How droll.

More ad hominem attacks. At this rate I'm expecting Dorothy, the Tin Man, and the Lion to show up to help escort your straw man (Scarecrow) to talk to the "Wizard".

I'm glad you find it funny. It's supposed to be. But maybe not for the reason you think?

The church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was created in response to a movement to teach Christian creationism in public schools. Their aim, to get the creation story according to the Flying Spaghetti Monster told in schools as well using the same arguments the Christian groups used.

If only that law restricting soda size had stood up, we could have limited them to having two 20oz drinks instead...

The real problem in this case is not so much the welfare, but the fact that junk food is far more cost effective to purchase than real food. This is made possible (if I'm not mistaken), in part, by corn subsidies, which is a cheap resource to create high fructose corn syrup which is in just about everything anymore (why does bread need high fructose corn syrup, really?). The result, cheap, sugar laden food. Easy to buy, delicious, and sometimes addicting (bet you can't eat just one).

I'm not going to disagree that the welfare system needs a good hard look at, but it's not the only thing that needs a thorough looking at. The entirety of taxation and spending needs to be looked into and cleaned up.

You're right, I wasted prime material on the wrong poster. It popped in there and then I read her post... mental juxtaposition fail.

She may be in the "right" mind, but that mind is not superior nor inferior to the "left" mind. I've come across several reports from people that attended Catholic schools that nuns used to beat kids that were left-handed (so called "right-brained" ) into using their right hands ("left-brained" ) (evidently, there are also reports of this happening in public schools... even supposedly to Ronald Reagan). Being left-handed was viewed negatively for centuries, it still carries a social stigma and challenges (although certain advantages in sports). They're sinistrals (latin origin meaning left, it's also the derivation of the word sinister), and were once thought to be possessed by the devil. This physical, forced change does not change a person from what handedness they are, they just learn to use a different hand to remove negative reinforcement (or is removing a negative stimulus positive reinforcement?) and hide what they really are (sound familiar?).

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to point out which logic I used would require me to be a biblical scholar. Is it that part where I said nobody is trying to destroy her religion (well, in an official capacity, I'm sure the druids didn't say the same thing in regards to Christianity)? One of the most basic tenants in Christianity is to love thy neighbor as thyself. You love yourself so much as to not change the sex of who you are attracted to, then why try to change someone else into something that is more kosher for you? If people really had a choice, do you honestly believe that they'd take the path that causes them to get harassed and worse (and then occasionally choose to commit suicide, why k**l yourself if you can just simply choose to be different)? I'm hesitant to believe that someone that speaks in such a manner as you do truly cares about the soul of anyone else, which lends me to believe that a "d*****t" behavior just makes you uncomfortable and you want to see it eradicated. Maybe you do really care and want to help, but what if they don't want your help? What if they want to live their lives the way they want, it's not like they're inviting you into their bedroom or forcing you to watch them. Oh it's about the kids? We already have plenty of problems with heterosexuals raising children, but somehow a homosexual is less qualified?

I invite you to prove your point. Make the choice and live as a homosexual, do all the things homosexuals do, but remember, you have to enjoy it (I mean really enjoy it).

I already told you, I'm not homosexual. I'm sorry to disappoint you. On the bright side, you were partially right, I do grow v***s for a living, I'm a Virologist. What can I say? I find v***ses fascinating.

To borrow your rationale for a moment: You get this train of thought from your handlers in the very same manner that you claim that I don't make up my own mind? You blame main stream media for your woes. Sounds like your blaming others, just like your side claims about the other side doing all the time.

I do read. I particularly enjoy scientific papers. All that data is just so nice. You see, data doesn't lie... people do. That's why papers get published in peer reviewed journals. When something doesn't look right, it gets challenged and possibly removed, or it doesn't get published in the first place. When they hold up to scrutiny, that gives them credibility. Unlike all the crazy "newstainment" shows and websites that get to spout wh**ever crap they want just to draw more ad traffic from everybody that eats it up. Typically, when I see a crazy headline, I try to check out the real reason(reference in the law, or order, etc.) to see what all the up and to do is. Then, after reading it carefully, I wonder where they got this crazy idea from. You see, I go for primary sources over secondary, or tertiary, and so on ad nauseum. And with there being so much crap slung around by everyone, it's really hard sometimes to pick a crazy topic to check out closer. If you notice... I don't always reference things, but when I do, I try to get primary sources.

You're right, she didn't send any bible thumping, pistol packing evangelists to silence anyone (as far as I know, dundundun...). Singularity was also informing of the potential legal questions involved by NPP conducting therapy and proselytizing. Tasine then, instead of forcing silence physically, tries to discredit Singularity's professional opinion by making a baseless claim against her job, which is the last line of defense for the guilty (although sometimes an effective defense). I have made no insult about Tasine's ability to perform her job or whether or not that really is her job. I have only pointed out a lie (or perhaps more accurately a t***sgression?), in that if Tasine really respected the privacy of everyone as she stated, that Singularity's claimed profession would not be questioned.

As for the media shouting bigot at Christian businessmen, did they send a bunch of gun toting camera men to suppress him? No? So, can you attempt to suppress by using words alone or not? I'm confused.

You've done it again and confused me. Where in this did I talk about freedom from religion? But if we're going to go off on a tangent... While I'm a dreamer in much the same way John Lennon was, I really don't care what invisible man, woman, pink unicorn, tree, flying spaghetti monster you pray to. You just have to remember that not everyone prays to the same invisible man, woman, pink unicorn, tree, flying spaghetti monster as you do and that they shouldn't have to suffer persecution just because they're different from you or your accepted idea of "normal". What is "normal" anyway? The purpose of allowing religious freedom wasn't to encourage nor was it to stifle. It was to allow the people to worship as they pleased without interference from the government. Of course there are limitations to what can be done in the name of religion: honor k*****gs, stonings, murderous cults, p********a (I still don't know how the church gets away with protecting these guys), etc.

Respecting an opinion and evaluating it for t***h are two different matters. You can say and think what you want, but if you're going to have an argument, it's best to have science and facts to back you up. Though it makes things exceedingly frustrating when one party just outright denies science (but yet reaps the benefits of science constantly). If you would like to have a more scholarly debate, one can be arranged.

A van line? But how am I supposed to drive to a van to China or Russia? Can I borrow your time machine that you used to talk to the founding fathers about me, so I can travel back to when the land bridge still existed? Besides, Russia's even worse in their treatment of homosexuals and China appears to be better but they still can't marry (a war that is slowly being won here). Why would I want to go there? Is this another c*******t suggestion? The 50s are over, McCarthyism died out a while ago, find a new pony to ride. And no, not a c*******t (not that you guys seem to care). I only suggested Saudi Arabia as it is a theocracy. All this talk about what God says is right would be more apropos to living in a theocracy, as then you would live under God's law and not man's, of which we have the latter (although some can be claimed to be influenced by the former).

These tangents have been fun. I hope I managed to touch on each subject in this novella. Oh, and I'm not your buddy, friend.

So wait a second, I owe you exactly nothing? And you ask nothing of me? But then you ask me to tell you I'm not a collectivist, which is very likely an attempt at calling me a c*******t (if I'm incorrect, then I withdraw my allegation), an obvious red herring. So which is it? Are you or are you not asking anything of me? You won't believe anything I say anyway, and that's perfectly fine, your loss.

On the topic of collectivism, it abounds in this nation. Even though you were most likely using that word trying to obfuscate your true intention of marginalizing me with McCarthyism (again, if I'm wrong then I relent on this) (although if I'm right, why is it ok for you to obfuscate your intentions but then try to crucify "the left" as a whole for doing the same thing?). There are many types of collectivism, for example the military, and church groups to name two. And no, I don't fall into any of the aforementioned labels.

Wow, when you can't fight facts demonize your opponent right? Claim they're illogical, stupid, lack reasoning abilities, and make other baseless ad hominem attacks. You sure you are playing out of that guide for radicals your friends keep talking about, or at least I think you are, I really don't know for sure as I've never read it nor have I any desire to (nor had I even heard about it until I saw people throwing accusations around concerning it here). But you sure are acting like the people you and yours demonize as taking cues from that book.

The difference between a warning and a conspiracy theory? A warning is based on causality/high probability of causality, a conspiracy theory is based on fallacious reasoning (adding in the obvious powerful connected people to make it a real conspiracy) (also associated with doom saying). For example, your gas gauge indicates empty (maybe it even flashes at you), warning that you'll not have gas soon. If it was to take the tone of a conspiracy theorist / doom speaker, your gas gauge would tell you that if you don't get gas you won't get home in time to stop the bad guys that are going to break into your house. Basically, one sounds probable and the other is a stretch.

Here's another example: Mom, if you get me the phone, then I'll do extra chores around the house. Causality. If A then B. Mom, if you don't get me the phone, then all the kids at school will laugh at me, I'll flunk out and probably start doing drugs. Fallacy. We are to believe that a series of events, that are not connected, are somehow tied to getting a phone or not.



None of this, however, explains your qualifications to doubt Singularity's profession. It would seem as though you have none.

So being a conspiracy theorist gives you the knowledge of any given user's profession. That definitely sounds like "stable" thinking (it's full of horse s**t).

Can we think of reasons why someone wouldn't respond? Perhaps she's busy attending to other things.

You're going to play the ganging up card when that's all that ever happens on this site left and right. It's delusional to honestly believe l*****ts do this and rightists don't. You believe and want to play off the "I'm a victim of suppression" card too. Yet you insist upon suppressing views that are counter to your beliefs. Last time I checked, we don't live in a theocracy, therefore laws and policies based solely on religious teachings do not survive long. If you would like to live in a theocracy, check out the middle east.

Again, nobody is trying to destroy your religion (even though you're not Christian). This is paranoia.

Please, enlighten us all, how do you KNOW the country is going to hell in a hand basket? I contend that you couldn't possibly KNOW. You may think and belive that, but you don't know for sure. Possibilities are not facts. So please, stop pretending like you know the future.

What, pray tell, is the "real" America? Is that when a woman's place was in the house, barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen? When a woman couldn't v**e? When we could own another human's life? Paradigms change constantly, those that don't change with the times become "old fuddy duddies" to the rest of society.

Nobody has taken your speech from you. Nobody is trying to silence you. People are trying to set the record straight (or not (get it?) as the case may be). The best way is with studies. So far, I have yet to see a single credible study that supports the idea that homosexuals are inferior in anyway.

This argument could be used against the religious and right wing articles using almost exactly the same wording. I'll demonstrate.




Observation: The only people I see actively trying to take rights away from anyone, are the very same people that claim someone else is trying to take their rights (in spite of the fact that they haven't and aren't losing any rights). Freedom for you, everyone else be damned.

Who are you to question Singularity's profession? A couple quick definitions from wikipedia does not discredit anyone. Basing an entire scholarly paper from wikipedia (although it makes a great starter for papers as they have sources for you to check out), would discredit your thesis and possibly yourself; a couple definitions, hardly worth batting an eye at.

Singularity's lambaste in no manner revealed any condition other than proclaiming that the targeted poster is full of BS and spreads it around. Any mental diagnosis would be inferred by the reader. Your attack on her profession reveals a lack of respect for her privacy, contrary to what you claimed about respecting everyone's privacy. What do you care if she is or isn't (was or wasn't) the professional she claims to be? I could make claims about you in regards to your profession, but hey I assume you do the best job that you can at wh**ever profession you do. I really don't care whether you are an RN or not.

As far as a right to privacy, posting on a public forum voids any privacy you seek to claim in regards to anything you post. This includes writing style, thought processes, tone, etc. A myriad of clues are presented to how a person really thinks, unless they're really clever and write in a manner completely different from their personality.


In before "stfu q***r". Not homosexual, sorry to disappoint boys, but I like the ladies (well, really only one nowadays, but who's counting?).

As an Eagle Scout, I understand full well the virtues of being prepared. However, being prepared is not about hoarding enough supplies to survive a nuclear apocalypse, it's about having the right tools you'll need to survive (as you can never be fully prepared for everything). I can get by with just my multi-tool (preferably), or without any physical tools if need be (guess I'll just have to make tools myself then). The main thing about preparedness, is knowledge. Knowing what needs to be done, how to accomplish that goal, and how to improvise. It t***slates to all walks of life.

The prepared mind doesn't panic. You have to remain composed if you are to defeat the wilderness. That's not to say you shouldn't be cautious, but if you spend all your time building defense against one problem, another will defeat you while your back is turned (fire, shelter, water, food). If confronted with a bear, if you panic, you die (very likely at least); the best solution is to remain calm and make yourself bigger than the problem (and louder as the case may be, although that doesn't work too well with people). If you happen upon a wounded person (or caused injury to someone accidentally) and panic, they could die; if you are prepared with the knowledge to care for them, you may turn a hero (or at the very least don't panic and call for help).

How does this t***slate? Well, something appears amiss with the purchase of firearms. Should we panic? No, we should try to understand the situation so we know best how to overcome it. Upon examination of the order, it's coded for law enforcement activity. A little searching reveals how law enforcement relates to the USDA. Remembering past events about a fugitive holding up in a cabin in the woods for a few days puts the law enforcement aspect into context (and then it getting blown up, or set ablaze somehow?).


Panicking and fear don't solve anything. It just leads to more confusion, more mis-information, more bull, and sometimes death. Unless you see a bomb technician running that is, then try to catch up.

So, this looks like it boils down to: some people are afraid of the government, and others aren't.

Those that are afraid of the government are easily set off on tirades about tyranny from very little facts, and the swirling of opinion. They will believe the government is out to get them (or will be soon) regardless of whether or not that is the t***h. This is called paranoia. Although, just because you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they aren't after you.

Those that aren't afraid of the government don't let very little facts and the swirling of opinion sway them emotionally. These people try to come up with a legitimate reason, right or wrong, that doesn't involve the men in black bashing in their door. This is rationalization. Although, just because it's rational, doesn't mean it's the correct answer.

When we think about a government entity arming itself, do we remember that the government entity is comprised of people? People that have families, and would like to see them when they get off work. People that need to protect themselves from the other people that arm themselves to protect themselves from the government.

I wonder if the uptick in reports of government agencies buying weapons/ammo is due to more t***sparency in government agencies, a response to possibly growing m*****as, threats of terrorism, or if it really is nefarious.


So, the choice is yours. Live in fear, or don't. Just remember, the writing is on the wall because somebody put it there.

The forestry service engages in law enforcement activities and is under the purview of the USDA. A law enforcement agency buying new weapons to replace old ones or get better gear is not unusual. Perhaps the person ordering the weapons is a gun enthusiast and wanted all the bells and whistles to better deal with fugitives that hide out in America's parks.

Without further data any explanation is pure speculation.

Better, Denver. ;-)

Laundry gremlins are a species similar to the underpants gnomes. Step 1, steal underpants. Step 2, ?. Step 3, profit.

The sky is not blue. The sky is black with tiny white pieces of dirt on it, or maybe that's the paint coming off again. Somebody should clean that thing, or repaint it.

What I mean is, say the section becomes successful, as I have not set up a User Managed site here, I do not know how it works.

The main site, when you report a post, it gets sent to the admin. I wonder if here, it will get sent to you. Do you have the ability to appoint moderators to help keep the peace, or does it all fall on your shoulders?

You get into dangerous territory when you cut out those "you consider" to be trolls. The easier way is to lay out rules for this section, that way you don't end up with a stigma of unfairly targeting political opponents, unless the rules aren't applied equally.

If you are able to appoint moderators to help you then it may work out, if it's just you, then we would inevitably end up with what we already have, except it's your headache.

I don't know if you are given all the tools that would be required to make it a real success.

Do flags go to you? How frequently are you here to patrol?

It is nice. I've been planning an objective look at the events of Benghazi, no feelings or opinions, just facts. In just haven't gotten around to it yet.