Fischer was a one-hit-wonder..!

  • #241

    Wasn't aware you had non-theistic affiliations and that wouldn't get under my skin at all. You're operating under a stereotype. People are much more interesting when you realize they're individuals and don't all think alike

  • #242

    i hate it when people get agitated if i bring god into the discussion, but then turn and try to say it is our views on deity, religion, etc., that is the reason for our differences....

    .....i guess people with double standards think they are better than us who have less ?....beisdes, i thought we werent supposed to discuss religion in the forums....

  • #243
    Psalm25 wrote:

    Ah, I see that you are a member of the RLS (Royally Lame Society.) That explains everything. Our assistant manager will escort you to the door. If you walk two blocks west, you will have no trouble acquiring a cab. Thank you for your cooperation.

    Psalm25 wrote:

    Wasn't aware you had non-theistic affiliations and that wouldn't get under my skin at all. You're operating under a stereotype. People are much more interesting when you realize they're individuals and don't all think alike

     

    Uh oh. Someone look up "hypocrisy" in the dictionary....

  • #244

    Not so. Check the Royally Lame Society's mission statement. If you weren't in agreement with it, why would you join the RLS?

    Button up your coat; it's cold outside! And that wind's blowing from the west. Fortunately, you'll be in a nice, warm comfy cab in no time.

    Cheerio!

  • #245
    Psalm25 wrote:

    Not so. Check the Royally Lame Society's mission statement. If you weren't in agreement with it, why would you join the RLS?

    Button up your coat; it's cold outside! And that wind's blowing from the west. Fortunately, you'll be in a nice, warm comfy cab in no time.

    Cheerio!

    Just like you are in agreement with certain things when you join a religion?

    You seem to want it both ways of course...it ok for you to apply group affiliations to other people, but not ok when it is applied to you.

    There is a word for that.

  • #246
    Ubik42 wrote:
    Psalm25 wrote:

    Ah, I see that you are a member of the RLS (Royally Lame Society.) That explains everything. Our assistant manager will escort you to the door. If you walk two blocks west, you will have no trouble acquiring a cab. Thank you for your cooperation.

    Psalm25 wrote:

    Wasn't aware you had non-theistic affiliations and that wouldn't get under my skin at all. You're operating under a stereotype. People are much more interesting when you realize they're individuals and don't all think alike

     

    Uh oh. Someone look up "hypocrisy" in the dictionary....

    Just did. Why is Ubik's picutre there??

  • #247
    Ubik42 wrote:

    C'mon Psalms, we know its my non-theistic affiliations that really get under your skin.

    When it comes to that kinda' thing, I prefer to remain unaffiliated.

  • #248

    Never agreed when I became a Christian to have those with non-theistic affiliations get under my skin. That's where your argument falls apart. Not aware of your stereotypical presumption being a tenet of any religion for that matter. So your claim of hypocrisy is totally without foundation. But don't let that stop you from indulging in shallow and intellectually-lazy stereotypes.

    Ah, I see a cab heading toward you.

    Take care:)

  • #249

    Wolf dressed as lamb. Day of reckoning approaches...

  • #250

  • #251

    Just re-read your post and am amazed at your lack of understanding. If a characteristic of a group affiliation is accurate (I.e. in its mission statement, charter or other founding document), I see no reason why it can't be applied. The problem is your chacterization of my group affiliation is not accurate but is based on a stereotype, something that intellectually-lazy people rely on when they can't do their own research or think for themselves.

    As your position is now busted, I have no interest in playing out a king + queen vs. king endgame.

    I'll simply wave goodbye as your cab pulls away and wish you the very best:)

  • #252

    Play King's gambit & head for Macdonalds instead then?

  • #253
    Psalm25 wrote:

    Just re-read your post and am amazed at your lack of understanding. If a characteristic of a group affiliation is accurate (I.e. in its mission statement, charter or other founding document), I see no reason why it can't be applied. The problem is your chacterization of my group affiliation is not accurate but is based on a stereotype, something that intellectually-lazy people rely on when they can't do their own research or think for themselves.

    As your position is now busted, I have no interest in playing out a king + queen vs. king endgame.

    I'll simply wave goodbye as your cab pulls away and wish you the very best:)

    1. Get caught in the act.

    2. Declare victory.

    3. ????????

    4. Profit!

  • #254

    Your accusation of hypocrisy has already been disproven to anyone with eyes to see. Further discussion is pointless.

  • #255

    @netzach - Let me guess. You're a member of the Royally Lame Society as well? Yes, I play the King's Gambit, but no, I don't go to NcDonald's. You're batting 50 percent. Congrats! Have a nice day!:)

  • #256

    Bad weather this year.

  • #257
    netzach wrote:

    Bad weather this year.

     Kinda cloudy.

Top
or Join

Online Now