[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You need to put some thought into these things...

I never said Biden assaulted anyone. What I said (and I am irrefutably correct) is that in Kavanaugh's case, the mere accusation was enough for Democrats to conclude Kavanaugh was guilty. But they aren't applying that same standard to Biden. If you thought Kavanaugh was guilty, there's no conceivable reason to not think Biden is just as guilty, other than politics.

If being accused of assault means that Kavanaugh isn't fit to be a judge, than why isn't being accused of assault reason to conclude Biden isn't fit to be POTUS? I would just love to hear you respond to that.

"You evangelist just steal money "

That's just brilliant. Churches take voluntary donations. Public unions confiscate money.

"seeing you think religion is under attack"

See if you can answer this. When Obama was president, there was a tr#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g company that shipped a lot of booze. There were Muslim truck drivers who didn't want to ship booze because of their religious beliefs, and the company tried to fire them. Obama's labor department stopped the company from firing them, saying that the Muslim truck drivers cannot be forced to abandon their religious beliefs on the job.

But at the same time, Obama would not offer that same protection to Christian bakers. How come?

I await your answer...

Wayne, I think about things before I form my opinions. I don't blindly believe what one side or the other tells me. The sooner you understand that, the sooner you'll stop embarrassing yourself with nonsensical posts like this. I can go on all day with examples of religions, or certain religions to be more accurate, having their rights trampled.

Here on this board, I thik it was you who said that the My Pillow guy was mocked for bringing religion into the discussion. Why?

In one post you say explicitly that talking about religion is reason to mock a guy (a recovering addict who only manufactures here in America and who is voluntarily making 50,000 PPE masks A DAY), then here you deny religion is under attack. Can't have it both ways.

I am not having it both ways because attacks on religion isn't occurring ... Like i said you see being against discrimination as being an attack on religion ... that's your logic not mine