Why does your religion condemn people?

[G.T.]

Let's see.

I don't need to see it to know what your game is, Tazmudda.

I knew you wouldn't, I just wanted to make you tap dance. Again.

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

 

[ding]

I don't need to see it to know what your game is, Tazmudda.

I knew you wouldn't, I just wanted to make you tap dance. Again.

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

 

[Taz]

I knew you wouldn't, I just wanted to make you tap dance. Again.

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

Answer the stuff here and we'll see. Start with moral laws, prove that they exist and then connect them to the god of the bible.

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

 

[Taz]

I knew you wouldn't, I just wanted to make you tap dance. Again.

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

He did, you missed that as well.

 

[G.T.]

I knew you wouldn't, I just wanted to make you tap dance. Again.

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

It's not a matter of beating you, it's a matter of you having already proven that you can't follow a conversation like an adult, and go all over the place with tedious red herrings while displaying an inability to grasp any counter-argument.

I tried a LONG time ago, to keep away from the meta in a discussion with ye, the perpetually dingerred, but you always resort to intellectual dishonesty and red herrings when your toddler-esque world view has the overly obvious holes poked into it.

Not worth it, until you correct your behavior and engage like an adult without the usual dingerred sophistry. & until you do, with someone...(anyone!!), I'll continue to mock you just the same. It's a forced irony that even my momma love

 

[ding]

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

Answer the stuff here and we'll see. Start with moral laws, prove that they exist and then connect them to the god of the bible.

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

 

[ding]

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

It's not a matter of beating you, it's a matter of you having already proven that you can't follow a conversation like an adult, and go all over the place with tedious red herrings while displaying an inability to grasp any counter-argument.

I tried a LONG time ago, to keep away from the meta in a discussion with ye, the perpetually dingerred, but you always resort to intellectual dishonesty and red herrings when your toddler-esque world view has the overly obvious holes poked into it.

Not worth it, until you correct your behavior and engage like an adult without the usual dingerred sophistry. & until you do, with someone...(anyone!!), I'll continue to mock you just the same. It's a forced irony that even my momma love

Would you like to take me on in the Bull Ring, GT?

 

[Taz]

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

Answer the stuff here and we'll see. Start with moral laws, prove that they exist and then connect them to the god of the bible.

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

 

[ding]

So you don't want to go to the Bull Ring and have a one on one debate?

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

He did, you missed that as well.

You and GT can wave your arms all you want but the fact that you are afraid to take me on in the Bull Ring tells the true story, Tazmudda.

 

[ding]

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

Answer the stuff here and we'll see. Start with moral laws, prove that they exist and then connect them to the god of the bible.

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

I'm not the one who is afraid to debate you in the Bull Ring. You are.

 

[Taz]

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

He did, you missed that as well.

You and GT can wave your arms all you want but the fact that you are afraid to take me on in the Bull Ring tells the true story, Tazmudda.

You're afraid to answer my questions and you want me to waste more time watching you dance like you are now?

 

[G.T.]

So you can not answer like you always do? Um...no.

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

It's not a matter of beating you, it's a matter of you having already proven that you can't follow a conversation like an adult, and go all over the place with tedious red herrings while displaying an inability to grasp any counter-argument.

I tried a LONG time ago, to keep away from the meta in a discussion with ye, the perpetually dingerred, but you always resort to intellectual dishonesty and red herrings when your toddler-esque world view has the overly obvious holes poked into it.

Not worth it, until you correct your behavior and engage like an adult without the usual dingerred sophistry. & until you do, with someone...(anyone!!), I'll continue to mock you just the same. It's a forced irony that even my momma love

Would you like to take me on in the Bull Ring, GT?

See, folks - how this question was clearly answered in the post he's quoting? The old man simply cannot follow a conversation, it's impossible. It's red herrings, sophistry, and a lack of reading comprehension. Dingerred does it again!

I didnt even ask him to prove me right he just......does

 

[Taz]

Answer the stuff here and we'll see. Start with moral laws, prove that they exist and then connect them to the god of the bible.

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

I'm not the one who is afraid to debate you in the Bull Ring. You are.

You're afraid to answer my questions, going to a private booth won't change that.

 

[ding]

Sure I can. In the Bull Ring. Are you declining?

You aren't worthy of a debate. You type red-herrings that are 17 paragraphs long and miss the point entirely, it's your autism. You're too tedious to debate, it once took me 3 pages to get you to realize an article YOU POSTED said what it said. And in between those 3 pages, you had like 100 total paragraphs defending it like a dunce.....that's just retardation to assume you've got the intellect for an in-depth discussion given your track record and that each time you devolve into some dingerred meta bullshit.

Then it should be easy to beat me in the Bull Ring, GT, right?

It's not a matter of beating you, it's a matter of you having already proven that you can't follow a conversation like an adult, and go all over the place with tedious red herrings while displaying an inability to grasp any counter-argument.

I tried a LONG time ago, to keep away from the meta in a discussion with ye, the perpetually dingerred, but you always resort to intellectual dishonesty and red herrings when your toddler-esque world view has the overly obvious holes poked into it.

Not worth it, until you correct your behavior and engage like an adult without the usual dingerred sophistry. & until you do, with someone...(anyone!!), I'll continue to mock you just the same. It's a forced irony that even my momma love

Would you like to take me on in the Bull Ring, GT?

See, folks - how this question was clearly answered in the post he's quoting? The old man simply cannot follow a conversation, it's impossible. It's red herrings, sophistry, and a lack of reading comprehension. Dingerred does it again!

I didnt even ask him to prove me right he just......does

Would you like to take me on in the Bull Ring, GT?

 

[ding]

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

I'm not the one who is afraid to debate you in the Bull Ring. You are.

You're afraid to answer my questions, going to a private booth won't change that.

It isn't private. It is public for all to see. And you and GT are afraid to debate me there.

 

[G.T.]

If anyone needed proof that dingerred isn't an intellectually honest person worthy of an actual debate, just take a look at how he's acting right now. Perpetually butthurt, and sanctimoniously repeating the same question over and over in his autism. Don't get me wrong, it's a serious disease - but if you've got it you shouldn't flaunt it probably.

 

[ding]

If anyone needed proof that dingerred isn't an intellectually honest person worthy of an actual debate, just take a look at how he's acting right now. Perpetually butthurt, and sanctimoniously repeating the same question over and over in his autism. Don't get me wrong, it's a serious disease - but if you've got it you shouldn't flaunt it probably.

I have offered to debate you in the Bull Ring. You have declined. That says it all, GT.

 

[G.T.]

Sounds like you are afraid.

Do you want me to create the thread?

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

I'm not the one who is afraid to debate you in the Bull Ring. You are.

You're afraid to answer my questions, going to a private booth won't change that.

I'll engage you in the discussion - let's ignore the triggered dingerred in the background and show him how its done.

First, we need to establish a definition for morals that we can both agree on, to ensure we're speaking of the same concept within the discussion. Go ahead and define that, see if we agree, and ask your questions.

 

[ding]

 

[Taz]

See? You won't even answer here.

I have offered to answer it in the Bull Ring. One on one. You against me.

So, you won't accept my challenge?

Your "challenge". You're challenged enough.

I'm not the one who is afraid to debate you in the Bull Ring. You are.

You're afraid to answer my questions, going to a private booth won't change that.

I'll engage you in the discussion - let's ignore the triggered dingerred in the background and show him how its done.

First, we need to establish a definition for morals that we can both agree on, to ensure we're speaking of the same concept within the discussion. Go ahead and define that, see if we agree, and ask your questions.

There are no moral standards, especially not from a god that boasts about drowning nearly all of humanity. But it's fun to confuse the autistic kid with.