‘There is NO GOD’ Stephen Hawking’s final revelation of the afterlife REVEALED

I feel sad for you.

I guess the people who supported Adolf Hitler kidded themselves the way you are doing here.

You should be above this.

I doubt you can be, though...so you are stuck with it.

The Nazis were socialists. Fascism is one of the two forms of socialism. Trump is not a socialist.
 
Since Sear asked me to say that again...I will:

"Donald Trump is the most grotesque, boorish, classless person ever to serve as our president...
Oddly enough, being grotesque, boorish, or classes.does not disqualify one to be President of the United States.
and anyone still supporting him is a traitor to America and to humanity."
It is not treason to be grotesque, boorish, or classless, or to support someone that is.
 
ItN, you need to look up the definition of socialism. They you need to look up historical fact as to what Nazi Germany did with private industry. You will find quite easily that you are incorrect.

Socialism is the redistribution of wealth from those who produce it to those who don't by force.

Germany Nazis implemented fascism. You still own the business, but the government tells you what you can sell, who you can employ, who you can sell to, what you can sell it for, and where you buy your raw materials from. You own the business and take all risks for owning the business, but you don't get to run it. The Nazi Party rejected communism, that other form of socialism, where the government takes the property from you and it becomes government owned outright.

Socialism can only be implemented by force. It is theft. That's why it requires an oligarchy or a dictatorship to implement it.
 
No.
Not specifically.

Isn't that spacial !

I refuse to get bogged down in terminological squabbles.

One of two things is true.

a) Either science has an alternate explanation for the Holy Bible's book of Genesis, or

b) it does not.

If it does, plug it in here.

If it does not, happy Halloween.

Okay...so you want to just throw out meaningless buzzwords and refuse to make any argument beyond a void argument.
 
You saying it, doesn't make it so.

Please pay attention to the FACT that you continue to refer to "theories".

As to how far it can be carried, is unknown.

The Theory of Creation and the Theory of Abiogenesis are both theories. Neither is a theory of science. A theory is an explanatory argument. You are talking about theories.
 
So you counter-argument is to make fun of my moniker???

I was not making fun of it. I made a legitimate observation about it.

When I was making my bones on this "sharing one's opinions" stuff...ALL opinions were shared with one's real name attached. So now people use aliases. I just think that a decent conversation should include use of a name once in a while. People without the balls to use their real names should at least use one that accommodates that courtesy.



The truth.

If you are suggesting that the truth is that the world laughed at us during the Obama administration...and has found new respect for us under the abomination, Donald Trump...either you are lying or crazy.



Obviously, you don't like Trump.

I do not dislike him. If I found him in physical danger or distress...I would immediately help him and attempt to comfort him as I would any other living thing.

I despise the fact that he is president of the United States. He is a sleazy, ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination...and should not be the face of America on the world's stage.

Echoing the sound bite news is not the Truth.

I am not echoing anything. My comments about his being a demeanor are my own.
 
The Nazis were socialists. Fascism is one of the two forms of socialism. Trump is not a socialist.

Nazism was not socialism by any stretch of today's use of the word. If you want to pretend it was...fine with me. You are not thinking clearly on this issue...so it is just one more mistake and rationalization for you to deal with.

Trump may not be a socialist. If he were...I certainly would not hold that against him. He is an ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination.
 
Oddly enough, being grotesque, boorish, or classes.does not disqualify one to be President of the United States.

Nothing odd about it. The founding fathers probably never considered the voters would ever elect someone with those qualities...so they did not define them as disqualifying.

I agree...they are not disqualifying.

Neither is bathing in horse shit...but I hope we never elect a person who bathes in horse shit.

It is not treason to be grotesque, boorish, or classless, or to support someone that is.

Donald Trump is a disgusting, grotesque, boorish, classless jerk-off...who deserves no support from people who truly love this nation or who has love for humanity.

Anyone continuing to support that abomination IS a traitor to America and to humanity.
 
I was not making fun of it. I made a legitimate observation about it.
No, you were making fun of it. You weren't even making an observation at all.
When I was making my bones on this "sharing one's opinions" stuff...ALL opinions were shared with one's real name attached. So now people use aliases. I just think that a decent conversation should include use of a name once in a while. People without the balls to use their real names should at least use one that accommodates that courtesy.
Irrelevant. Bulverism fallacy. The moniker serves as an identifier. That's enough.
If you are suggesting that the truth is that the world laughed at us during the Obama administration...and has found new respect for us under the abomination, Donald Trump...either you are lying or crazy.
Denying history again.
I do not dislike him.
Yes you do.
If I found him in physical danger or distress...I would immediately help him and attempt to comfort him as I would any other living thing.
Extreme argument fallacy.
I despise the fact that he is president of the United States.
Because you don't like him.
He is a sleazy, ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination...and should not be the face of America on the world's stage.
Not a requirement to be President of the United States. You subjective opinion is your subjective opinion.
I am not echoing anything.
Yes you are. You echoed the news media almost verbatim.
My comments about his being a demeanor are my own.
No, they aren't. You are echoing the news media.
 
Nazism was not socialism by any stretch of today's use of the word.
Yes it is. Fascism is one of two forms of socialism. The other one is communism. The acronym 'NAZI' means the National German Socialist Workers party. In the case of Germany, it was implemented via dictatorship.
If you want to pretend it was...fine with me. You are not thinking clearly on this issue...so it is just one more mistake and rationalization for you to deal with.
You like to ignore history, don't you?
Trump may not be a socialist. If he were...I certainly would not hold that against him. He is an ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination.
So you are willing to redefine history, the German language, and anything else to support socialism, eh? Trump is a conservative and a patriot. No wonder you don't like him.
 
Nope. A philosophical argument is not a theory. A theory is an explanatory argument. A philosophical argument does not explain anything. It defines and declares things and gives the reasoning for that definition or declaration.

It is a theory; but it just happens to have opposing sides, the same as "scientific theories".
 
No, you were making fun of it. You weren't even making an observation at all.

No, really, I was just making a observation.

Here's what "making fun of it" looks like: Only a fucking cowardly pussy would post the shit you post under an alias, Into the Night. Someone with balls would do it under their real name.

See the difference?


Irrelevant. Bulverism fallacy. The moniker serves as an identifier. That's enough.

As I said above!


Denying history again.

No...simply pointing out that you are full of shit regarding the world's attitude toward Barack Obama and the abomination, Donald Trump.

Yes you do.

No I do not dislike him.

Extreme argument fallacy.

Fuck you and your "extreme argument fallacy."

Because you don't like him.

You are correct, I do NOT like him. But I do not dislike him.

There is a difference. Learn it. You won't look so foolish.


Not a requirement to be President of the United States. You subjective opinion is your subjective opinion.

Okay. But stop getting so triggered. You left an "r" out.


Yes you are. You echoed the news media almost verbatim.

No I don't.

But, if you are able to produce a news media sentence like, "He is a sleazy, ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination...and should not be the face of America on the world's stage"...I'll reconsider.

No, they aren't. You are echoing the news media.

I'll wait for the link.
 
Yes it is.

No it is not.



Fascism is one of two forms of socialism. The other one is communism. The acronym 'NAZI' means the National German Socialist Workers party. In the case of Germany, it was implemented via dictatorship.

Fascism is fascism.

I'll give you that.

The rest of what you are saying is bullshit.



You like to ignore history, don't you?

Not at all.

Do you?


So you are willing to redefine history, the German language, and anything else to support socialism, eh?

I am not redefining history; I am not redefining the German language...and I am not supporting socialism. Other than that...you did get the punctuation and capitalization correct.

Trump is a conservative and a patriot. No wonder you don't like him.

I don't like him because he is a sleazy, ignorant, self-absorbed, boorish, classless abomination...and should not be the face of America on the world's stage.

I thought I mentioned that.
 
It is a theory; but it just happens to have opposing sides, the same as "scientific theories".

A theory is an explanatory argument. It does not have 'opposing sides'. A philosophical argument is not a theory. It doesn't explain anything.

A theory of science doesn't have 'opposing sides'. It has a null hypothesis and tests against that hypothesis. Science does not use voting or consensus.
 
Back
Top