ToxicBunny
Oi! Leave me out of this...
Bit of a stupid comparison Brian.. Lots of what happened to bring nazi Germany about was not democratic.If you had've lived in Nazi Germany, would you have accepted that?
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
Bit of a stupid comparison Brian.. Lots of what happened to bring nazi Germany about was not democratic.If you had've lived in Nazi Germany, would you have accepted that?
no, not nonsense - we may as well relinquish debate and resort to conversation with bots.Nonsense. They're both useful, and not. In this case clearly well researched, it certainly didn't thumb suck that answer.
I try to only use them to derive difficult to determine facts.
Bit of a stupid comparison Brian.. Lots of what happened to bring nazi Germany about was not democratic.
You're doing it again. This is starting to make you look really bad, dude.It's the secessionists who wish to inflict their desires on others, not the other way around.
Correct. And doing so peacefully involves confining yourself to make the strongest argument you can. As opposed to passing laws to force your preferred rule-set onto the unwilling.In the real world, getting more people to support the cause improves your chances of success, no matter how you believe the world should actually work.
no, not nonsense - we may as well relinquish debate and resort to conversation with bots.
It got lost in the incoming posts. Link, please?Lex - my earlier question re accepting a partial murder-ok type village - it's important, but can't go on until I get some response from you.
It got lost in the incoming posts. Link, please?
How is that relevant to the right of every individual to express his/her preference?
Not quite on the same level, so your comparison is still stupid.Lots of what's happening here is certainly not democratic - when did we have a vote on changing the law to only favour "previously disadvantaged"?
Certainly, that handicap was quite some time ago now..
Lots of what's happening here is certainly not democratic - when did we have a vote on changing the law to only favour "previously disadvantaged"?
Certainly, that handicap was quite some time ago now..
You're doing it again. This is starting to make you look really bad, dude.
That's a bad habit verging on anti-social.
When have I ever advocated to force my preferred rule-set onto anyone?
Quite the opposite, I'd much prefer people get exactly what they want and let the chips fall where they may.
Correct. And doing so peacefully involves confining yourself to make the strongest argument you can. As opposed to passing laws to force your preferred rule-set onto the unwilling.
It's not rocket science but you're kicking and screaming at the prospect others will catch on.
i can see your school reports now:
"brian can do better - must try harder"
here's an ideaI'm more careful than you think - AI makes me veeery nervous. But we have to move forward with the times too.
they dont call me "gypsy rose" for nothing.More accurate than you would think ;- )
Which law?
Right so you've changed your tune.... suddenly lexity is normal.Normal people.
We'll just have to take your word for it since you're too chicken-****... even to post google's definition.Do I like the outcome in SA? No. Do I accept it? Yes.
Huh? Put down the spliff.Right so you've changed your tune.... suddenly lexity is normal.
We'll just have to take your word for it since you're too chicken-****... even to post google's definition.
here's an idea
instead of asking a question to which you will receive a vague opinion, instead ask a direct question requesting the document that supports "x, y & z"
I do admire your "live and let live" philosophy, but how far do you take it?
For instance, if a village decided they want to make murder okay under certain circumstances, do you allow it to go on without interference? Specifically, since that could end up a threat to you, does that then change the consideration?
Coward.Huh? Put down the spliff.
OK.. *pats on the head*Coward.