Posted on 03/18/2009 4:12:59 AM PDT by Colofornian
LOL
LL, because you claim to be a lawyer, I expect you to know what you mean when you post it...
Farbeit for me to second guess your meaning, or mindread...
I dont know you or what you mean...
By association, you are pigeonholed, however...
;)
As far as your other question, I do not approve of in-vitro fertilization. I think it is creating human life knowing full well it will die. To me, that is murder.
This is a personal opinion, as there are no Scriptures that reference in-vitro. Since, though, life begins at conception, those embryos created that will be thrown away are being murdered.
If you were half as smart as you think you are, you’d be dangerous.
The sentence, “I don’t believe in abortion,” can be interpreted in more than one way — as can many English sentences. It can mean “Abortion is against my belief system,” or “I don’t believe abortion occurs.” When a word or phrase is capable of more than one interpretation, reasonably intelligent people use context clues to decide which meaning is intended. My meaning was clear. Especially since the second meaning is ridiculous.
But you, thinking you are oh, so clever, and without provocation, hop on the other meaning because, well, you can’t resist a chance to take a mean-spirited jab at a Mormon. That defines you and your brand of “Christianity.” This most recent post is also fairly typical of your arguments.
Thanks for your answer.
Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal."
Okay. I thought the posts leading up to my final response were “making it personal,” and without any provocation. But, you’re the moderator, so I will comply.
See, e.g., Post #25: “For a lawyer, you dont [sic] seem to be good at sematics [sic]...”
Posts like this are doing Obama's work for him.
Also, even if provoked, two wrongs do not make a right.
My belief if baptism is essential for salvation that negates the death bed conversion.
But, don’t you realize that one of the purposes of FR is to make sure that no Mormon has the temerity to call himself a “Christian,” and, as an extension of that, to make sure that no Mormon has the gall to think he can be President?
Thanks for the explanation. And I will comply. The “two wrongs” business is a bit of a conundrum, though, don’t you think. I certainly taught it to my children. But when the Republicans act nice in the face of snarky Democrats, we accuse them of not fighting back. Ah, well. LOL. This thread is just full of unanswerable questions.
So now you introduce religion ???
How can you accuse me of “introducing” religion on a thread titled “LDS Beliefs in Focus,” which was posted by an Anti-Mormon, and on which religious views on various questions are being discussed?
I’m not wasting any more time with you today. That’s a little gift I’m giving myself.
IMO, if you are going to disrespect Jim Robinson's home, you should at least ping him.
Additionally, from the RM yesterday, "Anti-FR behavior will get a poster pinched, newbies sooner than oldtimers, but it is still considered trollish.
234 posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:49:09 PM by Religion Moderator
Jim has posted his reasons many times for seeing Romney as a RINO, and his reasons have nothing to do with Mitt's mormonism.
He allows mormon proselytizing on this site, and in turn allows rebuttal of mormon claims.
For FReepers who have a problem with that, there are closed threads on which no debate is allowed.
You posted #25 and it doesn't say anything like that.
Did you mean something else?
The Mormon “proselytizing” as you call it, is simply an effort to present our side of the story. If you and your ilk would stop the Mormon-bashing, and accept us as your allies and equals in the fight against the Leftist threat, there would be no pro-Mormon threads posted. We have enough in common that it serves no earthly purpose to keep picking at the differences.
I, for one, cannot imagine why religious threads are allowed on FR. They only create division and undermine the primary purpose of this site, which is to promote conservatism. The fact that you and your ilk have been permitted to carry on your non-stop anti-Mormon campaign has been the reason I have diverted my donations elsewhere.
But this is JR’s decision to make, whatever his reasons.
Sorry. I looked at the bottom of the post. It is #39. It was responding to #25.
There ya go again...
No problem. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.