Vatican plan to block gay priests

**whypikonme** · 08-31-2005, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by manker

You posted drivel, so I pointed out that it was drivel.

No, you did what you always do, you read the post, then decided what nasty remark you could make. That's all you do, it's all you've ever done, you're a nasty, vindictive piece of work. But that's OK, every forum needs someone like you, you perform a duty, we should all be grateful you grace us with your presence.

**manker** · 08-31-2005, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by whypikonme

Originally Posted by manker

You posted drivel, so I pointed out that it was drivel.

No, you did what you always do, you read the post, then decided what nasty remark you could make. That's all you do, it's all you've ever done, you're a nasty, vindictive piece of work. But that's OK, every forum needs someone like you, you perform a duty, we should all be grateful you grace us with your presence.

Dry your eyes, mate.

You posted drivel and I deigned to let you know. I didn't have to but thought it wise to enlighten you to your folly lest you repeat this drivel elsewhere - like on a Big Brother forum that you admin, or something.

Now pick your toys back up and put them back in the pram, there's a good lad.

**whypikonme** · 08-31-2005, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by manker

You posted drivel and I deigned to let you know.

You keep telling yourself that, everyone on this forum knows the truth about you, you fool no-one. When someone posts drivel, as you put it, it's usual to come up with a counter argument, which you fail to do, ever. You nit-pick and insult, nothing more.

**manker** · 08-31-2005, 01:56 PM

To be fair, I didn't think my initial post was insulting nor nit picking.

Also, I posted a watertight counter-argument, which you will absolutely not address. Preferring instead to revel in precisely what you chastise me for - flinging insults. Do I really have to use the hypocrite word again.

Ah, too late.

I am going to presume this is because you now realise that you've posted pish, or drivel, if you prefer.

Originally Posted by manker

Originally Posted by whypikonme

But, since the Church still regards the main purpose of sex to be procreation, they insist that any ethical sexual act must be open to conception.

Since there isn't a 100% method of contraception, I'm presuming that you're talking pish.

A combination pill is something like 98% so technically a sexual act while using this form of contraception is still open to conception, albeit to a lesser degree - yet I'm sure that the Catholic church doesn't advocate this.

So, refute what I've written.

**whypikonme** · 08-31-2005, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by manker

So, refute what I've written.

Why should l? You refuted someone else's words, as you've been told. So go and refute it to them, it's nothing to do with me.

These beliefs are grounded in their concept of natural law. The church once taught that the sole purpose of sex -- and marriage -- was procreation. They have modified this stance in recent decades by admitting that also has a unitive function; it bonds married couples closer together and strengthens their relationship. But, since the Church still regards the main purpose of sex to be procreation, they insist that any ethical sexual act must be open to conception. On this basis, they forbid the use of artificial methods of birth control, and consider any sexual behavior other than intercourse between a husband and wife to be a grave moral sin. Forbidden practices include masturbation, pre-marital sex, post-marital sex, extra-marital sex and all same-sex behaviors.

Here you go, Captain Doodoo.

**DanB** · 08-31-2005, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by whypikonme

Originally Posted by manker

You posted drivel, so I pointed out that it was drivel.

No, you did what you always do, you read the post, then decided what nasty remark you could make. That's all you do, it's all you've ever done, you're a nasty, vindictive piece of work. But that's OK, every forum needs someone like you, you perform a duty, we should all be grateful you grace us with your presence.

Just like every forum needs a Billy Dean?

**whypikonme** · 08-31-2005, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by DanB

Just like every forum needs a Billy Dean?

Isn't he a mate of yours Dan?

**manker** · 08-31-2005, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by whypikonme

Originally Posted by manker

So, refute what I've written.

Why should l? You refuted someone else's words, as you've been told. So go and refute it to them, it's nothing to do with me.

It's a bit mental to go and copy/paste words to use in a discussion if you don't agree with their meaning.

Wouldn't you say.

Funny tho' - you truly are the king of cut-and-paste, with the added string to your bow that you have the gall - when you get caught posting drivel - to say 'Wasn't me, guv'.

Btw, when I say funny, you'll realise I mean that in a 'dog with two legs' kinda way.

**JPaul** · 08-31-2005, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by manker

Originally Posted by whypikonme

Why should l? You refuted someone else's words, as you've been told. So go and refute it to them, it's nothing to do with me.

It's a bit mental to go and copy/paste words to use in a discussion if you don't agree with their meaning.

Wouldn't you say.

Funny tho' - you truly are the king of cut-and-paste, with the added string to your bow that you have the gall - when you get caught posting drivel - to say 'Wasn't me, guv'.

Btw, when I say funny, you'll realise I mean that in a 'dog with two legs' kinda way.

With the two legs on a different axle.