|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Debate talk:The Permissive Society
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This page is for content unrelated to the debate (Such as excessive personal abuse)
- Pfft, wow the lameness continues. Talsley is much more entertaining, Rob so much more crazy. This is some pitiful basement dwelling incompetnet trying to steal some of their attention. Try something else sugar. CopperheadHisssssss 12:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- For the sake of decency I won't be responding to Copperhead's baiting, immaturity and discourtesy. MarkCarthy (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- You can do better. Come on, provide some links to some right wing blogs or Fox rather than talking out your ass. CopperheadHisssssss 13:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Once again, I would request that you vacate yourself from this discourse if you are incapable of behaving with basic decency and respect for diversity. I assume this website doesn't tolerate such childishness - if this disruption continues I may have to seek disciplinary procedures in order to attain justice. MarkCarthy (talk) 13:57, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- You're a lame parodist, your stream of united bullshit and usage of British spelling pretty much scream it. Bad parodist, no cookies. CopperheadHisssssss 14:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I fail to understand why anybody is engaging with this chap. He's obviously a time-wasting parodist.--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 21:31, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, but I want to help him to be the very best troll, like no troll ever was. ±
KnightOfTL;DRlavishly loquacious 23:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's just that I can't see the point of debating someone who doesn't believe what they are saying. You can't convince them they are wrong or change their minds because they already know they are wrong. Any response you make just encourages them to invent something else. But, OK, if you enjoy it then that's fine - everybody needs a hobby. :-) --Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 13:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, but I want to help him to be the very best troll, like no troll ever was. ±
- I fail to understand why anybody is engaging with this chap. He's obviously a time-wasting parodist.--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 21:31, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- You're a lame parodist, your stream of united bullshit and usage of British spelling pretty much scream it. Bad parodist, no cookies. CopperheadHisssssss 14:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Once again, I would request that you vacate yourself from this discourse if you are incapable of behaving with basic decency and respect for diversity. I assume this website doesn't tolerate such childishness - if this disruption continues I may have to seek disciplinary procedures in order to attain justice. MarkCarthy (talk) 13:57, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- You can do better. Come on, provide some links to some right wing blogs or Fox rather than talking out your ass. CopperheadHisssssss 13:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Its funny that liberals and politically correct fascists always claim that those with opposing views are 'parodists'. I'm much closer to public opinion than any of you pinko's, what with your excuses for paedo's and your tolerance of militant homosexuality. MarkCarthy (talk) 23:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- What's wrong with gays in the military?
Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 01:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC) - 70% of Republicans supported the repeal of DADT, fucktard. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Um, I didn't claim you were a parodist for your opposing views. I claimed you were a parodist because your views don't fucking make sense given that you stated you aren't an American. Your excessive use of america-originated social scares, american-based assumptions, and american-based use of political terminology ('left' =/= democrats outside of America) indicates to me that you aren't who you say you are, and are constructing a fake persona. If I'm wrong and you are an american, then your dismissal of the first amendment by supposedly not being american is invalid. If I am wrong and you aren't an American, what the fuck are you doing behaving like the worst caricature of a right-wing, american bible belt, stuck-in-the-60s bozo? ±KnightOfTL;DRyeah, well you fight like a cow! 01:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Um, I didn't claim you were a parodist for your opposing views. I claimed you were a parodist because your views don't fucking make sense given that you stated you aren't an American. Your excessive use of america-originated social scares, american-based assumptions, and american-based use of political terminology ('left' =/= democrats outside of America) indicates to me that you aren't who you say you are, and are constructing a fake persona. If I'm wrong and you are an american, then your dismissal of the first amendment by supposedly not being american is invalid. If I am wrong and you aren't an American, what the fuck are you doing behaving like the worst caricature of a right-wing, american bible belt, stuck-in-the-60s bozo? ±
- Why so personal? Its obvious you're very ignorant of politics outside of the USA. Conservatism is a very active force this side of the pond. I've already said that I'm a member of the United Kingdom Independence Party. If you're incapable of having an argument without employing political correctness as a shield, maybe it would be better if we gave this thing a rest before we really get started. MarkCarthy (talk) 09:12, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Also, I haven't mentioned god once. I'm not a religious person. I think religion is important to keep women and the underclass in line, but most men are rational enough people to do without it. MarkCarthy (talk) 09:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)