Members banned from this thread: evince |
“If we have to have a choice between being dead and pitied, and being alive with a bad image, we’d rather be alive and have the bad image.”
— Golda Meir
Zionism is the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel.
ברוך השם
Four young girls fought off a man who was attempting to kidnap them outside a convenience store in Michigan - hitting, kicking and then throwing coffee on him, police said.
Authorities said the girls, who are in middle school, were attacked about 80 miles northeast of Lansing. A 22-year-old man, who was identified as Bruce Hipkins, "grabbed the youngest girl around the head and told her she was coming with him," then the others started defending her, according to a statement from the Millington Police Department.
Authorities said that Hipkins "let the young girl go and grabbed another one of the girls by her hair." Again, police said, he was "kicked and hit by the girls until he let her go."
The girls were not harmed in the incident. Hipkins was arrested on numerous charges, including kidnapping, police said.
"I think they did great," Millington Police Chief Jason Oliver said about the girls Tuesday in an interview. "They did exactly what they should have done. They fought the suspect - and they won."
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Girls-used-kicks-and-coffee-to-escape-a-13155237.php
And it gets funnier
You don't give a shit about the kids, if you did you wouldn't have taken the time to paste pictures of the Clintons and Obama's with the Pope, you got caught, and now you are looking for a way out. Ain't any, your deficiencies are on full display
As I said, stick with the banning posts, you do end up talking to yourself, but least you don't embarrass yourself
Next
Yes. If you read your own post, you'll see it says "The 884-page document, two years in the making, shines a light into the dark corners of these dioceses going back seven decades, exposing the predators and the efforts of their bishops to protect them."
It's relevant because I was responding to the notion that it occurred just under previous Democratic administrations.How is it relevant?
There's no absence of concern for the children on my part. I am concerned about that. But I was struck by the odd decision to try to tie this in some way to the Clinton and Obama administrations, based simply on them meeting with popes as all presidents do.BTW, the absence of any concern for the children on your part is noted for the record.
To be clear, what was the argument you were trying to make with those photos? Do you object to presidents meeting with popes? Do you think the Democratic presidents were closer to the Vatican than Republican presidents? Do you think there was something those particular presidents should have done differently with regard to the abuse? If so, what? And does it not apply to, say, the Bush administrations?
Phantasmal (08-14-2018)
The hero of the gay rights movement was the founder of NAMBLA
He got a full pass from the left his whole life
If I'd said it occurred just under DEMOCRAT Administrations, you'd have a point, sock.
Since I didn't, you don't.
So you say now, sock. Yet I had to shame you into saying so. Your first impulse was to spread the blame along partisan lines.
That's telling. Very telling.
Yes, and the same point applies when you select photographs seeming to implicate two Democratic administrations, but no Republican ones.
There's no shame. It goes without saying that people are concerned about children being victimized. But what struck me as odd about your post was the insertion of those photographs of Democratic presidents meeting with popes, which was out-of-place in light of the content of the story. So, that's what I commented on. What was your intention in including those?So you say now, sock. Yet I had to shame you into saying so.
No, it doesn't, sock. Those were the two Reigns of Error during which the most recent instances of abuse detailed in the report occurred, as you'd know if you'd read the report., which clearly delineates when the abuses occurred.
Of course not, sock. You are a liberal. Liberals seem to be incapable of feeling shame.
It does not go without saying, sock, and no liberal has said it. For instance, you haven't said it, sock. What can be deduced from your lack of stated empathy?
Nothing "struck you as odd," sock. The explanation is a simple one, which you are determined not to grasp because you are primarily concerned with defending the non-existent honor of your preferred Party, not the systematic abuse of children by homosexual men.
BTW, sock, do you recall the DEMOCRAT Party's record on championing homosexual "rights" and the methodology employed by liberal social justice warriors to make it "normal?"
Did you read it? It's 900 pages long, and I'll gladly admit I didn't. However, I did read the excerpts in the NYT, which included details of abuse in June 2003 by Rev. Edward R. Graff. Do you recall who was in the presidency at the time? I also saw the details about Rev. Giella at St. John the Evangelist Church abusing many members of a large family in the 1980s. Do you recall who was president in that era?
It does.It does not go without saying
As you know, I did.no liberal has said it
Actually, the inclusion of those two photos of Democratic presidents with popes did, since it was such a non sequitur in relation to the article. I'm still not clear what your point was. Could you explain?Nothing "struck you as odd,"
The Democratic Party has a mixed record on championing homosexual rights. For example, it took a court order to get the ball rolling on gay marriage. But, for all the failures of mainstream Democrats to step up and defend the civil rights of homosexuals, they certainly did better than the GOP. As for calling it "normal," I'd say it isn't, in the same sense that green eyes, or left-handedness, or being Jewish aren't normal. Such things are statistically outside the norm. But they should not be subjected to mistreatment because of that.BTW, sock, do you recall the DEMOCRAT Party's record on championing homosexual "rights" and the methodology employed by liberal social justice warriors to make it "normal?"
Bookmarks