Comment

Absurd Anti-Evolution Lawsuit Denied by Supreme Court

733
jimc3/24/2009 1:19:28 pm PDT

re: #731 Jimmah

YES IT DOES! Saying a religious fanatic is X can only be read as a definition. You did not say ‘X is an example of a religious fanatic’. And given that you were trying to defend yourself against the accusation of being a fanatic, what would be the point anyway of merely giving an example of another kind of fanatic? We all know that religious fanatics come in many flavours. You aren’t kidding anyone.

OH you got me, yes, I thought I could fool everyone into thinking ONLY those who strap bombs to their kids to blow up Jews were the ONLY fanatics, not the Islamist who saw off peoples heads with a swiss army knife, no not them mother-scratchers, but them other dudes, yes on them and specifically those that strap bombs to their kids. But don’t be confused, the people who strap bombs to themselves are clearly NOT fanatics because I didn’t include them either, no, neither did I include the snake handlers or Scientologists, nope JUST THOSE WHO STRAP BOMBS TO THEIR KIDS TO BLOW UP JEW KIDS, that narrow specific group ARE THE TRUE AND ONLY FANATICS.

Get the point now, moron? You can’t have it both ways, either I was being that specific to give an example or you truly are stupid enough to believe that only those who strap bombs to their kids are the only fanatics…

Please for all that is kind and holy, don’t respond…