LDS Freedom Forum

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:27 pm

Fiannan wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:23 pm

So, submission is wonderful if you have a vagina but horrible if you have a penis. Woohoo! I love logic!

Just curious, do you think that is all the difference there is between men and women?

That's what it comes down to . ..because men and women are "equal".

Is it any wonder that transgenderism is on the rise?

Modern femininity tells everyone men and women are the same. Of course, if that is true then why shouldn't someone be able to simply change their gender. We are the same, so it should make no difference if one proclaims they are male or female.

Good point. If you give a woman enough anabolic steroids she will begin to develop into what appears to be a man. Her DNA is still female though. If you cloned her then you would get a female baby. You can give a man estrogen and he will grow breasts. So if we think the only difference between men and women are anatomical those can be altered. In time, I am certain that nanotechnology will be able to transform even the expression of our DNA and even make a person able to transition into an actual, fully functional, member of the opposite sex. In theory, if male, they could store sperm, reprogram their body, and get themselves pregnant. However, there is still the brain and the soul. And if we factor in any esoteric aspects of our existence then to think that men and women are merely different because of sex organs becomes rather laughable.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:50 pm

MMbelieve wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:45 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Yes, if one needs power.
I wonder if two co-workers can be on the same footing on a task together and get it done without establishing who’s boss over who? That’s right, likely men cannot because they must operate in a well defined power structure based usually on strength. And they get it! Women do not.
Women? Why do women fall under the SOP of how males operate? Do not treat your woman like a man. She will lose her feminine nature and gentleness faster than you can say sorry. Men need to be sure to not enter-mingle woman’s nature with their nature and seek to be a boss or establish a power struggle of authority. Women NATURALLY want you and admire you and look up to you and seek your things you offer as a man. Bring up that she has to obey you and you ruin it all. It’s already naturally there and women want to follow and support and sustain their husbands. But you guys are stuck on the wording as if that can change a woman’s nature. Be a good man and she is butter for you.

This whole thing is being discussed without the heart involved.

Oh come on, now you are claiming that women don't have a hierarchical social status, give me a break.

Women have just the same emotions as men they just manifest it differently. Women don't in general physically fight-but they will sure back-bite, be passive-aggresive and destroy a career if you cross her wrong.

Women are not men nor do they operate in the structures men know and operate in. Your being an advocate of equality and your agreeing with me.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

False. If we disagree, we compromise so we both can be happy.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:48 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:37 pm Go research myself? YOU SAID "PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING". I didn't say that. You did. Give me some pudding!

I've already provided you with the questions you need to ask. I'm giving you the pudding.

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

I'm giving you the pudding. You claim you'd believe me-but you don't. You won't even investigate it yourself.

Go research the data.

I'm not going to provide the data for you. I'm providing you the ingredients to make the pudding. If you won't even put forth the effort to see if the ingredients make the pudding then you won't believe the pudding I put in front of you is good.

Forced labor isn't the ideal. Should we bring back slavery because it produced so much more and is more efficient?

The fact is that we simply have more sexual freedom nowadays for men and women, and both genders are choosing the easier route. The sexual revolution freed the men from responsibility just as much or more-so than the women, and today, you see more men than women shying away from family. It's simply because life is so much easier without a wife and kids.

Fiannan wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:54 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:27 pm

Fiannan wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:23 pm

So, submission is wonderful if you have a vagina but horrible if you have a penis. Woohoo! I love logic!

Just curious, do you think that is all the difference there is between men and women?

That's what it comes down to . ..because men and women are "equal".

Is it any wonder that transgenderism is on the rise?

Modern femininity tells everyone men and women are the same. Of course, if that is true then why shouldn't someone be able to simply change their gender. We are the same, so it should make no difference if one proclaims they are male or female.

Good point. If you give a woman enough anabolic steroids she will begin to develop into what appears to be a man. Her DNA is still female though. If you cloned her then you would get a female baby. You can give a man estrogen and he will grow breasts. So if we think the only difference between men and women are anatomical those can be altered. In time, I am certain that nanotechnology will be able to transform even the expression of our DNA and even make a person able to transition into an actual, fully functional, member of the opposite sex. In theory, if male, they could store sperm, reprogram their body, and get themselves pregnant. However, there is still the brain and the soul. And if we factor in any esoteric aspects of our existence then to think that men and women are merely different because of sex organs becomes rather laughable.

What you are describing is Transhumanism.

Which frighteningly enough Elder Renlund mentioned in a leaked Stake Conference. I'm not sure if what he meant when he said the word transhuman-but he did say it.

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:55 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

False. If we disagree, we compromise so we both can be happy.

Yes, sure compromise is great, it's necessary and vital in a marriage. But sometimes in life compromise simply can't be achieved. Saying we do everything by compromise is simply false.

Most things in life don't really matter. Does it really matter if when we buy a new car, I like the blue one she likes the red one and we "compromise" and get the "purple" one. No that doesn't really matter at all.

However, there are things that do matter in life that have severe impact on people's lives and sometimes all a "compromise" really means is that we each get less.

Take GC for example, the Church "compromised" and gave women their own night specifically during GC weekend. Sure it was a "compromise", but in the end we both get less. Men get less Priesthood Session and women get less Woman's Session.

Some decisions can't be "compromised", you want to homeschool, the wife doesn't. You can't compromise that decision-someone must submit their will to the other.

I can't think of an instance where my wife submitted to me or that I asked her to submit to me. I just don't understand that concept of marriage. Good luck with that.

What we do do is a wonderful thing called communicate. We each have our strengths and weaknesses and we know this about each other and have worked out a division of labor and responsibilities along those lines. Sometimes a hard decision arises. We talk it out, carefully, over time as needed, then usually I or her will say "I don't know, you decide". About equal time she decides and I accept the answer and the other time I decide and she accepts the answer.

i would never trade this relationship for some paradigm where I rule the home and expect her to meekly do what ever I say.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

And this is called the "Divine Dilemma" where you both want to submit to the will of the other. It's beautifully expressed by wanting to please the other before yourself, and taking turns as far as who decides on some things.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:00 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:55 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

False. If we disagree, we compromise so we both can be happy.

Yes, sure compromise is great, it's necessary and vital in a marriage. But sometimes in life compromise simply can't be achieved. Saying we do everything by compromise is simply false.

But WE do. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Somtimes it just takes us awhile to put away our egos, but we find a middle ground. Soooo it’s true for us no matter how you’d like to pretend it isn’t. Compromise has always been achieved eventually, when we aren’t in agreement.

Traditionally, Vashti was seen by rabbis as deserving of punishment because she refused to party naked with her husband's friends at his request. It is not as if the rabbis felt that this was a great thing to do, but that she had an obligation to her husband.

Lot's wife disobeyed and got dehydrated.

David's wife mocked him for his displaying his, well, manhood in front of guests. She was punished with never having kids.

Just noting some Biblical patterns there.

justme wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:01 pm I can't think of an instance where my wife submitted to me or that I asked her to submit to me. I just don't understand that concept of marriage. Good luck with that.

What we do do is a wonderful thing called communicate. We each have our strengths and weaknesses and we know this about each other and have worked out a division of labor and responsibilities along those lines. Sometimes a hard decision arises. We talk it out, carefully, over time as needed, then usually I or her will say "I don't know, you decide". About equal time she decides and I accept the answer and the other time I decide and she accepts the answer.

i would never trade this relationship for some paradigm where I rule the home and expect her to meekly do what ever I say.

If you have to ask the other person to submit you've already lost any bit of authority you might have and the person submitting is already in rebellion.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Such black and white thinking is detrimental to our church.

Oracle has co-CEOs, 2 leaders. Something you say isn’t possible.

The idea that you need one single leader is but one form of leadership, it’s but one philosophy.

Co equal marriage only works if both parties are humble and give their whole selves to their partner. It’ll be nonsense to you until you open your mind.

Fiannan wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:05 pm Traditionally, Vashti was seen by rabbis as deserving of punishment because she refused to party naked with her husband's friends at his request. It is not as if the rabbis felt that this was a great thing to do, but that she had an obligation to her husband.

Lot's wife disobeyed and got dehydrated.

David's wife mocked him for his displaying his, well, manhood in front of guests. She was punished with never having kids.

Just noting some Biblical patterns there.

If that first one is true I’d rather take punishment then do that.

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:03 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:00 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:55 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm
You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

False. If we disagree, we compromise so we both can be happy.

Yes, sure compromise is great, it's necessary and vital in a marriage. But sometimes in life compromise simply can't be achieved. Saying we do everything by compromise is simply false.

But WE do. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Somtimes it just takes us awhile to put away our egos, but we find a middle ground. Soooo it’s true for us no matter how you’d like to pretend it isn’t. Compromise has always been achieved eventually, when we aren’t in agreement.

Sorry you can't find a "middle ground" on some issues. It just means you haven't confronted anything that big in life in which you have a disagreement. That is great, it's wonderful, and I hope you never have something that big to worry about.

Maybe, in discussions of symbolism, we can examine the architecture of the temple and its origins in ancient Egypt. The spires are inspired by the obelisk which is symbolic of the male. The interior of western religious buildings is symbolic of the womb. The temple merges both the male energy and female to symbolize the divine purpose of life and the promise of eternal increase in the next life.

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:08 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Such black and white thinking is detrimental to our church.

Oracle has co-CEOs, 2 leaders. Something you say isn’t possible.

The idea that you need one single leader is but one form of leadership, it’s but one philosophy.

Co equal marriage only works if both parties are humble and give their whole selves to their partner. It’ll be nonsense to you until you open your mind.

Lol you had to search that one out.

Now show me they each perform the exact same function and are equal in weight and authority.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:06 pm

justme wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:01 pm I can't think of an instance where my wife submitted to me or that I asked her to submit to me. I just don't understand that concept of marriage. Good luck with that.

What we do do is a wonderful thing called communicate. We each have our strengths and weaknesses and we know this about each other and have worked out a division of labor and responsibilities along those lines. Sometimes a hard decision arises. We talk it out, carefully, over time as needed, then usually I or her will say "I don't know, you decide". About equal time she decides and I accept the answer and the other time I decide and she accepts the answer.

i would never trade this relationship for some paradigm where I rule the home and expect her to meekly do what ever I say.

If you have to ask the other person to submit you've already lost any bit of authority you might have and the person submitting is already in rebellion.

Lol. There it is. Pretty much spells it all out.

Your wife does what you say, period. Otherwise it’s rebellion. Just like a good little child, or a slave.

That’s called unrighteous dominion . D&C 121.

Without exception, every man that I’ve talked to who’s all bent out of shape on this topic refuses to acknowledge D&C 121. They won’t do it. It condemns their type of leadership.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:09 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:03 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:00 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:55 pm

False. If we disagree, we compromise so we both can be happy.

Yes, sure compromise is great, it's necessary and vital in a marriage. But sometimes in life compromise simply can't be achieved. Saying we do everything by compromise is simply false.

But WE do. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Somtimes it just takes us awhile to put away our egos, but we find a middle ground. Soooo it’s true for us no matter how you’d like to pretend it isn’t. Compromise has always been achieved eventually, when we aren’t in agreement.

Sorry you can't find a "middle ground" on some issues. It just means you haven't confronted anything that big in life in which you have a disagreement. That is great, it's wonderful, and I hope you never have something that big to worry about.

Give me just one example of something we couldn’t compromise, just one.

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:08 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:14 pm And this concept of no head, that men and women are "equal" will absolutely destroy relationships between men and women.
All these menfeminists have no idea what they are really advocating for.
Why? Because I guarantee you they actually have a household where their wives do submit and they do lead, OR their wive is their leader and they do what she wants.

You can't have co-leadership, it doesn't work. You can have individual leadership in spheres of influence, but you can't functionally have a combined unit where each is equal in power and authority. It just doesn't work.

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Such black and white thinking is detrimental to our church.

So glad it ain't YOUR Church. But thank you for making yourself a self-righteous jerk who takes the place of God.
lol

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:11 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:09 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:03 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:00 pm
Yes, sure compromise is great, it's necessary and vital in a marriage. But sometimes in life compromise simply can't be achieved. Saying we do everything by compromise is simply false.

But WE do. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Somtimes it just takes us awhile to put away our egos, but we find a middle ground. Soooo it’s true for us no matter how you’d like to pretend it isn’t. Compromise has always been achieved eventually, when we aren’t in agreement.

Sorry you can't find a "middle ground" on some issues. It just means you haven't confronted anything that big in life in which you have a disagreement. That is great, it's wonderful, and I hope you never have something that big to worry about.

Give me just one example of something we couldn’t compromise, just one.

I just did.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:12 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:11 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:09 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:03 pm

But WE do. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Somtimes it just takes us awhile to put away our egos, but we find a middle ground. Soooo it’s true for us no matter how you’d like to pretend it isn’t. Compromise has always been achieved eventually, when we aren’t in agreement.

Sorry you can't find a "middle ground" on some issues. It just means you haven't confronted anything that big in life in which you have a disagreement. That is great, it's wonderful, and I hope you never have something that big to worry about.

Give me just one example of something we couldn’t compromise, just one.

I just did.

What was it? You gave no situational example.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:12 pm

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:08 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Such black and white thinking is detrimental to our church.

So glad it ain't YOUR Church. But thank you for making yourself a self-righteous jerk who takes the place of God.
lol

Name calling? Really?

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:11 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:06 pm

justme wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:01 pm I can't think of an instance where my wife submitted to me or that I asked her to submit to me. I just don't understand that concept of marriage. Good luck with that.

What we do do is a wonderful thing called communicate. We each have our strengths and weaknesses and we know this about each other and have worked out a division of labor and responsibilities along those lines. Sometimes a hard decision arises. We talk it out, carefully, over time as needed, then usually I or her will say "I don't know, you decide". About equal time she decides and I accept the answer and the other time I decide and she accepts the answer.

i would never trade this relationship for some paradigm where I rule the home and expect her to meekly do what ever I say.

If you have to ask the other person to submit you've already lost any bit of authority you might have and the person submitting is already in rebellion.

Lol. There it is. Pretty much spells it all out.

Your wife does what you say, period. Otherwise it’s rebellion. Just like a good little child, or a slave.

That’s called unrighteous dominion . D&C 121.

Without exception, every man that I’ve talked to who’s all bent out of shape on this topic refuses to acknowledge D&C 121. They won’t do it. It condemns their type of leadership.

Lol just keep throwing those insults. If you think I don't acknowledge 121 you haven't been paying attention.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:10 pm

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:08 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:36 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:30 pm

Doesn’t destroy my marriage. Interesting. Did you do a poll or something?

You don't have a "co-equal" marriage. Either you submit to her or she submits to you.

Such black and white thinking is detrimental to our church.

Oracle has co-CEOs, 2 leaders. Something you say isn’t possible.

The idea that you need one single leader is but one form of leadership, it’s but one philosophy.

Co equal marriage only works if both parties are humble and give their whole selves to their partner. It’ll be nonsense to you until you open your mind.

Lol you had to search that one out.

Now show me they each perform the exact same function and are equal in weight and authority.

Lololol I was employed by Oracle bud.

Open your mind. It’s ignorant to believe that only one type of leadership is possible and that it requires one single individual to be the head.

You have no reason to believe that co-leadership isn’t possible, no reason at all except your own culture and traditions holding you back.

Gods ways are not your ways. Your ways are worldly, your ways are flawed. How much better to prove that Gods ways are higher than mans ways than to prove that the proper form of celestial marriage is a form that you can’t possibly comprehend.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:48 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:37 pm Go research myself? YOU SAID "PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING". I didn't say that. You did. Give me some pudding!

I've already provided you with the questions you need to ask. I'm giving you the pudding.

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

I'm giving you the pudding. You claim you'd believe me-but you don't. You won't even investigate it yourself.

Go research the data.

I'm not going to provide the data for you. I'm providing you the ingredients to make the pudding. If you won't even put forth the effort to see if the ingredients make the pudding then you won't believe the pudding I put in front of you is good.

catcatinabox:

Only on the internet do you get to say such silly things and get a way with it.

You have no proof. Providing questions are not proof and its not pudding. Why do I need to investigate claims that you are making? Why don't you provide me with the proof since you have already investigated this?

You can try to pretend that its my fault that you can't prove your ideas, but, its just make believe.

Conclusion: catcatinabox lied when he said the proof was in the pudding. There was no proof, no pudding, nothing. He is gaslightning now because he can't prove his words yet he wants people to believe him.

Got it. Although I had already figured you out. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt.

In case you didn't pick up on this, you've lost credibility with me. That means outside of pointing out your logical errors and nonsensical statements (if I feel so inclined) I will not be expecting anything from you and so therefore I will not be using any more of my time attempting to engage with you in a discussion. That is until you prove yourself credible again.

Valo