The Pitters' Place

I feel like reminiscing.

I think my favorite was the claim that if you really love someone, you will never want them to change anything about themselves. This extends all the way to the idea that if your spouse becomes a drug addict or alcoholic, you shouldn't seek to help them, because that's just being selfish and wanting them to change for you. If you really love them you will accept them for who they are.

Stop talking bad about Chx!! She defended me against Chuppah!! I'm going to spank you! Get it? Spanking? Get it??

Seriously chick was crazy.

Dr_Liszt wrote: I'm going to spank you! Get it? Spanking? Get it??

Don't let Whitey find out.

1) Wetlands are bad for genetic diversity.

2) The actions of one branch of the Salvation Army somewhere in the wilderness of British Columbia = Salvation Army policy.

3) Christian Domestic Discipline, a web site set up and maintained by Christian women who like to get a little kinky in the bedroom, is a sign of Christian men abusing their wives.

4) "What kind of Christian are you?"

Gendo wrote:

Dr_Liszt wrote: I'm going to spank you! Get it? Spanking? Get it??

Don't let Whitey find out.

She'll be appropriately spanked for this. I will take any chance I get to place my hand on her butt.

Another crazy Chx thing. Insulting the recently deceased grandmothers of posters for being religious in their last days.

Water and ice and everything nice. Ya? In other words, that thing about water existing in three different states or something.

Oh and your kid will totally decide to go to the dentist if give them a choice. And boob feeding your kid till they are 6 us totally not icky.

This one's a little complex:

Once during a discussion of "is God a man?" I pointed out that in general, "gender" is a biological concept that applies only to biological organisms. As God is not an organism, God cannot be "male" or "female".

HarvardLawGuy misread or misunderstood something about my argument and said I was wrong because some organisms do not have a gender. Chx jumped all over that with "see Gendo, HLG just showed that you're stupid and wrong and stuff!" I pointed out to HLG that he was mistaken; my argument wasn't that all organisms have a gender, but rather than all things with a gender are organisms. I used the example of "just because all squares are rectangles doesn't mean that all rectangles are squares."

HLG responded with basically "oops, my mistake." Chx on the other hand refused to acknowledge that any such error had ever occurred; even to the point of putting me on ignore when I asked her if she was willing to admit that she had made an error.

Apparently in Europe a woman cannot be prosecuted for murdering someone within 2 months of giving birth because of post-natal depression.

Also English men are way prettier than English women because Peter Pevensie is more attractive than Susan Pevensie to a straight woman from California.

I remember one time having a discussion on one of the many paradoxes that can be raised by omniscience. The op's orginal post specifically said "Let's assume the Judeo-Christian god exists." I was on the side trying to reconcile free will with an omniscient being. Anyways, about twenty or thirty posts in both chx and worov jumped in to the discussion demanding proof that God exists. I claimed there's no need to provide proof since it was assumed at the beginning of the argument that God existed; they then both proceeded to call me in idiot and accused me of using circular logic.

I was labeled a pretentious Luddite for not having a cell phone when i was 14.

^pretentious Luddite