What's not plausible is Haldeedoodoo being anything other than a congenital liar.

I remember in Analysis that any meaningful projection of probability (which is akin to plausibility) can only be approached when one has a meaningful handle on Possibility.

Doodooman changes ground with the frequency of a Rowboat at sea in a Hurricane.

Making any meaningful analysis of his plausibility impossible.

Thus the default position would be he lies like a Whoopie Dear Little Friend.
Or one of Chris Rock's nasty neighbors.

One of Jesse Jackson's or Van Jone's "people"?

mick

Just to save you some potential embarrassment, PADdy. You might want to consider--and I know this may have been accidental rather than intentional–you might want to consider that when you start slinging the “God” slur at Constitutional Conservationists it is a well known and long identified code for “I’m a yqueer and you won’t let me yqueeritate in the street!”

Also it ain’t our fault YoBamie is a Commie. He beat HISSELF with the Red Stick (Hey St. Denis–Baton Rouge!). His daddy beat him with the ugly one.
Stupid is as Stupid does, to quote the great 20th Century Philosophy F. Gump.
Naw, I’d say all the Clubs are in YoBama’s hand.
And the Spades.

No diamonds of course.
Hearts are still out.

Mick

boy! Happens when I am chortle-ing with gales of laughter.
CONSERVATIVES as radicals apparatchicks, ideologs! THIS from the VAN JONES FAN CLUB!! From the HEIRS of Saul Alinsky and Bill Ayers!!!
LOOK OUT, the pictures are falling OFF the WALL I'm laughing so hard!!!!! INCOMING!!!

PADdy, you ain't the pot calling the kettle "black." You is the Pot calling the tea bag POT!

PADman let me clue you in on a well known Conservative Fact that is secret only to brain dead commieqrs in denial like you.

Constitutional Conservationists, Reaganites, Radical Jeffersonians---we just want to be left alone. That's all, left alone.

So when you shove your ugly face in our space, spatter us with your rabid spittle, and...

Re. Hal's to Ms.Paddy 10:16 This a.m.

Gee Hal, wasn't your whole premise not very long ago that it was the GUNS of the NORTH, their Military Might, that settled the Law of the Land?

You mumblin out the OTHER side of your mouth now?

mick

Ms. Paddy you ain’t.

It’s a ancient premise that to get better at writing, Wrong, one reads the GOOD writers.
I suggest you go camp out at Ms. Paddy’s site and memorize everything she’s written.
Might help, couldn’t hurt.
Mick.

That sounds EXACTLY like what your Dumbolcrap Commieqr Controlled Exec and Legislative Branches are DOING RIGHT NOW!
Isn't that what happened with the Banks and Detroit and Freddy and Fannie? ACORN?

You paint the picture--Red Communism--but the Politboro, the Supreme Soviet and the Commissars of Industry are all wearing the ASShead of Dumbolcrap-Commieqrdom, Proud.
They are Dumbolcrap-Commieqr CRONY's.

So what you got to be PROUD of? The Crony Communism you claim to be depreciating?

Seems like you be hoisting yourself on your own petard, Proud.

mick

My posts drifted into a more philosophic and contemplative mood, Dante, so I am going to be nice to you just this one.
I am going to TELL you EXACTLY what you need to do to CONVINCE me to support your position that Homomarriage is a Civil Right in the SAME SENSE that Voting and Free Speech are and that it is both Unconstitutional and "homophobic" to oppose it.
THOSE are the premises inherent, implied, and intentionally inferred, by your 2:08 post.
First you are going to have to convince me that a Sexual ACT (specifically sucking your own elimination off another man’s member still you both blow your poopymixed wads into each others’ mouths) is substantially the same KIND of thing as a RACIAL Genome.
That means you are going...

Kenyatta, got me thinking with his opening of "chatter" and I placed it along side one of the arguments on the thread about "hating" yhomos.
It's the PRHOMOs I resist.
Prhomo is my "terminological exactitude".
It's meant to conjure visions not just of "pro" yhomosex", but of the IRA PROVOS--Provisional Army terrorists.

Yeah, one could argue I am "prhomo" 'bashing', based on the mere NUMBER of my engagements.
I regard it as Deconstructing Dis-cogent argument, but One man's deconstruction is the deconstructee's (on the short end of the cogency stick) "bashing."

But here's the deal. YqueerGuys, YOU CHOSE TO COME HERE AND ATTEMPT TO REFUTE JACKSON!
YOU picked the fight IN HIS rhetorical BAR!
I really don't...

One can hope. We are told the Word itself is living and active and accomplishes ITs own purposes. Shatters the rocky heart, reveals intentions, you're right, it could happen.

On a more serious note though, this is the whole thing that makes me dig in my Theological Heels (and therefore Political ones) on the Norming and Warranting and Legitimizing of Homosex by State Marriage.
I can't make the passages say anything but what they DO say, and what they appear to say is that God regards homosex as a kind of DELIBERATE Debauched, Depraved, Degenerate, IDOLATRY.

Seriously nasty and seriously serious stuff.
I kind of ultimate "NO GO" Zone.

Again, I'm enough of a Theistic Anarchist to say, "take your own risks in...

Having looked over most of the "arguments" advanced in favor of yqueermarriage on the thread, I have to say I think the Prhomos would be further ahead to simply come out in their Shirley Temple Dresses and Curls, stomp their pretty little patten leather shoe clad feet vigorously several times shrieking: “I want my Maypo! AND My homosex!” Then immediately turn, skirts awhirl, and flounce off!
They sure as Hell ain’t very good at cogent argument.
Other way might work better for em.

Mick