You heard her, she’ll be back on Halloween…
I don’t rape children - or other human beings. I don’t molest them, I don’t abuse them, I don’t sexually assault them, I don’t do as I please with no regard for their feelings.
BWAHAHAHAHA. Oh, my sides. Be a good little guai lo and go read page one.
I wonder how in the world there’s anything hypocritical about bringing (among other things) consent into it, but for me to honestly ask that I’d have to believe you were sincere in your post, and I don’t believe that to be the case.
Actually, yeah, that’s true. IMO There’s nothing wrong, in and of itself, with the attraction. What IS wrong, and what is criminal (and I hope it always is) is child rape. That’s child i.e. someone who is not an adult, and rape ie not consenting. Children aren’t built to have sex at five years old. The difficulty of course is in the fact that people who have a desire to be sexually active with children tend not to sufficiently suppress that desire.
They are criminals because they’re broken the law. And nobody is allowed to have sex with children.
Well, if we don’t, there’s the fairly standard way of showing us: incontrovertible proof. That would be proof sustained by still other proof sustained by yet more proof. The Bible, I’m afraid, simply doesn’t cut it.
It’s not disagreement but willful ignorance. You know that. Why do you continue to post and pretend otherwise? How many times have we told you this?
Oh, of course you could. Simply don’t press the “submit reply” button.
By the way … in CJ’s now-locked thread you made a comment about Bible-based faith and such. If you could email me (iampunha at netscape dot net) I think I have a way to show you why basing your entire life on one book can be a very dangerous proposition. Then again, if you don’t have the time, that’s fine.
Not if it happens to be the word of God which I believe it is.
Thanks for the offer, but no thanks.
Vanilla, the reason I called you two faced is that you go to the other board and talk like you believe what the Bible says about certain hot subjects, then I see you come here and it appears you’re saying the opposite. It seems kind of like you can’t make up which side of the fence you want to be on. It looks like you want to be popular on whatever board you’re on. If I’m mistaken, well I’m just saying that’s the impression I get. There’s more I’d like to say to you specifically but not here and you won’t answer pm’s unless they’re pleasing to you it seems, so there you go.
And I won’t agree with your diatribes against jersey.
Um, why are you calling a (presumably) Korean guy a “white ghost”? Moreover, why are you using a Cantonese insult to a Korean? In addition, I trust you know that “guai lo” is a quite rude racial epithet aimed at white guys?
Stick with “shiphal kaeseki” which is Korean for “fucking son of a bitch.”
Now you are getitng snakry, Lynn.
I didn’t think you had asked me a question on the pm or I would have replyed.
Disagree all you want about Jersey, you both have the same mind set, like anyone who agrees with you on everything.
Well, Monty and I disagree on religion, but we still like each other.
I have never posted anywhere to be popular, on the “christian” board, I am not popular at all because I am not a right wing conservative.
Go figure.
As to why the gay folk seem to like me here, well, I’d let you figure it out but that would take too long(I’m funny!)
Because I don’t judge them, nor am I repulsed by them as you are.
They just people dear, I married one, ya know.
I was under the impression (evidently wrong) that the term meant not white ghost but foreigner, since that is the way it’s used there.
I guess that’ll teach me. I got it from “Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story”, though it was the movie version, not the book form The Bruce Lee Only I Knew*, which was written by his wife.
While you’re here, baqua (no idea on spelling, as it’s never given in the movie) are small ornamental mirrors used to ward off evil spirits, right? Given the presentation of guai lo in the movie, I figured I’d check before (too) casually using that term anywhere.
lynn73, if you haven’t moved on to other things, I thought you might like to know some reasons vanilla and other Christians on this board don’t get the replies you and JD get:
As strongly as vanilla believes in one thing or another in the Bible, she A) readily admits she could be wrong, B) is open to education on a variety of subjects (education here meaning nothing more than "someone else’s perspective) and C) takes less of a legalistic and more of a humanistic approach to living in the Bible’s word.
Well,it’s the Cantonese term for any white guy, and since any white guy is a foreigner (i.e. not Chinese), you’re not off by much, but the Chinese use other epithets for Asian foreigners, like calling the Japanese “short pirates” and the Koreans “stinkers.” There is a word for just foreigner, which translates to “outside country person.” In Korean, it’s “weigukin,” in Japanese it’s “gaijin,” and in Putonghua (Mandarin), it’s “weiguoren,” usually shortened to “laowei” (old foreigner), which is friendlier than it sounds.
You’ll have to ask Rjung about that word, since he’s the only Cantonese speaker I know of on this board. (Although I’m your guy for questions on Korean and Japanese). I only know “gweilo” because I spent a lot of time in Hong Kong. And the use of mirrors to repel evil spirits is widespread throughout East Asia.
no, iampunha the reason is because there are no christians on here, and I don’t come in and tell you all the word of God, which is that youre all going to hell.
Thats why I’m popular and Lynn isn’t. 
You’re popular for the same reason Pun is. You’re both terrific. 
and I know that Libertarian is a christian (Christ-like) person.
By their fruits yee shall know them.
Lib has the fruit of love and humbleness, like Seige and Polycarp too.
Group hug!!!
BWHAHAHAHA, Lib, humble?
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
away with you scoffer!
He’s right to scoff. I’m the very least among all.
No, he’s an asshole to scoff. But being an asshole is forgivable, too.
So he might have reason to suppose he is superior to many others and act all haughty. That withstanding, me scoffing at the idea Lib is humble is being an asshole? Ahh yes, Lib is the pargon of love, unless you are a handstabbing athiest. But I am the asshole, eh?
I’m about as godless as an atheist can get, but Lib has never referred to me as a “handstabber,” to my knowledge.
I don’t see him as an “asshole” either. He only gets a little overenthusiastic in advancing his arguments. This is common among Dopers, myself included.
How did this turn into another Libertarian pitting?
It jest growed that way.
so Lib is a fundie now?!!!
waiting for iampunha to run naked thru here just to finish this thread with a flourish.