Political memes, Posters, Funny Pics, Etc.

[89Hen]

you believe in some forms of charlatanism and not others

So you're saying it's all or nothing for you. I tend to see shades of grey. Must be terrible to live in your black and white world.

[Chizzang]

you believe in some forms of charlatanism and not others

So you're saying it's all or nothing for you. I tend to see shades of grey. Must be terrible to live in your black and white world.

the unanswered question above...?



regarding my world:
I simply don't "want to believe in something" whereas you want to believe
the more illogical and fantastical the less I subscribe to it - I try to remove the "want"
and focus less on the desired outcome and more on the process

[89Hen]

So you're saying it's all or nothing for you. I tend to see shades of grey. Must be terrible to live in your black and white world.

the unanswered question above...?



regarding my world:
I simply don't "want to believe in something" whereas you want to believe
the more illogical and fantastical the less I subscribe to it - I try to remove the "want"
and focus less on the desired outcome and more on the process

Again, you think I somehow have a vested interest in Kenneth Copeland?

I do think there are shades of charlatanism. You don't.

The only question I saw was "was JJ a murderer" to which I answered yes. Then you posted an article that agreed with me. What did I miss?

[Winterborn]

[Winterborn]

[Chizzang]

the unanswered question above...?



regarding my world:
I simply don't "want to believe in something" whereas you want to believe
the more illogical and fantastical the less I subscribe to it - I try to remove the "want"
and focus less on the desired outcome and more on the process

Again, you think I somehow have a vested interest in Kenneth Copeland?

I do think there are shades of charlatanism. You don't.

The only question I saw was "was JJ a murderer" to which I answered yes. Then you posted an article that agreed with me. What did I miss?

I think that a charlatan should be held responsible for his rhetoric
particularly if he is actively persuading people to behave in a manner that is dangerous to their health or others

You think that is a gray area
and to me that type of behavior is a form of "endangerment" and should be liable
Healthy adults call that behavior "lying"

[kalm]

Again, you think I somehow have a vested interest in Kenneth Copeland?

I do think there are shades of charlatanism. You don't.

The only question I saw was "was JJ a murderer" to which I answered yes. Then you posted an article that agreed with me. What did I miss?

I think that a charlatan should be held responsible for his rhetoric
particularly if he is actively persuading people to behave in a manner that is dangerous to their health or others

You think that is a gray area
and to me that type of behavior is a form of "endangerment" and should be liable
Healthy adults call that behavior "lying"

Sshhhhh. I think he just admitted the Catholic Church is a form of charlatanism on some level. That’s a huge step and I’m damn proud of him.

[89Hen]

Again, you think I somehow have a vested interest in Kenneth Copeland?

I do think there are shades of charlatanism. You don't.

The only question I saw was "was JJ a murderer" to which I answered yes. Then you posted an article that agreed with me. What did I miss?

I think that a charlatan should be held responsible for his rhetoric
particularly if he is actively persuading people to behave in a manner that is dangerous to their health or others

You think that is a gray area
and to me that type of behavior is a form of "endangerment" and should be liable
Healthy adults call that behavior "lying"

You're a fucking tool and you got owned. Sorry you're such a bad fisherman.

[89Hen]

I think that a charlatan should be held responsible for his rhetoric
particularly if he is actively persuading people to behave in a manner that is dangerous to their health or others

You think that is a gray area
and to me that type of behavior is a form of "endangerment" and should be liable
Healthy adults call that behavior "lying"

Sshhhhh. I think he just admitted the Catholic Church is a form of charlatanism on some level. That’s a huge step and I’m damn proud of him.

It is... to folks like you. I get that.

[Chizzang]

I think that a charlatan should be held responsible for his rhetoric
particularly if he is actively persuading people to behave in a manner that is dangerous to their health or others

You think that is a gray area
and to me that type of behavior is a form of "endangerment" and should be liable
Healthy adults call that behavior "lying"

You're a fucking tool and you got owned. Sorry you're such a bad fisherman.

Where did that come from..?
I'm just trying to get a straight answer about charlatanism and it's accountability
I'm perfectly cool with you thinking it has zero accountability

[89Hen]

You're a fucking tool and you got owned. Sorry you're such a bad fisherman.

Where did that come from..?
I'm just trying to get a straight answer about charlatanism and it's accountability
I'm perfectly cool with you thinking it has zero accountability

How did you get that? I agreed Jim Jones was a murderer. That was the only question you asked, and even though I answered it, here we are.

Is what Kenneth Copeland did on level footing with JJ? Would a court find it criminal in action? You find it condemning, but you are the same type of person who would chastise a person for believing a religion other than their own was wrong. I find that satisfyingly rich.

[Chizzang]

Where did that come from..?
I'm just trying to get a straight answer about charlatanism and it's accountability
I'm perfectly cool with you thinking it has zero accountability

How did you get that? I agreed Jim Jones was a murderer. That was the only question you asked, and even though I answered it, here we are.

Is what Kenneth Copeland did on level footing with JJ? Would a court find it criminal in action? You find it condemning, but you are the same type of person who would chastise a person for believing a religion other than their own was wrong. I find that satisfyingly rich.

I'll refresh:
UNI88 said that what Copeland did was fraud or endangerment
You responded to his post by saying it was "a gray area at best"

Which got me interested in that "gray area"
so I brought up Jim Jones as an extreme example so we could find the non-gray area and work backward

Presently I'm attempting to understand moving backward form Jim Jones
Where is the line of accountability for behavior manipulation ?

then you flipped out and called me names
and here we are

[CID1990]

Televangelists cure cancer every day and now that they cure COVID y’all mad


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grizzaholic]

Ron would not approve.

[CID1990]

Ron would not approve.

Both of them are


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

Televangelists cure cancer every day and now that they cure COVID y’all mad

Transvangelists should be a protected class.

[89Hen]

How did you get that? I agreed Jim Jones was a murderer. That was the only question you asked, and even though I answered it, here we are.

Is what Kenneth Copeland did on level footing with JJ? Would a court find it criminal in action? You find it condemning, but you are the same type of person who would chastise a person for believing a religion other than their own was wrong. I find that satisfyingly rich.

I'll refresh:
UNI88 said that what Copeland did was fraud or endangerment
You responded to his post by saying it was "a gray area at best"

Which got me interested in that "gray area"
so I brought up Jim Jones as an extreme example so we could find the non-gray area and work backward

Presently I'm attempting to understand moving backward form Jim Jones
Where is the line of accountability for behavior manipulation ?

then you flipped out and called me names
and here we are

OK revisionist. Go back and read again from where I chimed in. Had something to do with public hangings, satan, etc...

[Chizzang]

I have revised nothing - you were responding to a UNI88 post directly
and that began our discussion about the accountability of charlatanism in earnest



its plain to see

[89Hen]

I have revised nothing - you were responding to a UNI88 post directly
and that began our discussion about the accountability of charlatanism in earnest



its plain to see

Weird. Apparently 88 changed his name to Chizzang on the post to which I responded that started this line.

[Chizzang]

I have revised nothing - you were responding to a UNI88 post directly
and that began our discussion about the accountability of charlatanism in earnest



its plain to see

Weird. Apparently 88 changed his name to Chizzang on the post to which I responded that started this line.

You do not see the post from UNI88 that you quoted and then responded to..?



I find that suspicious

[89Hen]

So have public hangings...

Almost sounds like you're against free speech and freedom of religion.

No Cleets, I don't see that one. I see ^

[Chizzang]

So... on the previous page
You do not see your post where you quote UNI88 and respond to his statement ?

[UNI88]

This one?

It's definitely foolish and at some point, it becomes fraud and/or endangerment.

That's a very grey area at best.

[89Hen]

So... on the previous page
You do not see your post where you quote UNI88 and respond to his statement ?

Yes, several posts after you and I started in on this.

[Ivytalk]

So... on the previous page
You do not see your post where you quote UNI88 and respond to his statement ?

Yes, several posts after you and I started in on this.

Take it outside, you two. At least 6 feet apart.