Michael Oke, II wrote: > I sincerely doubt that you are capable of explaining it in anything > other than simple terms. > Oh come now Michael! Lighten up! > I see, you don't think that there is a word to adequately describe > discrimination based on religious preference so you substituted a word > that is sure to fan the flames. Racism has nothing to do with it. > Still waiting for that magic word you imply exists. > Oh and I'm not being discriminating of any group but thanks for lumping > me in with some group that you see in the dark. Wait might that be a > pot calling the kettle black situation? I think so. > Well, 'lumping' you was only meant wind you up. Did it work? > Now how does either of your weak analogies work since I don't have a low > IQ, am not humourless nor was I born in the US? Oops. > Your IQ is low enough as to not notice that "low" denotes relativity, and you did not say relative to what. Of course your IQ is not low relative to a dog. No one who lacks sense of humour will admit it.
_______________________________________________ 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.
