Actually, that sounds like a pretty good description of you, moron. What's the matter? Getting upset because I once again caught you making an obviously stupid comment?



And here you once again demonstrate your amazing gift for utter stupidity. The AFA has a very active anti-gay agenda, and they use these corporate blackmail tactics to coerce companies into complying with their wishes.



I believe you're an utter moron and a wimp and I say so. See? I can express my beliefs too.

You just repeatedly make amazingly stupid comments without ever once acknowledging the validity of other people's views.

If they were valid, I would acknowledge them. I have beliefs, and I refuse to compromise.

By the way, Dilbert is awesome. However, by going into heated attacks instead of level-headed debate, you make your point look worthless.

You know what is good and totally not gay?

Wendy's.

And they're open late!

Of course, most stupid people have a problem with seeing other people's viewpoints, so this answer really doesn't surprise me at all.



I don't waste my time debating an imbecile. You don't even know the meaning of the word debate, which is not surprising as you don't seem to know the meanings of many words (boycott and blackmail come to mind). Face it, you're just too narrow minded and stupid for honest debate.

I see the viewpoints, I don't have to acknowledge stuff against my beliefs. If they don't have to, I don't have to.

Define necrophobia without a dictionary. I dare you. If you wanna sink to that level.

Excuse me, in a debate, you choose one side to cover. Your goal is to bring the other to your side, not hit them with a sense of sickening neutrality. I've been to a debate, and your goal is not to sink into a weak womanly compromise as you do, condemning the other for spite. You don't slink to insults, you don't tell the other person to "Rot In Hell", you don't call them a worm, you don't call them anything. You debate the issue. You, madam (I mean no sexism, merely an insult of my opponent's manlihood), are the one who fails at debating.

I already told you, worm, you're not worthy of debating. See how stupid you are? I had to tell you twice now because you're too stupid to get it the first time.

Oh, by the way, necrophobia is an unreasonable fear of death or dead bodies. Nice try dimwit, but my knowledge of language is far superior to your puny, doesn't know the meaning of blackmail, little mind.

Your pathetic attempts at insults are laughable.

I, myself, may not need a debate, but I am perfectly capable of doing so, and I am intelligent enough. You did not need to tell me twice, because you are wrong.

That's the exact quote of the Wictionary, with a couple words changed. Shall I point out the flaws in your grammar, or have you noticed them yet? Define Intelligence, 'cause I don't see it in you.

At least they're original. And once again you dodge the attack, too afraid to take it? I see you have to fake it. I'm talking about your toughness, of course, you compromising dog.

I could keep at this all day, but I'm gonna ask you to take it elsewhere. We're ruining KFC's article this way.

Surely your stupidity must get tiring after a while. There isn't a single original thought in that pathetic excuse you call your brain.



And yet you continue regardless. You're not only stupid but a hypocrite to boot.



I looked up Wiktionary (figures a dimwit like you would not only need that but also not know how to spell it). It isn't even a very good resource. Perhaps that's why you don't seem to understand easy words.

Now you're upset because I knew the definition of the very easy word that I'm sure you're little mind thought was hard. :LOL:

Get real Skippy, you make yourself look more stupid with every post. Perhaps it's time for you to crawl back into your little worm hole and stop annoying your intellectual superiors.

You haven't read my fiction writing, have you? If you make a smart comment, you admit that I am smarter than you. It's cheap, but what the heck? I'll give it a shot.

I can arrange an alternate place for this duel of wits. It may take a while, but I could.

I spelled it correctly, didn't I? If so, please correct in bold. It's what I do. I just like it because it's easily searchable from Firefox. I could go to dictionary.com, but that's not that much better. Or I could consult one of many collegiate dictionaries on my bookshelf. Did I ever mention I've read the dictionary? For leisure, no less.

Ok dimwit.



I even quoted it above, spelled it correctly for you, and you were still too stupid to see it.



Yeah, right. I've repeatedly demonstrated superiority over your pathetic lack of understanding of simple words and ideas. The only person who thinks you're smart is you, and since you've demonstrated your stupidity over and over again that doesn't mean much.



Too bad you obviously couldn't understand it.



That's laughable as you are so woefully unarmed.

I'll repeat it, you're proving yourself not only stupid but a hypocrite as well.

:LOL:

ya know Mason and Erath, I just read the exchange between the two of you and I feel like I'm listening to the three stooges minus one. 

 

So, yeah, there's a boycott against McDonalds. That hasn't come up in this thread for a while, I thought it might be worth mentioning.

No matter where I spend my money, some of it is going to go to evil. Instead of worrying about that, it might be better to just pray often and give to the good guys consistently.

Did you know that your local McDonalds is a franchise, so boycotting is going to hurt your local McDonald's owner more than it will hurt McDonald's corporate, who will get paid by their franchises regardless?

Oops, we forgot to consider the ACTUAL consequences of our actions instead of just the feel goodness of our actions. Like raising the minimum wage, the reality is that it's going to hurt, even though we feel so happy that we're helping people with low incomes...

Also, how long have we known that McDonalds was evil? I mean, they really haven't been on the right side of the fence for a while now... if you eat their food consistently you will die. Yeah, they sound like a real morals-centered company. Why didn't we boycott them for their obvious hatred of the health of human beings?

Because they're convenient and we don't care.

So they gave money to the gay cause. Good for them. How much? $20,000? Is that even a percentage point of their annual net income?

Americans spend $3 billion on Christian missions a year, and $25 billion on lawn care. Perhaps we individuals should worry about what we're doing with our own money before we worry about what other people are doing with theirs.

If you want to hurt corporate McDonalds, don't buy a franchise.

Darn typo. When I said "correct in bold", I meant the specific letter. Plus, at least I don't screw up pathetic. Wiktionary isn't even a real word, mind you.

That's like a horse-drawn carriage calling a tank slow. It may move a little faster (though tanks can move faster, it's not recommended), but the tank can obliterate it.

Again, to make a military analogy, like using a hollow-point round on a tank.

Ask people. Other than your buddies. Who probably drank their brain cells to oblivion long ago.

You may continue this battle here, so you don't mess up more of KFC's stuff: http://videogameclassifications.wikidot.com/erathoniel

Warning: If you vandalize anything, you earn a free ban. It's my wiki. And Wikidot doesn't like vandals.

I love the Stooges!

Common ground!

Did you see the duel location? It's public, so everyone who wants can watch (or join). I'll switch the wiki to public editing now. Insult in designated areas only, please.

Why would I want to visit your pathetic little site? I have no interest in it, or even you for that matter. You're just a little hypocrite who makes stupid statements and doesn't seem to understand the most simple of concepts (or words).

You flatter yourself into thinking this is some grand duel. I don't care about you that much. You're nothing more to me than a stupid, mildly annoying, narrow minded, self-righteous, egotistical, hypocrite who deserves to be publicly exposed for what he is for as long as I find it amusing to do so.

The most amusing thing for me is the fact that you swallowed the bait hook, line, and sinker, exposing yourself to be just another "in name only" self-righteous Christian, which was my goal all along.

While KFC and I often disagree and debate, she would never have allowed her pride to sucker her in as you have. She wouldn't have fallen into name calling, egotistical boasting, or blatant demonstrations of hypocrisy. I know because I've tried to bait her. She's far more intelligent than you are, but then most people are as well.

While I don't really agree with some of her ideas about religion, I have no doubt that she honestly has love for her fellow human beings even when she disagrees with them. You only give lip service to that concept and have revealed that here as well.

She also wouldn't have been so wimpy as to cry "I'm contacting Stardock!" You have no idea how hard I laughed at that wimpy, pathetic post.

You have been out done, mostly by your own sin of Pride. I guess it's true, pride goes before the fall. It was so obvious that was your weakness too. You had put it out there all over JU for all to see.

well I, for one, did a long time ago.



Well the AFA recommended we talk to the local McDonald's and tell them how we feel about the issue. How they react may be an indication which side of the fence they're on. You should know Jay about being equally or unequally yoked.

We have a family member who bought a business with another partner. One was a Christian and one was not. The family member (the Christian) was warned not to go into business with the other guy. He ignored the warning and bought the business and entered the partnership. It didn't take long to see they had two diff views about things. One wanted to do things by the book (the Christian) and the other had some shady ideas and business practices. One cared about what kind of help was hired, morally speaking, the other did not care. It went sour fairly quickly. Now one partner has to buy out the other because it's really really bad.



where are you getting these figures?



and go to Wendy's.... ;p 

Nice to see you back Jay...where have you been?

MasonM, swallow your pride (it's huge, I know), and stop ruining KFC's comments, or go to my site. Those are your options for insulting me. I give you one that hurts only me and you, and one that hurts you. Stardock has literally been contacted, though.

Ditto.

I dunno, but it sounds sadly true.

You don't dictate options to me, worm. Face it, I've played you like a violin and you fell for it completely.



I'm sure they'll tell you to grow a pair.

Your continuing in this manner violates rules (i), (j), and (n). If you do not stop, I trust that Stardock will make you.

So I could have four? I've given you a place if you wish to continue this. You're just being stubborn and ruining a thread when I gave you a perfectly constructive place to go that you don't even have to register for.

Wow, finally some common sense amongst all this craziness. Thanks jythier.

I'm not sure where the $3 billion came from, I saw it on a slide at church. I'll have to ask the associate pastor. I googled the lawn care number and it came from the EPA. I'm pretty sure the slide at church had a much bigger number for lawn care, though, so maybe it's not $3 billion per year? Will have to find out.

As for where I've been, I've been doing other things. I come around and read and post now and again, but I haven't really had anything to write an article about. I never was much of a life-blogger, and most of the things I'd write an article about already had one out and I could just comment on it.

Mason, I know we have crossed swords in the past, but I must commend you unreservedly on your contribution here. Your analysis of the crux of the issue under question is excellent, and - despite all the insect whining to which you have been subjected along the way - remains substantially unchallenged. Kudos!

On the subject of the whining insect, I am surprised that no one has taken him up on this particularly choice bit of frothing at the mouth:

'Excuse me, in a debate, you choose one side to cover. Your goal is to bring the other to your side, not hit them with a sense of sickening neutrality. I've been to a debate, and your goal is not to sink into a weak womanly compromise as you do, condemning the other for spite.'

So you've been to a debate, erathoniel? Good for you. I've been to a hospital, but that doesn't make me a surgeon. And isn't 'sickening neutrality' exactly what the AFA demanded from McDonalds in the first place? Finally, as for 'weak womanly compromise', I can only assume from this that you are as fearful, mistrustful and intimidated by women as you quite obviously are by gay people. Better surely to stick with those who look, act and 'think' exactly as you do - never challenged, never contradicted, never required to exercise your critical faculties.