From: dene on 16 May 2010 14:00 <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message news:he60v5916cp1npbb7g21h0ft17sh99hehs(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 16 May 2010 09:09:57 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > >In article <4befeb08$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > >> It is interesting to me that so many anti-abortion crusaders absolutely > >> love capital punishment. Why is that? Is human life sacred or not > >> (assuming for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, which they're > >> not)? > > > >Should a man be condemed for what he does? > No > > > >Should a man be condemed for what he thinks? > No > > > >Should a man be condemed because he is an inconvienence? > No > > Now reach down in that shallow brain pan and put these questions in > response to Carbon's. Then you may realize that your status quo is a > non sequitur. You really are all over the place and have no > concentrated thought. > > BK BS BK. Bert's position on abortion is quite clear. He answered Carb's questions quite well. The death penalty is based on the choices the criminal makes. An unborn child has no choices. You, Carbs, and Billy need to deal with what he posts instead of resorting to the "stupid" card. It makes you guys look unintelligent. -Greg
From: bknight on 16 May 2010 14:38 On Sun, 16 May 2010 11:00:53 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > ><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >news:he60v5916cp1npbb7g21h0ft17sh99hehs(a)4ax.com... >> On Sun, 16 May 2010 09:09:57 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >> >> >In article <4befeb08$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >> >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >> >> >> It is interesting to me that so many anti-abortion crusaders absolutely >> >> love capital punishment. Why is that? Is human life sacred or not >> >> (assuming for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, which >they're >> >> not)? >> > >> >Should a man be condemed for what he does? >> No >> > >> >Should a man be condemed for what he thinks? >> No >> > >> >Should a man be condemed because he is an inconvienence? >> No >> >> Now reach down in that shallow brain pan and put these questions in >> response to Carbon's. Then you may realize that your status quo is a >> non sequitur. You really are all over the place and have no >> concentrated thought. >> >> BK > >BS BK. Bert's position on abortion is quite clear. He answered Carb's >questions quite well. The death penalty is based on the choices the >criminal makes. An unborn child has no choices. > >You, Carbs, and Billy need to deal with what he posts instead of resorting >to the "stupid" card. It makes you guys look unintelligent. > >-Greg > You're wrong. Though Bert's position is clear these questions didn't reply to Carb's at all. K
From: bknight on 16 May 2010 14:45 On Sun, 16 May 2010 13:38:24 -0500, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: >On Sun, 16 May 2010 11:00:53 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> >wrote: > >> >><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>news:he60v5916cp1npbb7g21h0ft17sh99hehs(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 16 May 2010 09:09:57 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>> >>> >In article <4befeb08$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >>> >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >>> >>> >> It is interesting to me that so many anti-abortion crusaders absolutely >>> >> love capital punishment. Why is that? Is human life sacred or not >>> >> (assuming for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, which >>they're >>> >> not)? >>> > >>> >Should a man be condemed for what he does? >>> No >>> > >>> >Should a man be condemed for what he thinks? >>> No >>> > >>> >Should a man be condemed because he is an inconvienence? >>> No >>> >>> Now reach down in that shallow brain pan and put these questions in >>> response to Carbon's. Then you may realize that your status quo is a >>> non sequitur. You really are all over the place and have no >>> concentrated thought. >>> >>> BK >> >>BS BK. Bert's position on abortion is quite clear. He answered Carb's >>questions quite well. The death penalty is based on the choices the >>criminal makes. An unborn child has no choices. >> >>You, Carbs, and Billy need to deal with what he posts instead of resorting >>to the "stupid" card. It makes you guys look unintelligent. >> >>-Greg >> You're wrong. Though Bert's position is clear these questions didn't reply to Carb's at all. They are all good questions though. There's no way that Bert can make anyone look unintelligent. As I said, he's all over the place, and its hard to deal with posts that don't conform to other's. I know that you agree with his stance on this subject, and that's fine. However, Carb's opinion is just as valid. BK
From: BAR on 16 May 2010 15:53 In article <85apv7F4jbU2(a)mid.individual.net>, dene(a)remove.ipns.com says... > > <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > news:he60v5916cp1npbb7g21h0ft17sh99hehs(a)4ax.com... > > On Sun, 16 May 2010 09:09:57 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > >In article <4befeb08$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > > > >> It is interesting to me that so many anti-abortion crusaders absolutely > > >> love capital punishment. Why is that? Is human life sacred or not > > >> (assuming for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, which > they're > > >> not)? > > > > > >Should a man be condemed for what he does? > > No > > > > > >Should a man be condemed for what he thinks? > > No > > > > > >Should a man be condemed because he is an inconvienence? > > No > > > > Now reach down in that shallow brain pan and put these questions in > > response to Carbon's. Then you may realize that your status quo is a > > non sequitur. You really are all over the place and have no > > concentrated thought. > > > > BK > > BS BK. Bert's position on abortion is quite clear. He answered Carb's > questions quite well. The death penalty is based on the choices the > criminal makes. An unborn child has no choices. > > You, Carbs, and Billy need to deal with what he posts instead of resorting > to the "stupid" card. It makes you guys look unintelligent. Bobby doesn't like opposing views and he doesn't like people who really don't care about his opinion of them. I answered Carb's questions. Bobby just doesn't like the way I answered them.
From: BAR on 16 May 2010 15:54
In article <npe0v5df9m37t1fa04eg0at294dltml7oh(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net says... > > On Sun, 16 May 2010 11:00:53 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> > wrote: > > > > ><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > >news:he60v5916cp1npbb7g21h0ft17sh99hehs(a)4ax.com... > >> On Sun, 16 May 2010 09:09:57 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <4befeb08$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > >> >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > >> > >> >> It is interesting to me that so many anti-abortion crusaders absolutely > >> >> love capital punishment. Why is that? Is human life sacred or not > >> >> (assuming for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, which > >they're > >> >> not)? > >> > > >> >Should a man be condemed for what he does? > >> No > >> > > >> >Should a man be condemed for what he thinks? > >> No > >> > > >> >Should a man be condemed because he is an inconvienence? > >> No > >> > >> Now reach down in that shallow brain pan and put these questions in > >> response to Carbon's. Then you may realize that your status quo is a > >> non sequitur. You really are all over the place and have no > >> concentrated thought. > >> > >> BK > > > >BS BK. Bert's position on abortion is quite clear. He answered Carb's > >questions quite well. The death penalty is based on the choices the > >criminal makes. An unborn child has no choices. > > > >You, Carbs, and Billy need to deal with what he posts instead of resorting > >to the "stupid" card. It makes you guys look unintelligent. > > > >-Greg > > > You're wrong. Though Bert's position is clear these questions didn't > reply to Carb's at all. > K Sure they did, you just fail to see how they respond to Carbs. You don't always get the answer you want. |