RDP

[rdp]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

Just funnin ya.

The fact is, someone getting sick of posting and going on to bigger and better things is NOT "running away" no matter who the person is or what the subject is or even said position on it.

Man, this is the 2nd time we have agreed on something!

Let's go back to fighting....It's funner !

[OnTheFritz]

Originally Posted by rdp

She also started "letting her hair grow" out.....& I said nothing in her presence about women not cutting their hair.

Did you let her know it was too late. The damage was done. She can't "uncut" her hair?

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by rdp

Man, this is the 2nd time we have agreed on something!

Let's go back to fighting....It's funner !

Hey if your giving out hugs I want one. Pliny likes me

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rdp

First, you are very wrong....Titus2woman very explicitly stated that she was just fine with a dress made for a man....with a "murse" to match it !

And, I was pointing out that if it's acceptable for women to wear pants because they are "made for a woman," then the inverse has to be equally acceptable.....Dresses made for men!

Finally, I already showed which side started with the snarky-smug comments. At this point, if you cannot see who started it all.....You're merely ignoring their actual quotes.

These are the only posts that Titus2woman made before your Post #24. The two posts are about Cindy Nash.

Post #16
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...0&postcount=16

Post #21
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...4&postcount=21

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Attachment 4178

Thanks, Prax. What source is this information? And why would Strongs use the definition for "wear" that it used?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by OnTheFritz

By the way, RDP, I admit I was at times rude and sarcastic. I should have probably been less so. Oh well. No need to recap that point in your next hundred responses.

But the thing that really torques people off is the condescension. You clearly think we are less worthy, less educated and less intelligent than you. You proclaim it in nearly every single post. It's probably a defense mechanism you have, but it brings out the reaction you should expect.

Actually, I come on here periodically (don't worry, I'll be gone again soon) to see what y'all have to offer & to subject myself to those who believe diametrically opposite what I believe.

The irony of it all is that I do this for fair evaluation from an opposing side.

No, I do not think I am above anyone & anybody who knows me in person will tell you this.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by OnTheFritz

Did you let her know it was too late. The damage was done. She can't "uncut" her hair?

Ummm, I hope you are kidding ???

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

These are the only posts that Titus2woman made before your Post #24. The two posts are about Cindy Nash.

Post #16
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...0&postcount=16

Post #21
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...4&postcount=21

I am well aware....I went back & looked.

You said "nobody believes" a man can wear dresses made for men on here.....I showed you that you were wrong.

Never said she said it before my posts.....& you are still ignoring the volumes of outright attacks on me, while attempting to hold me to a moral-standard???

[OnTheFritz]

Originally Posted by rdp

Ummm, I hope you are kidding ???

Not sure. Elder Epley says that "women with bobbed hair will not see heaven" or some such, so I guess I'm not sure if she can undo her destiny of eternal damnation brought upon by previously cutting her hair. He didn't say "women who cut their hair a long time ago (1 month or more maybe?) are ok as long as they promise to stop". I mean - her hair is either cut or it isn't.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rdp

I am well aware....I went back & looked.

You said "nobody believes" a man can wear dresses made for men on here.....I showed you that you were wrong.

Never said she said it before my posts.....& you are still ignoring the volumes of outright attacks on me, while attempting to hold me to a moral-standard???

No I am not ignoring attacks on you. I am telling you that you came waltzing in with Post #24 and placed a huge target on your back. Anyone who logs in here already knows the drill, and I pretty much believe you anticipated what would come next...and I pretty much believe you enjoyed every minute of it.

Again, you never offended me with any of your posts as I sensed you did not feel anger toward anyone while throwing your Smiles around to punctuate your wording antics.