Bob Calco wrote: >> Nah... that's for you repressed blokes. I get the real thing, not the >> imagery. :-) >> > > Oh, you're such a stud. > > As Jean in one of his more verbose outbursts might opine, "Yawn..." > Hey! It had a smiley, and that makes whatever I wrote before right. At least that's how you use them, don't you? (sorry, you also say "my bad" to make things right)
> No great gift of interpretation or specialized hermeneutic is required to > see through your verbal song and dance. You godless heathen like to dance > and duck around your own words. :) > We godless heathen don't need to do that, because there is no superior being we are trying to deceit. >> I'm not in tune with my animal instincts, and they don't override my >> cerebral cortex. I AM an animal so the instincts are part of ME, and >> therefore they don't need to override anything. Oh, and Pete's an ass. >> Ask any woman and she'll tell you. >> > > You are more than an animal, but until you grasp that, you'll never realize > anything more than an animal existence. > Then I'll evolve and have crusades, burn people at the stake, hang them, kill babies, etc. I don't think we are qualitatively above animals. But I can see how you do. After all you've always needed some group to look down to, be it animals, women, black people, yellow people, Muslims, ..... Oh sorry! That describes Petey your friend, but since you are friends you must share these basic tenets of personality. > So what kept you from hitting her? The TV did not make you angry. > I was angry, I expressed it (as opposed to repressed it) and hurt no one. > Whence, from such an admitted animal as yourself, did some notion of the > strong being *wrong* to attack the weak come? Didn't the bitch deserve it, > exasperating you so, but you displaced your righteous wrath on the > defenseless inanimate TV? > It came from within, as opposed to it coming from the bible or the commandments or the priest. > Talk about hypocrisy! I'm an immoralist, a sensualist, a seeker and giver of > great pleasure, an ANIMAL, I am beholden to no Christian ideals... But I > abhor the strong harming the weak. Where did that sentiment come from? > I get it, cruelty and bullying are animal traits, not human traits. Thanks. > You remind me of Hollywierd liberals who profess great love for the poor, > even vote for politicians promising to sock it to the rich... but they all > have their tax shelters and no compunction of conscience about stealing > millions from the poor in the theatres. > And you? With your professed "love" (at least what your religion officially says) and then you vomit all this hatred calling them names (Hollywierd) and generally despising them, not because of their spirits but because of their political beliefs. > Well I was just observing the fact that our OT relationship doesn't exactly > follow the Marcus of Queensbury rules, or elenchus in the purely Socratic > sense. :) > Errrhh.... It's not Marcus, it's the Marquis. But hell, I'm sure you already knew. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
