tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post5246147865560650408..comments2024-03-28T03:54:21.932-04:00Comments on Canadian Cynic: whack-a-troll dayCChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-85195117590871211972007-02-13T05:22:00.000-05:002007-02-13T05:22:00.000-05:00Hmmm, i don't think I've ever seen anything writte...<I>Hmmm, i don't think I've ever seen anything written on here of any value..</I><BR/><BR/>...and your obnoxious, obvious and overlong contribution changes that how, All Cock?Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-83559799279545795852007-02-12T23:41:00.000-05:002007-02-12T23:41:00.000-05:00goombah i used the term troll because the tone and...goombah i used the term troll because the tone and tenor of your entrance suggested it. you didn't offer a dissenting opinion. you scoffed and dismissed.<BR/><BR/>the examples cc gave in the original post made perfect sense in the context of the christian faith entitlement phenomenon. he did not say these were the same things, but they were propped up using the same stick. belief trumps law. <BR/><BR/>you framed your words to just skirt the bounds of prevarication. you diminished the monument issue by placing it in a generic "public space". when the issue in that instance was that the monument was in a court of law. <BR/><BR/>you follow by maligning cc's wit and intelligence while offering none of your own as a counter example. <BR/><BR/>you then try to dismiss the whole business with the "panties in a twist" garbage.<BR/><BR/>i called you a troll because that is what you is. you did not come to engage in discussion. you did not come to convince or to be convinced. you showed up pissed on the lawn and now you're sniffy because, like any recalcitrant pup, you've had your nose rubbed in it.<BR/><BR/>"If you restrict your readership only to <A HREF="http://www.bloggingtories.ca/" REL="nofollow">baglickers</A>, how ever will you manage to whip yourselves into a hissy fit over alternate views?"<BR/><BR/>there is no doubt in my mind that the readership of this site will be more than happy to slap me around the ear if they think i'm saying something stupid. as for how we'll manage without petulant dimwits parading through the comments, well, we'll get by. it isn't like there's a shortage of stupidity in the world to discuss, though it has been generous of you to provide home delivery.<BR/><BR/>goombah, you will think what you think and believe what you want. if you want to be something other than a troll, offer argumnets, try to validate your stance. otherwise, you're backing a lie out of stubborn ignorance and retrograde bigotry. <BR/><BR/>as for your thoughts on intolerance. yes, in this case, this subset of christians are intolerant. in refusing to perform the duties of the job based on personal judgement of others, in denying legal services of the government to citizens, you and your gang are intolerant. <BR/><BR/>you are the banjo. we are the orchestra.Lindsay Stewarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13461043718147845594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-72876307734817328492007-02-12T23:15:00.000-05:002007-02-12T23:15:00.000-05:00Goombah wrote:"And religious people are the intole...Goombah wrote:<BR/><BR/>"And religious people are the intolerant and close-minded ones?"<BR/><BR/>It's like he's putting a ball on a stick for six-year-olds to hit with a bat, thinking it's a challenge.<BR/><BR/>And, for the record, I have never licked CC's bag. But, he has hoofed me in the nuts at least once. Bastard.David Webbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05891790923170327958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1435842836618248412007-02-12T22:54:00.000-05:002007-02-12T22:54:00.000-05:00One question to CC and the Ape: Am I considered a ...One question to CC and the Ape: Am I considered a troll simply because I read your blog and offered a dissenting opinion? <BR/><BR/>If you restrict your readership only to baglickers, how ever will you manage to whip yourselves into a hissy fit over alternate views?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-17967539419896719022007-02-12T22:48:00.000-05:002007-02-12T22:48:00.000-05:00Hmmm, i don't think I've ever seen anything writte...Hmmm, i don't think I've ever seen anything written on here of any value until I read this post. And, I must say that I agree that a civil marriage commissioner has two options: perform the ceremony against his religious values, or quit and get a new job. <BR/><BR/>Religious disagreement is reserved for church ceremonies - churches have, and should have every right to deny any person marriage sanctioned by the church. <BR/><BR/>But when we're talking about state-run marriage, they are obliged to keep religion out of it. <BR/><BR/>as for you aweb - Your suggestion is ridiculous. Any issue is fair-game and up for debate. Its free speech and democracy - and the problem with people like you is that instead of arguing with fact, you decide to hold your hands over your ears and say its not there. And if you really feel like talking about sides being wrong, then you better be letting go of kyoto lest you break that pretty glass house of yours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-3092460501413053832007-02-12T22:45:00.001-05:002007-02-12T22:45:00.001-05:00"Or maybe it's something else, but the inability t..."<I>Or maybe it's something else, but the inability to let anything go, ever, and just accept that they were/are wrong, is staggering.</I>"<BR/><BR/>And religious people are the intolerant and close-minded ones?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-9658467891903455862007-02-12T22:45:00.000-05:002007-02-12T22:45:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-50182270540104110982007-02-12T22:42:00.000-05:002007-02-12T22:42:00.000-05:00Oh very good, very good indeed!I liked the part ab...Oh very good, very good indeed!<BR/><BR/>I liked the part about how they'd probably marry divorcees and about the significance of the civil law and the office that the ceremony is being carried out in.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-66221466852705730222007-02-12T22:29:00.000-05:002007-02-12T22:29:00.000-05:00This issue is just another in a long line of issue...This issue is just another in a long line of issues where one side sees it as up for debate. It's been said before, about many topics, but sometimes one side is just wrong. End of debate. <BR/><BR/>I assume it's the strong religious component of that side which has twisted minds to think that everything is up for interpretation (bible studies anyone?). Or maybe it's something else, but the inability to let anything go, ever, and just accept that they were/are wrong, is staggering. <BR/><BR/>Oh, and I'm enjoying the contrasting styles of CC and pretty shaved ape. Although capital letters would be nice sometimes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com