Here we go again (gay marriage)

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:09 pm

Defend it against what? Your opinion? So you can then follow up with your "omg so you are always right" zinger.

/snerk

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:11 pm

Is this where I reply with your traditional zinger:

"Harlowe seems to be your typical contrary poster. It's pointless really to discuss anything with people like that. They aren't engaged and the deliveries are dry and smell of fish."

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:19 pm

If you can't come up with anything original, sure.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:23 pm

Kulaf's still sore that he disclosed he has a sekrit identity and nobody cared.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:26 pm

If you didn't care you wouldn't bring it up.

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:35 pm

Relbeek Einre wrote:Kulaf's still sore that he disclosed he has a sekrit identity and nobody cared.

That would explain the pouty-style of the posts.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:38 pm

Beats your emotion driven drivel any day.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:47 pm

No it doesn't.

(ps I brought it up because I found the failure of your attention whoring, and your subsequent pout, to be utterly amusing.)

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:52 pm

You are right, arguments generally ending with "neener-neener" always win out over people engaging themselves.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:54 pm

Pfft. I don't pout.....and your still wondering. Which I find funny......where's Dick Fuckin Tracy when you need her?

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:59 pm

Dude. Look at you pout. Your pouty poutiness is pouteriffic.

PS Neener-neener.

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:59 pm

You are really teetering on delusional and truly underestimating this board's attention span.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:00 pm

OVERestimating, my dear Harlowe.

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:02 pm

I was thinking "underestimating this board's ability to not give a shit" and "overestimating this board's attention span".

Whoopsie.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:02 pm

I'm just amazed that Harlowe doesn't find your traditional.....defend the damsel in distress routine utterly demeaning.

Harlowe · Post by **Harlowe** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:07 pm

I must have slept through the "distress" part.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:10 pm

Yeah, me too. No, Kulaf, this was more of a "pile it on the doofus" mode. I love kicking an idiot when he's down.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:43 pm

Keep crowing Rooster boy.....one of your hens is in trouble.

When you'd like to actually discuss a priori knowledge let me know and we can stretch your mind a bit.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:53 pm

I think your attempt to throw up the "rooster" defense is a worthy deflection tactic, unfortunately, you need to have had the upper hand in the squabble with the "hen" for it to be at all effective. Without that, you just look like a beaten man, desperately lashing out pitiably to try to conceal your wounds.

And I find your use of the term "a priori" to be very awkward when we're talking about innate morality, since we're not talking about necessary vs. contingent truths.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:59 pm

Well grab your dictionary. Knowledge without benefit of experience......a priori.