus the means to serve justice is wholly and entirely: CRIPPLED.

It was this addled departure from sound principle which removed the Mental Disorder that Presents as Sexual Deviancy from the medical register of such maladies. Was Medical Justice Served? Of course not. And did the ramifications of that profound error remain limited to Medicine? NO IT DID NOT! It trickled down and throughout the culture... rotting it from it's core with catastrophic consequences. But, I digress...

Now Reader, understand, they lack the means to reason objectively... therefore they have no means to understand what was just provided for them... let alone the means to understand such sufficiently to agree with it.

The point here is not to convince those who lack the intellectual acuity to reason... the point is to help them to demonstrate that they lack the means to reason, for the edification of the sound human beings, so that they can finally come to understand where the problem is, why its a problem and to steel themselves for the unenviable tasks which are just before them, once these individuals mount the inevitable attack upon them.

It's not even a potential question in terms of "IF" they will attack, it is only a question of when the attack will come and in what form.

We've seen it tested in small markets with ruthless commitment, and all that remains is for them to adapt the local tactics, to the national scale.

Everyday we're treated to reports where the racial minorities among the Left have brutally murdered or savagely beaten innocents... we see it played out on Youtube and other web venues, we watch the Left foment racial animosity... we see them foment animosity at every point where such can be advanced.

So the intent is clear, the willingness is likewise just as clear.

We're now simply waiting for the main assault... and like most things profane, you will not have any problem knowing it when you see it... then, it falls to you, to do what you must to avoid the impact of it. As the next day will be that of the "GREAT GETTIN' UP MORNIN'... " When all accounts are settled and the accounting doesn't stop, until there's none left to count.

Now, if THAT is not harm as a consequence of Degeneracy... then such simply does not exist.

 

[Skylar]

Again... let's review to bring the issue back to point.

A lack of respect for God and God's Laws have stifled the Spirit of God within the Degenerate.

Which god? Remember, your conception of god has no factual, logical, or rational basis. When pressed for any such, you offer us the 'first mover' argument. But a first mover argument need do nothing more than move first. There's no mandate that it is sentient, no mandate it is good, no requirement that it have a 'plan' or the capacity for planning, that it be aware we exist, have awareness, not even a requirement that it exist after moving first.

You've imagined all of that. Citing your feelings, subjective beliefs and personal interpretation. Which you laughably label as 'objective'.

Yeah, I don't think 'objective' means what you think it means. As you keep equating anything you can possibly make up with 'objectivity'.

Absent the Spirit of God, the Degenerate lacks access to the light of God's Reason, thus is limited to mirky filth of subjectivism... or that which is OKA: Relativism...

Says you, citing you. Where you are quite literally citing your feelings and subjective beliefs as GOD.

Which is about as relativistic as it gets.

You're stuck. You can't establish causation, can't factually establish that embracing homosexuality causes a society to collapse, can't even offer us a logical or rational basis for your conception of god. To say nothing of a factual one.

Which again, is why you failed.

 

[Skylar]

Again Reader, understand that the key to defeating a Leftist rest upon two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to speak.

Again, Keyes......you do realize that you're talking to yourself, right? Your 'reader' is just you talking to you as you quote you, while citing yourself as a source. You are literally your own audience.

Which begs the question: do we even need to be here?

And yet another classic demonstration of the rancid subjectivism that is common to the lowly Relativist.

Thank you, Skylar.

And your concession is again, Duly noted and summarily accepted.

You're citing your feelings and subjective beliefs as God. Which is about as relativistic as it gets. And you can't establish any of it rationally, factually, or logically.

You can't even establish cause and effect. And you know it.

Which is why you offer us your tell: an abandonment of your claims, a summary declaration of victory......and then a predictable rout. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have to run.

 

[mdk]

(Now Reader, understand, that Keys is a huge pussy that believes his civil war fetish will come to pass but he expects you, the Reader, to do all the bleeding while he sits on his fat relativitist ass. Such is the nature of cowardly bitches)

 

[Skylar]

(Now Reader, understand, that Keys is a huge pussy that believes his civil war fetish will come to pass but he expects you, the Reader, to do all the bleeding while he sits on his fat relativitist ass. Such is the nature of cowardly bitches)

Its just another in a legion of examples of Keyes' fundamental disconnect from reality. Where he imagines a 'civil war' that he won't have to fight in or sacrifice for in any way... yet will still do whatever he wants it to do, killing who ever he wants killed.

Back in reality, the fighting age folks are Millennials who support gay marriage by about 80%. They're not killing anyone or shedding a drop of their blood because Keyes is convinced he speaks for God.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again... let's review to bring the issue back to point.

A lack of respect for God and God's Laws have stifled the Spirit of God within the Degenerate.

Which god? Remember, your conception of god has no factual, logical, or rational basis.

That would be Nature's God.

You know... the one which endows all men with inalienable rights.

But hey, in fairness to you, as a Leftist; which is to say one who promotes Foreign Ideas Hostile to American Principle... THERE WAS NO WAY THAT YOU COULD HAVE KNOWN THAT!

Ya see Skylar, you are considering this equation purely from your own subjective experiences... colored through the hazy lens of your own NEEDS, WANTS AND DESIRES.

God is known to many people through many different names... as many as there are perspectives.

This is quite understandable for those who possess the spirit of God, thus who are bathed in the light of God's Reason.

I am one man... yet I am known to some as 'friend'... to others as "Boss", to others as Brother, Cousin, Son, Father... .

In this we see that it is only natural that with all of the various perspectives that come with 20,000 years of existence, and billions of individuals, scattered across dozens of various environs, that our respective understanding of God would be different, for different people, who live at different times... .

You claim such is evidence of human subjectivism... and I claim that such is evidence of human subjectivism. The difference between us, is that I recognize God is objective and humanities eternal quest to know God, to be in his light, is evidence of God's objective truth, while you reject the existence of that truth, because such does not serve your subjective needs.

But hey... such is the nature of evil.