U. S. Constitution Inspired by God

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

That's NOT what I wrote. This is exactly the problem with you trying to guess at what people may have meant instead of reading/hearing the literal words they said.

You're not arguing semantics, you're telling a lie. I wrote what I wrote, not what you claim I meant.

LOL! I didn't say you said that exactly. Notice the no quote marks. I said that is how it comes across.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

LOL! I didn't say you said that exactly. Notice the no quote marks. I said that is how it comes across.

To you perhaps. You're so completely far off from what I actually meant, and that's why I object to what you're trying to do with Delay. Your interpretation skills are sorely lacking and completely missed the mark.

Good grief. That you could read what I said, then come up with a total opposite meaning just shows either complete personal bias or lack of reading and comprehension skills.

[n david]

How this....

Originally Posted by n david

But I don't believe God was as interested in a man-made government as is trying to be said here.

becomes this...

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Semantics....it comes across the same way - Secular humanists wrote the document, get over it, God wasn't very interested.

Lack of reading and comprehension skills or plain personal bias against me. Likely a little of both, IMO.

I never said He wasn't interested. There wasn't so much as a hint or suggestion even. I said He likely wasn't AS interested AS some here think He was.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

How this....


becomes this...


Lack of reading and comprehension skills or plain personal bias against me. Likely a little of both, IMO.

I never said He wasn't interested. There wasn't so much as a hint or suggestion even. I said He likely wasn't AS interested AS some here think He was.

Frankly, after the JA thread, it is probably the above in bold. After you distorted and still today claim I was waffling, that is a bit hard to take. So, today, I view you in a much different light (a bit of dishonesty to win an argument) and should probably refrain from conversing with you at all. Which I will do now.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Frankly, after the JA thread, it is probably the above in bold. After you distorted and still today claim I was waffling, that is a bit hard to take. So, today, I view you in a much different light (a bit of dishonesty to win an argument) and should probably refrain from conversing with you at all. Which I will do now.

I was not being dishonest, nor did I distort what you posted. You did waffle. You're just upset I called you out on it.

When you say something, then change to something else, then change back to the original...that's waffling. And that's what you did.

And BTW, how is what you're wrongly alleging I did any different from what you just did here? Pot calling the kettle black much?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

I was not being dishonest, nor did I distort what you posted. You did waffle. You're just upset I called you out on it.

When you say something, then change to something else, then change back to the original...that's waffling. And that's what you did.

And BTW, how is what you're wrongly alleging I did any different from what you just did here? Pot calling the kettle black much?

I'm always disappointed when a liar's pants don't really catch on fire.....

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm always disappointed when a liar's pants don't really catch on fire.....

Really, PO? First a jerk, now liar? The lipstick doesn't become you. Take a break, step away from your PC and breathe.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

Really, PO? First a jerk, now liar? The lipstick doesn't become you. Take a break, step away from your PC and breathe.

Lucky for you that "Liar, Liar, pants on fire" is just an expression...

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Now you are just acting like a jerk, respectfully.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Actually, now I really do think you are acting like a jerk.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm always disappointed when a liar's pants don't really catch on fire.....

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Lucky for you that "Liar, Liar, pants on fire" is just an expression...

What wonderful, loving, Christ-like sentiments!

Have a good day.

(Not sure if this is a male or female dog. Eh, whichever it may be, I like it.)

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

Really, PO? First a jerk, now liar? The lipstick doesn't become you. Take a break, step away from your PC and breathe.

Originally Posted by n david

The "pig with lipstick" comment is a play on her own quote. .

I get your attempt at a veiled point....

What wonderful, loving, Christ-like sentiments!

Have a good day.

pants on fire.............