Keanu Reeves not touching women is a thing

CNN Entertainment ^ | June 12, 2019 | Lisa Respers France

[Bob434]

‘[[You fail, or refuse, to understand the difference between “sometimes necessary” and “always good.”]]

Still moving goalposts huh? Nothing you posted in your responses to me had ANYTHING to do with ‘sometimes’ and ‘always’ - You made the blanket statement that women buy into the ‘Satanic notion’ that women should work- period!

[[When you “refute” the argument with insults, then dishonestly accuse your interlocutor of starting the fight.]]

Oh BS- you started in with the insults fella-

[[You haven’t presented an iota of reasoned argument in support of your position;]]

You can’t be serious!? You made the implication that women aren’t supposed to work because it’s a ‘Satanic Notion’- I was the one that provided ample examples- then all you said was ‘Nuh uh’ and started in with the insults AFTER I presented those verses showing that Yes- women did indeed work in the bible- contrary to your implications!-

[[all you have done is make it personal, while accusing me of what you do.]]

You are unbelievable! The BS just flows right out of you! And that’s a simple observation- not an insult- it’s a fact- Just grow up- will ya? YOU are the one who made it person right from the start! Enough with hte BS-

[Bob434]

[[yet even here almost everyone has bought into the Satanic notion that it’s a good thing for women to work outside the home]]

Let’s go over your statement slowly- shall we? Nowhere did you mention that it’s ‘sometimes ok’ for women to work in that statement- nowhere- but now you’re implying that what you ‘Really meant’ was that it’s sometimes ok? Really?

Again- You move the goalpost AFTER you get called on an ubliblical implication you made-

Then you begin complaining about me insulting you? Nope- Wrong=- I was gonna just drop the whole issue after pointing out your implications- until you began in with your usual childish insults- Like I said you haven’t changed one iota- You get called on something- don’t like it- then lash out with insults- Nowhere did i insult you- YOU are the one who started that crap! So enough with the BS-

[[then you need to realize that you have adopted the leftwad position]]

Project much dsc? Because liberals say crap that isn’t true— get called on it- then lash out with insults while moving the goalposts in an attempt to make it look like they didn’t mean what they said in the first place— Just like you’ve done in this thread- Your ‘Oh but but but- what i really meant was... ‘sometimes necessary, not ‘always necessary’, AFTER you got called on your unbliblical implication that it’s a ‘Satanic Notion’ for women to work outside of home- is typical leftwad nonsense! to use your term! - and just like a liberal- you project-

Don’t try pullin that crap around here- it’s BS and you know it!

[dsc]

“Nowhere did you mention that it’s ‘sometimes ok’ for women to work in that statement- nowhere- but now you’re implying that what you ‘Really meant’ was that it’s sometimes ok”

I shouldn’t have to mention that. It’s bleeding obvious that there is a difference between “sometimes necessary” and “always good.” Any adult of normal intelligence should take that as stipulated.

There is no “goalpost moving” here; if you’re not bright enough see that immediately you shouldn’t be trying to debate such questions.

“Nowhere did i insult you”

This is the first insult in our exchange:

To: dsc
lol sure there isn’t- working women are tools of Satan- got it- thanks for setting us all straight!
84 posted on 6/13/2019, 11:24:10 AM by Bob434

“Your ‘Oh but but but- what i really meant was... ‘sometimes necessary, not ‘always necessary’”

Two things there: it’s not a matter of “what I really meant,” but a matter of “that’s bleeding obvious and anyone who doesn’t see it immediately is a moron.” Secondly, you have rewritten my position again; it’s not “sometimes necessary,” not “always necessary,” but “sometimes necessary, not always good.”

“AFTER you got called on your unbliblical implication that it’s a ‘Satanic Notion’ for women to work outside of home”

Is that what my position looks like seen through the filter of a room-temperature IQ? Or are you deliberately rewriting my position to turn it into something you can deal with?

What I said was, “…almost everyone has bought into the Satanic notion that it’s a good thing for women to work outside the home, instead of making a home for husband and children.”

No person of normal intelligence needs to be told that there is a difference between “a good thing” and “a necessary thing,” nor that the statement only applies to women for whom marriage is a possibility.

That’s not “moving goalposts,” it’s bleeding obvious.

Let me go even further into the obvious. What is Satanic is not a girl working while in high school or college, or even a few years after. What is Satanic is the notion that all females must seek a career in the working world in preference to marriage and motherhood. And, once again, that is not “moving goalposts,” it is something that any person of normal intelligence should perceive immediately.

“Still moving goalposts huh? Nothing you posted in your responses to me had ANYTHING to do with ‘sometimes’ and ‘always’

I didn’t explicitly state that my position is only valid on Planet Earth, either, or that I was speaking solely of homo sapiens. Your demand for explicit restatement of the obvious is unreasonable and irritating. If you can’t keep up, shut up.

“You made the blanket statement that women buy into the ‘Satanic notion’ that women should work- period!”

I said, “…almost everyone has bought into the Satanic notion that it’s a good thing for women to work outside the home, instead of making a home for husband and children.”

A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing.

Your dishonest rewriting of my position would exclude the obvious fact that it might sometimes be necessary for a woman to work, for one reason or another.

Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious.

“Oh BS- you started in with the insults fella”

Why would you tell such an obvious lie, when the written record is available for anyone to read?

“I was the one that provided ample examples”

No, those were not examples of women choosing a career over husband and children. Frankly, I’m surprised that you would choose to equate being chosen by God as a “prophestes” (I presume you meant prophetess) with choosing to pursue a career as, say, an advertising exec or a photographer.

Of all the “examples” you provided, not a single one was an example of a woman choosing a career over marriage and children. Those women were chosen by God as prophetesses, or in two or three cases chosen by God to play other roles. Thus, my reply:

To: Bob434
Even taken at face value, there is nothing in what you wrote that argues against what I said in any way.
81 posted on 6/13/2019, 11:15:51 AM by dsc (Our system of government cannot survive one-party control of communications.)

There I go with those insults, eh?

“AFTER I presented those verses showing that Yes- women did indeed work in the bible- contrary to your implications!”

Two problems there. Firstly, do you really want to call being God’s prophetess “working?” Just like being a laundry woman or a cook? And secondly, the existence of some women who worked demonstrates in no way that women choosing a career over marriage is a good thing.

“YOU are the one who made it person right from the start!”

My goodness. How could I have been so terrible as to say, “Even taken at face value, there is nothing in what you wrote that argues against what I said in any way.” How personal. How insulting. Everything you have said to me is justified by that.

And now, I’m done with this.

[Bob434]

[[And now, I’m done with this.]]

Oh no you’re not-

[[There I go with those insults, eh?]]

Are you serious? My objections had NOTHING to do with that statement- stop playing dumb-

[[My goodness. How could I have been so terrible as to say, “Even taken at face value, there is nothing in what you wrote that argues against what I said in any way.”]]

Again- stop playing dumb- it had nothing to do with that comment and you know it!

[[No, those were not examples of women choosing a career over husband and children.]]

Oh i see- moving the goalpost again- how liberal of you- NOTHING in what you originally said made mention of choosing either or- You specifically implied that women working outside the home were buying into the ‘Satanic notion’ that women can work outside the home- You made absolutely NO mention of the woman abandoning her duties in your blanket statement- MANY women juggle working outside the home with raising kids and taking care of their husbands- and the families turn out just fine-

[[Why would you tell such an obvious lie, when the written record is available for anyone to read?]]

You’re right- it is available- I never insulted you- YOU started in calling me stupid- low iq- so enough with the nonsense- Show me where i called you low iq fella!

[[Your dishonest rewriting of my position]]

The only one beign dishonest here is you- Here- I’’ repost- for the umteenth time- what you posted and what i responded to- The only dishonest one here is you- changing your intentions AFTER you got called on your unbiblical statement

[[yet even here almost everyone has bought into the Satanic notion that it’s a good thing for women to work outside the home]]

Sorry- it’s NOT ‘bleedingly obvious’ whatever the hell that means- that ‘You Meant’ something other than what you said- period- There’s no ambiguity there- That is when you had to come in and say ‘but but but- what i really meant was’-

[[A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing. A good thing.]]

[[Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious.]]

How old are you? Seriously? You’re not back-peddling out of this- I haven’t ‘dishonestly rewritten anything you’ve said- Your original statement- before you began backtracking, implied very obviously that a woman’s job, her biblical obligation, was to stay at home tending to the needs of men and children-

[[There is no “goalpost moving” here;]]

Oh yes there was- no matter how many times you deny it- You have backpeddled- you have moved the goalpost- not once, but twice now-

[[This is the first insult in our exchange:

To: dsc
lol sure there isn’t- working women are tools of Satan- got it- thanks for setting us all straight! ]]

Oh for crying out loud- You can’t be serious? That wasn’t an insult- that was simply restating your position as per your comment- period- As I mentioned before- I simply restated you original position per your post- and was gonna just drop the whole issue- leave you to your unbiblical belief- and be done with it- but nope- You started in with the insults immediately- Calling me low iq- inferring that I’m stupid- apparently because I didn’t read your mind when NOTHING you said even come close to inferring that you only meant ‘Sometimes’- If you’re attempting to turn that into an insult- then all i can say is wow!

[[And now, I’m done with this.]]

Oh no you’re not-

You aren’t done insulting others to boost your own self esteem yet- and no- that also isn’t an insult- it’s an observation of your abusive tactics both now and in the past- I have found that people with low self esteem feel the need to put others down repeatedly- they just just can’t help themselves- They have to try to make others look stupid in order to boost their over-inflated opinion of themselves- They can’t have normal civil discussions about anything really-

So no-
You aren’t ‘done with this’ yet-