SkyHigh

You quoted the wrong person. Guess you get the Gold for illiteracy

No one in their right mind would believe the bible over science on anything in which science is relevant. Yes many very intelligent people believe in God (not the same god you pretend to worship) but no geneticist regardless of his religious beliefs thinks we descended from Adam and Eve. As for as the idea of a higher being, there are zero conflicts with science, as science does not way in on the supernatural because science deals exclusively with things that can be quantified, measured etc,.. Reasonable, well read, Christians have no need to deny science, unfortunately you are not reasonable, well read (you literally told me you have never read a book by a qualified scientist on the theory of evolution, in fact claimed that there was no such thing) or a Christian

Once again you show your complete ignorance to what science is and does. The only ones that would ever say " people think science is infallible" , are those who lie about science to con simpletons like you for their own profit. Science is by definition provisional (you can google what that means). That is why science is an exponentially better way to truth, than the fictional book(or books) you pretend guide you. Why? Because science can and has changed, it's why we know the earth is spherical and not a flat surface covered by a firmament, like the bible says But please find me any legitimate scientist that has made any claim even resembling "science is infallible" but we both know you won't

If you put aside the whole sovereignty thing.( I personally don't think he really wanted an independent Québec, but used the movement to help polarize the people around his vision, but what do I know hahaha) René Lévesque was an amazing politian, just for the campaign financing laws he introduced alone.

That's a bad joke even for you, I'll give you another chance. You can do it Gilligan!

Again I could shoot fentanyl in my eye ball and still run intellectual circles around you Again I never even suggested abortion was good in fact I said the complete opposite, this is a question of government overreach. Normal people do not say that, murder has a specific definition under the law and abortion does not meet those criteria. You're arguing against the constitution by thinking that your religious beliefs should be the law of the land. Again I don't really care about the circus that is American politics, all I know is that my stocks are doing great. You're not up to speed on anything but maybe you should look into the organizations you use to defend your "moral" (used quotes because I don't think you actually have a moral code) opinions because they're batshit crazy. Again with the unsupported insults , who are these degenerates that I'm supposedly associated with? Again still waiting on one example, of anything I've ever posted on here that qualifies me as a left-wing psychopath .

If I was anyone it would be the professor. But good try Gilligan

P.S soy milk in a smoothie is actually very good

The only people that say "abortion is murder" is right wing, religious, nutbar , zealots. Are you arguing for a theocracy ? Wait, didn't you post an article from the heritage foundation? Are they not the progenitors of project 2025? So, you think the government should be involved in personal medical decisions and don't support the first amendment, what exactly do you stand for? As far as an ass kicking. Son, all you've done is throw ridiculous accusations at me without even trying to support them, were this a real ass kicking contest, you might as well be a double amputee, cause you got nothing you sad little man

Another great example of why there should be mandatory training for fire arms in the U.S. Dude couldn't shoot for shit.

I accept your surrender But just for fun, I said that personally I didn't agree with it but this is a question of government reach into our lives, what are your thoughts on that? You need to get off your morale high horse, your orange leaders spiritual advisor had to step down because he admitted to inappropriate sexual conduct with a minor. I'm starting to understand why you're so obsessed with pedophiles

Again, support anything you've said before demanding. En plus, I've already stated my position on the matter and nothing produced by a far right, faith based organization will sway me into letting the government be involved in those kind of personal discussions and you shouldn't want that either. A: because you claim to want to reduce the power of government and B: if you allow the government to regulate such things, when the lefties you're so afraid of take over they'll be able to have simple minded bigots like you to be castrated so the ignorance doesn't propagate. Now support an argument or admit defeat.

I wonder what it must be like living in your head (other than being spacious of course) because you're in a fantasy world. This conversation started with me simply asking you to support an argument you made and because you couldn't, you started making claims about me, which you couldn't support either. Then you "tested" me( I passed you ignored) then you "tested" me again and all you could do is argue semantics, wait do you know what semantics means? Serious question. Now you expect me to follow you down some rabbit trail and read something from the heritage foundation, the heritage foundation, seriously? Support any of your claims and quit trying to change the subject or just admit you live in a trailer, on welfare, and that this is your only outlet where people will actually interact with you. I'll figure out a topic we agree on and we could have a nice conversation and you could take a break from being so angry 😁

How about you justify calling me a left wing lunatic and a pervert ,instead of just ignoring all the times I've made you look silly,then trying to dictate what I have to talk about. How about you support any of the ridiculous crap that comes out your fat mouth. Or just continue ranting like the fool you are, which I'm sure you'll do, since we've obviously established you don't really have anything of substance to say. Do you or do you not claim to be an educator?

I'm not racist I own a color T.V But that dude is

I love how he claims the moral high ground, while calling me a pervert in the same sentence . He's funny

Yup ,blah, blah blah, talking point, blah, blah , blah, pervert, blah, blah , blah , lefty. Sad Don't you claim to be an educator?

You really have nothing to say do you? Call me a left wing lunatic without even an iota of evidence, then proceed to pepper me with questions and the best you can do is play semantics? You talk about logic with zero understanding of what it actually means. You're a sad little man. I know you're trying to own the libs(because you have nothing else) but all you're really doing is making a fool of yourself but then again, that's about all Trump and his supporters do , talk nonsense without ever actually offering any real solutions or even anything resembling rational, intelligible discours.

Believe you me, I don't. He's just a contrarian that thinks that juvenile, petty insults on some random anonymous forum makes him a big man. Today was fun though, I had him defending Trudeau. Hahaha

If you can't find Trudeau saying that it would be the last "first past the post" or FPP election ,since you obviously didn't understand because that's all I've been talking about this whole time. Well? I don't know what to tell you

What are you talking about, there are minimum levels based on seats in the house not based on popular vote and it is of course at the discretion of the government to add members of other parties to commissions. You should get off your high "horse" because everyone else can see it's just an old, tired, broken down, jackass

First the system that was "unpopular" was not the system he sold to the voters and not the system they thought they were getting. I said Politicians exaggerate their plans , you went on to argue the sincerity of campaign promises. One of the major reasons the PQ did so poorly in the last election is they put the question of sovereignty aside going against one of the founding principles of the party. That the leader of said party says he's going to hold a referendum to garnish votes, in no way implies that either Quebecers want to separate, or that there's even a chance of an actual referendum. But no you're logic is sound and I'm definitely the one lacking the intellectual capabilities to carry on this conversation. Si on veut vraiment parler de les enjeux de Québec on devrait le faire en français, oh wait j'ai oublié vous êtes même pas capable de communiquer dans la langue de la majorité du peuple vous prétendez comprends.

Just to be clear, your contention is that the neo-liberal head of Canada's "natural governing party" who enters every federal election with a distinct advantage was sincere about making it harder for his party to be elected? And more importantly having a majority?

He ran on proportional representation, then proposed nothing more than a modified FPP model (he didn't even set up the parliamentary commission based on the popular vote of the election that had just happened). Those that are proponents of election reform are mostly leftists from fringe parties and the idea that they were content with how Trudeau handled that is ludacris at it's face But please continue arguing for Justins integrity, I find it amusing

That's why I was so offended by you calling me American, your just racist against people who enjoy the delicacy of some delectable Jr mints But to quote a great Canadian band "American women stay away from me"