All Activity

Yesterday you learned what a majority opinion was and how it is distinct from other opinions. Today you learned that the judicial branch does indeed make law--case law. Busy week! Now for hierarchy of laws. Constitutional law is the ultimate authority. Statutory law will never trump constitutional law, no matter how it's written. Who interprets the constitution? The judicial branch--in this case SCOTUS is the ultimate authority. 5 Justices signed a majority opinion endorsing the plain and accurate reading of the 14th amendment. That has the force of law and constrains the other branches of government. No statutory law can undo that determination. Therefore no real path forward for ending birthright citizenship other than a constitutional amendment.

What military officials?? Why is it that whatever Israel says is instantly factual?

After you encouraged me to use my eyes and knowledge of history just like you? No surprise there.

He can't because his outrage over our noncompliance has him confused and disoriented. eyeballs would rather point fingers than defend his pseudoscience.

Then feel free to actually respond to something I said instead of making crap up.

No, I can only point out where you didn't...so far anyway.

So… can you show me where I did that? Or nah?

No, please look up - you all need to pull your heads out of each other's asses. I use personal attacks because you encourage it. Try being honest for once - you'd be surprised over how civil I really am.

No, it's why Craig Ladyman wants people to vote for him. ROCKFORD, Mi. – A candidate for a seat on the Rockford, Michigan school board in this town of approximately 6,000, located ten miles north of Grand Rapids, went onto far-right social media platform Truth Social founded by former President Trump and shared a graphic collage of the Progress Pride flag converted into a Nazi-style swastika.“Like my new Pride flag?” candidate Craig Ladyman captioned the now-deleted post. Craig Ladyman? LMAO!

Of course I believe it. You think humans control the weather, don't you. lol

Why did you ever think he was going to do anything other than f&ck things up worse than they were?

I notice you haven't called out Deluge. Silence is complicity as the saying goes.

Show me where I did that.

Sure, and when we try to engage you people, using the same things you rely on, your own eyes and history, you still fall back on personal attacks. Denial overrules absolutely everything.

You should send your Canadian military to Gaza, full deployment, everything you have, to root out Hamas and maintain the peace there. See how that works out for you. Interesting. So... when did you feel sorry for them?

Keep it down, a$$hole. Remember, nobody gives a shit.

1. It makes sense; you're a moonbat, so it's obvious that trees going down offends you deeply. The problem is the rest of the world needs to keep going, despite your tears and full diapers. 2. What fazes me is a$$holes who fight civilization and progression. I know you'd rather have the third-world throughout the world, but I wouldn't; in fact I hate that idea.

Don't you care how many French people die every year from the cold?

Facts are facts. Truth, logic, and reason are not overruled just because an Expert says something. This is the illogical game you guys play to avoid having to engage yourselves, instead, you just fall back on "experts" and an argument from authority and in this case you threw in some personal attacks.

It's funny as hell. Looks good on the Maga Clowns. LOL 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

The core of it is an arrogance that you know more than an expert. Humility is unknown to them. Their self image seems to come from Dodge Ram Tough ads...

"Notice it says God was manifest in the flesh... This is a critical verse to prove to Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus is God." You've explained why you believe the KJV reading is theologically stronger. You have not demonstrated that it is textually original. Those are different questions. "A vast number of manuscripts use the word God and only a few... have the word he." That's the Majority Text argument. It is not proof that the minority reading is corrupt. Critical Text scholars argue that an earlier reading preserved in fewer manuscripts can still be original if later scribes expanded or clarified the wording during transmission. You may disagree with that conclusion, but that is the debate. "There was no excuse to change it." That assumes the conclusion. Critical Text scholars would say they didn't change the text. They believe they are restoring an earlier reading based on the manuscript evidence. You haven't demonstrated that their conclusion is wrong, only that you disagree with it. "This makes it far more difficult to convince a JW that Jesus is God." Whether a reading is more useful in defending a doctrine has no bearing on whether it is the original reading. Theological usefulness is not evidence of textual originality. "Acts 8:37... Modern versions leave this verse out." Again, you've explained why you believe the verse is doctrinally important. You have not demonstrated that Luke originally wrote it. Critical Text scholars omit it because they argue it was added later as a baptismal confession and is absent from many of the earliest Greek manuscripts. You may reject that conclusion, but that is a textual argument, not evidence of corruption. The discussion isn't whether these variants exist. The discussion is whether your preferred readings are demonstrably original and the alternative readings demonstrably corrupt. So far you've argued why you prefer the KJV readings, but you haven't demonstrated that the competing readings are corrupt rather than simply different conclusions reached through a different textual methodology.