User

Why do you keep asking me to define things that are already a common phrase? It means just that. If someone is going to choose to do something outside of norms that would put them in a position to have to deal with any policies or laws it might conflict with... it is on them. I don't have to figure out how to accommodate them. They put themselves in that position. I already pointed out the picture you were showing was an extreme example, so why do you keep asking me to define things like this? You continue on later to complain about my saying you are obfuscating, well, if you are going to keep engaging in these tactics whether you intended to or not, I will keep calling you out for them. Just as I can't see any other reason for what you are doing, it is a way to justify your wanting to force this trans madness onto women. Except, we were breaking this down beyond laws, bringing up what schools do too. Not everything is a law, nor needs to be. No. I won't stop talking to you. I will just keep calling out what it appears you are doing in these discussions. If you don't like that, stop posting on a public forum or change the way you post. I am laughing at how you say no, but then go on to confirm it was a yes. You are not seeking clarity when you choose to not answer the question and instead focus on something specific I didn't ask. If you don't think I am being clear, then ask. OK. When don't you? You want to keep saying my questions are too broad, like there are some kind of exceptions out there... so, can you name one? What is a traditional woman's-only space you think a trans woman has no business going into? And you are not disagreeing with me now. You are just saying you didn't say it was OK. So... is it OK? I also did not say anything about "demand" nudity either. Have you never been in a public locker room? People get undressed or will be in various stages of being undressed in them. Assume what you want, I am calling you out for what you are saying here. The fact that you don't think you are obfuscating doesn't change what you are saying. I said physical competition. Then you bring up auto racing. Then you wonder why I say you are obfuscating? You focused on boxing... do I really need to spell out every physical competition? There is a reason why we have women only categories in almost every physical sport. Everything from Tennis, Basketball, Soccer, Weight lifting, swimming, the list goes on and on and on. Not my problem. Talking about it doesn't make it my problem. I don't have to have an idea for what to do about it. This is your ruse to try to argue that because there is some extreme example, then women should be just fine with some dude with a beard wearing a dress in their bathroom. It is absurd. Nope. My position is pretty clear. It is the women's change room. The expectation is then that only women actually use it. I did, in the next sentence. OK Well, since you did not actually respond to my comment, here you are again: You can declare yourself to be anything you want, it doesn't make you that thing. This is a simple statement of reality. LOL, so you complain all this time about me using the term... then use it yourself? Not a facepalm emoji big enough... No, trans madness is simply what I call what you and others are engaged in pushing onto society right now. No one is forcing you to participate on a public forum. No, there is no agree to disagree. You are pushing a fundamentally false thing. No... you continue to push this and have yet to acknowledge what you were doing, and now you just want to move on. Why would you obfuscate? Because you have an agenda to push trans madness... So, you admit your assertion was not one of fact? No. When you post on this stuff in a thread I am interested in, I will call you out for it.

The largest is all a meaningless concept without some point of relativity. China produces more coal energy than the rest of the world combined... so bragging about producing a little bit more wind/solar power is not much of a point.

I get the feeling you have no interest in being honest. 2022 is a whole year, it was not until something like August Biden was saying it was over. Not that there were no more deaths and not that there had not been any all that year prior. And again... they were still talking about COVID deaths and COVID. Since we are talking about Canada... when did they declare this over? When did the WHO declare it over? You are focused on what Biden said.

First, COVID came in waves, not everyone was instantly exposed and infected on day 1 in 2020. Second, the vaccine was also administered over time and with boosters. Third, you continue to ignore the unvaccinated who continued to die in far greater proportions by population size. It would have been far worse without the vaccine, as was evidenced by the amount of unvaccinated that continued to die. This is such a dishonest argument. If you have a population of 10 million people and 8 million are vaccinated and then half the deaths are still with unvaccinated people... then that means you had a vastly greater instance of dying if you were unvaccinated. This has been explained to you many times now, by me and others in just the short time I have been here. And it spiked even more for the unvaccinated.

Ok, and? What do you think Sacraments are? This comes down to if you are a Christian, wouldn't you get Baptised? Yes... Wouldn't you break bread? Yes... wouldn't you repent of your sins? Yes... These are the outward signs of grace, your belief in Christ. Do you not believe Christians should do these things? Your words: "Catholicism teaches you need the Roman church's priest's sacraments and Mary."

No, it is not. The assertion you made was not that Catholics do pray to Mary, but that they need to. Show us the Catholic teaching that one must pray to Mary for salvation?

Holy crap man, you just got done saying vaxxed Canadians were still dropping like flies when this point was already made. Didn't you push this nonsense before? I already provided you numerous links showing otherwise. You are pulling these percentages out of thin air.

Far more serious... at what? Do you care about fighting climate change or just building a few more solar panels? China is still full speed ahead on the use of coal power. Building a few solar panels in addition to that is not being serious about climate change.

It's dishonesty by omission. People were dying because a deadly disease was killing them. Far less died because they had a vaccine that helped protect them. I don't care what you are fine with, I care about the facts. Incorrect. That is not what the data supports at all regarding the effectiveness of the vaccine.

No, clearly not serious. When they continue to expand coal power vastly more than the rest of the world...

Just amazing how you guys have no moral, ethical, or legal consistency. You just say whatever you want or can when it is politically convenient.

Unwanted forceful touching is a crime. You can't push a police officer away.

Oh yeah... so serious. New coal power plant projects in China hit the highest level in nearly 10 years, report says https://apnews.com/article/china-coal-power-plant-carbon-climate-change-ba86e7584e3afe1826eed5cffa25354a "BEIJING (AP) — China’s power industry began construction on nearly 100 gigawatts of new coal plant capacity last year, the most in nearly a decade, a report from two clean-energy groups said Thursday."

OK, and? This is now some conspiracy that Trump was born on the same day the Army was created?

Show us this teaching you are talking about. This is not what is taught at all.

You asserted this, for sure... doesn't change the facts. Here you go, NPR: Girkin, 44, is a Russian citizen from Moscow and a former colonel in the Federal Security Service, or FSB. He prefers being called by a nickname he chose for himself — Strelkov, which is Russian for "shooter." Analyst Boris Kagarlitsky says Girkin became an important figure in the separatist movement in eastern Ukraine because Kremlin planners didn't have a well-thought-out strategy for Russia's involvement there. "They just wanted to control the situation," Kagarlitsky says, "especially when it dealt with people who were part of their own team, like Girkin, who definitely was sent to Ukraine by Russian Intelligence, and he doesn't deny that fact. And then, because of the lack of very clear ... plan, he started making decisions on his own." https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/01/06/372872870/the-russian-who-claims-credit-for-fanning-the-flames-in-ukraine

You are still pushing this lie. Just as many unvaccinated were dying in 2022 and when you factor in that Canada had a high rate of vaccination... that doesn't make it better for the unvaccinated.

Well, when you dissect comments and create large responses... it takes time.

No lie. Russia's Igor Strelkov: I Am Responsible for War in Eastern Ukraine https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/11/21/russias-igor-strelkov-i-am-responsible-for-war-in-eastern-ukraine-a41598 "If our unit hadn't crossed the border, everything would have fizzled out — like in [the Ukrainian city of] Kharkiv, like in Odessa," Strelkov, who uses that nom-de-guerre meaning "Shooter" to replace his last name Girkin, was quoted as saying. "There would have been several dozen killed, burned, detained. And that would have been the end of it. But the flywheel of the war, which is continuing to this day, was spun by our unit. We mixed up all the cards on the table," he said." Not being a Russian state-sanctioned paper is your big argument? LOL That doesn't change the facts. It only further proves you are pushing Russian propaganda.

All in the thread that day saying he was shot: You called him a traitor, when called out for your political posturing said to person to F off, speculating on it being an inside job, calling him an authoritarian dictator... Stay classy!

Easy... it is a dude that looks like a lady. You want to throw out all common sense here for the most extreme example. This is why we just set the rule that men use men's facilities and women use women's facilities. If a man or woman does such a good job as pretending to be something they are not, it is on them. You don't understand the difference between laws and policy? The point was clear. You are obfuscating by being hyper-specific to avoid the point. Men do not belong in women's spaces and vice versa. LOL, so first you say no, but then you go on to say it could be your main argument. Then you go on to answer my other questions in the affirmative. Because you keep being hyper-specific to avoid answering. Glad you finally did here, that you are OK with dudes going into women's spaces. Which, to my earlier point, is why I was calling you out for posting such silly pictures and making your arguments about opposing federal laws... when at the end of the day, you are just fine with dudes in women's spaces. We are going to fundamentally disagree here, in that women should feel safe and confident in a changing room, that they won't have a male in there with them getting naked and exposing themselves or seeing them as they might be in various stages of undressing. I care about this because women do too. Women have complained about the madness of forcing these dudes into their spaces. See, this is the obfuscation I am talking about. You hyper focus on boxing. So, you are just fine with men beating women in every other physical competition? My point is the same as above, if someone wants to alter themselves and their appearance to the extreme point they look convincingly like something they are not, it is their problem. Not mine. If you walk around covered in body piercings and tattoos, you don't get to complain that people stare at you and treat you differently. More obfuscation. If they are both-sex bathrooms, that is not a woman's space. That was not my assertion. You can declare yourself to be anything you want, it doesn't make you that thing. This is a simple statement of reality. You are avoiding this because it is more obfuscation so you can avoid having to admit the truth because you support the trans madness. Nope. Yeah, I know what I said, but you still refuse to acknowledge that you were interjecting crap about me personally that is irrelevant. If I sit here characterizing you as being an emotional cry baby... does that add anything to the discussion? No. We agreed to keep things to the points being made, not make it personal. You forget that? That which can be asserted without facts, evidence, or logic can be rejected without it as well.

How quickly you forget the crap you were posting the day Trump was shot... Give me a break with this stuff.

OK... so what? If there are any former slaves alive today, lets compensate them.

Its the Army's 250th birthday. I guess they can't ever celebrate anything like that ever again because of your hate for Trump.

Yes, you are regurgitating Russian lies.