Interracial couple denied marriage license in La.

Southern Man said:
If you're not prepared to back up your claim that there were no cover-ups by public schools then it is baseless.
Click to expand...

Are you still asking for someone to prove what didn't happen?

And you claim to have some skill at debating?
 
Southern Man said:
You referenced an article about a TV program that makes accusations. Where's the evidence?
Click to expand...
The Vatican does not deny it? It does acknowledge the existense of the Crimen Sollicitationis and in his 2001 letter the Cardinal Ratfucker makes reference to it when telling the churches to keep sexual abuse secret.
 
Southern Man said:
I'm asking you to prove your claim, that public schools exposed all known pedophiles within their ranks.
Click to expand...

lol

Is that all? Just prove what was done in every school system in the country? Actually, you said was "If you're not prepared to back up your claim that there were no cover-ups by public schools then it is baseless". And one cannot prove what was not done.

If there were any cases of coverups (and I have not seen any), it was far smaller in scope than the church's coverups. No teacher was transfered and hidden by the school system.

No comparison.
 
Socrtease said:
The Vatican does not deny it? It does acknowledge the existense of the Crimen Sollicitationis and in his 2001 letter the Cardinal Ratfucker makes reference to it when telling the churches to keep sexual abuse secret.
Click to expand...
The Vatican does not confirm it, and according to any competent lawyer, wisely so. Can you point out in the 39 page internal memorandum where the Pope was "instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety"?
 
Damn, now where did I put that video of the Pope addressing this specific issue and addressing it to SM? Its around here someplace.


There is enough evidence to show the Vatican was involved in the coverup. Certainly far more evidence than there is to back up some of the leaps of logic you make.

To quote the song, "Denial is not just a river in Egypt".
 
WinterBorn said:
... No teacher was transfered and hidden by the school system.

....
Click to expand...
That's exactly what happened with Luke Markishtum, another former Seattle employee.

According to two decades of complaints in his personnel file, he groped and kissed girls at American Indian Heritage Secondary, bought beer for athletes, had sex with his girlfriend on campus, and hugged his female students and had them sit on his lap. Yet he faced no punishment.

Finally, in 1995, a student said he grabbed her by the shirt and pulled her toward him so he could kiss her. An investigation revealed other troubling information: In 1981, he had been caught trying to help smuggle 6 tons of marijuana into the state. He made a deal to testify against the others and wasn't charged.

"There appears to be a pattern of inappropriate and unprofessional behavior with staff and students that spans 26 years," then-Human Resources Director Tom Weeks wrote.

But instead of firing Markishtum, the district paid him the remainder of that year's salary, plus an additional $69,000, and promised to keep his record secret from future employers.

Markishtum denies all of the allegations. He was hired by the North Kitsap School District, which wasn't told about his past. He wasn't accused of wrongdoing there.
Click to expand...
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001863238_sexbills23m.html :readit:
 
Last edited:
WinterBorn said:
Damn, now where did I put that video of the Pope addressing this specific issue and addressing it to SM? Its around here someplace.


There is enough evidence to show the Vatican was involved in the coverup. Certainly far more evidence than there is to back up some of the leaps of logic you make.

To quote the song, "Denial is not just a river in Egypt".
Click to expand...
If there's evidence, point it out in the memo. :)
 
Southern Man said:
Of course not and neither did you; it's not my responsibility to read 39 pages of unsearchable pdf to prove your point for you. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Now you are claiming to know what I did or did not read? Sorry, but you are wrong yet again.

You asked for proof, and I provided a link to said proof. You do not win the argument simply because you are too lazy to read a few dozen pages. The fact that it does not have a search feature does not change the content, it only shows you have grown lazy and spoiled by technology.
 
WinterBorn said:
Now you are claiming to know what I did or did not read? Sorry, but you are wrong yet again.

You asked for proof, and I provided a link to said proof. You do not win the argument simply because you are too lazy to read a few dozen pages. The fact that it does not have a search feature does not change the content, it only shows you have grown lazy and spoiled by technology.
Click to expand...

At some point in this conversation you're going to realize that you're talking to a moron who doesn't have the capacity for analysis, nor the honesty for debate.

It doesn't matter what proof you give it.
 
blackascoal said:
At some point in this conversation you're going to realize that you're talking to a moron who doesn't have the capacity for analysis, nor the honesty for debate.

It doesn't matter what proof you give it.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I just enjoy playing Whack-a-mole with him.

But I concede that it is a waste of bandwidth.
 
WinterBorn said:
Now you are claiming to know what I did or did not read? Sorry, but you are wrong yet again.

You asked for proof, and I provided a link to said proof. You do not win the argument simply because you are too lazy to read a few dozen pages. The fact that it does not have a search feature does not change the content, it only shows you have grown lazy and spoiled by technology.
Click to expand...
If you read it and it supports your assertion then you would point out the relevant paragraph. Since you haven't there is only one obvious conclusion.
 
blackascoal said:
At some point in this conversation you're going to realize that you're talking to a moron who doesn't have the capacity for analysis, nor the honesty for debate.

It doesn't matter what proof you give it.
Click to expand...
You are the true moron here since all you can do in a debate is to play the race card then refuse to back it up. My thread asking you to prove your assertions is approaching three months old; I have reminded you of it many times and since you refuse to debate that I can only conclude that I have you boxed in like a frightened kitten.

Here it is again: Just Plain Politics!
 
Southern Man said:
If you read it and it supports your assertion then you would point out the relevant paragraph. Since you haven't there is only one obvious conclusion.
Click to expand...

You keep trying to support your unwillingness to read a paper by trying to sound like you know what I would or wouldn't do.

I provided a link, as you asked. There is plenty of evidence in this link, if you would only read it. Now either argue about the contents of the link or don't. But this bullshit dancing is a waste of time.

Let me know when you have something new and relevant to say.
 
Southern Man said:
You are the true moron here since all you can do in a debate is to play the race card then refuse to back it up. My thread asking you to prove your assertions is approaching three months old; I have reminded you of it many times and since you refuse to debate that I can only conclude that I have you boxed in like a frightened kitten.

Here it is again: Just Plain Politics!
Click to expand...

You're a moron so I don't expect you to get it.

YOU are a racist and (here's the part that you don't get) .. I DON"T GIVE A FUCK WHETHER YOU PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT OR NOT

Racists are scum and they rarely acknowledge their evil .. ie; Limpy.

I'm not going to engage your idiocy of "proof" when you never acknowledge any proof of your mindless statements. I don't have to prove shit to you.

YOU prove yourself a racist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top