PDA

View Full Version : Re: NAT: A different response


June 8th 09, 12:37 PM
On Jun 8, 1:12*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 9:31*pm, George M. Middius > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sacky is on a ro-o-o-ollll.
>
> > > > Sacky stupidized:
>
> > > > > > If Obama addresses "don't ask, don't tell" I'll bet you $5 that either
> > > > > > 2pid or Clyde will trot out "unit cohesion" as a 'reason' to keep gays
> > > > > > from openly serving in the military.
>
> > > > > I answered this months ago.
> > > > > Its up to the military authorities to asses the situation.
>
> > > > This kind of moronic posturing is one reason for my earlier assertion:
> > > > "Unlike you, he doesn't make dogmatic assertions, he doesn't exhibit
> > > > mindless prejudices and irrational biases".
>
> > > there is no dogma, mindless prejudice and irrational bias.
>
> > dogma: only "the military" are capable of releasing human rights from
> > captivity
>
> > prejudice: Gays have some secret disability known only to "the military"
>
> > irrational bias: I admit you didn't state this here, but in the past you
> > have fatuously claimed that since marriage has always been a hetero
> > institution, it should always remain so. I presumed that a similar bias
> > underlay your current weaseling about the sanctity of the Most High Secret
> > Military Lore (i.e. "the military" has always had a policy of not
> > tolerating Gays, so that state of affairs should continue).
>
> As I said, prepare for the old saw "unit cohesion".
>
> I think Clyde is prepping the battlefield for its introduction.

That is the third time "YOU" mentioned it.