mental_avenger's Page

More from mental_avenger

Forum Posts

Comments

Posted on: Anyone else want to beat this guy to a pulp?
at 11/25/2009 7:35pm

But apples and oranges are both fruit, and if the law has one standard for apples, and another for oranges, then there ... more(+)

dragon04 wrote:

dragon04 wrote:You're comparing apples to oranges,….

But apples and oranges are both fruit, and if the law has one standard for apples, and another for oranges, then there exists a double standard for fruit. close(-)

Posted on: The All Things Sarah Palin thread!
at 11/25/2009 7:32pm

In the 8-9 years I have been on Space.com, I have never seen a single case of a member who was involved in a debate, ... more(+)

baulten wrote:He doesn't necessarily have to be refuting his own point to post what he sees as an interesting topic pertaining to the discussion, even if he doesn't agree with it 100%.

In the 8-9 years I have been on Space.com, I have never seen a single case of a member who was involved in a debate, posting opposing opinions in that debate, and then posting a quote and link which refuted their viewpoint and did not support that viewpoint. Never. Not once that I can recall. close(-)

Posted on: Anyone else want to beat this guy to a pulp?
at 11/25/2009 7:25pm

Apparently you don’t get anything. Nothing I have posted supports your Ad Hominem claim, you were dead wrong on both ... more(+)

brandbll wrote:Listen buddy, we get it. You hate people that smoke marijuana but you dig people that like to stomp a puppy's face in for no good reason. Your fetish is sick, so lets just move on.

Apparently you don’t get anything. Nothing I have posted supports your Ad Hominem claim, you were dead wrong on both counts. close(-)

Posted on: Anyone else want to beat this guy to a pulp?
at 11/25/2009 7:22pm

You say there are exceptions for vermin and hunting, so you effectively admit there is a double standard. So you say ... more(+)

baulten wrote:That's wrong. There is no double standard because the law covers all animals. It's all about who gets caught.

You keep repeating that like a mantra, but you have yet to provide any proof of that claim.

baulten wrote:Yeah, and they pay for the license and usually sell off the meat or give it to their dogs.

No, they usually left it in the field or gave it to the farmer.

baulten wrote:Killing prairie dogs falls under the vermin category, typically. They can cause tons of damage to crops. They are a pest in farmlands that has to be dealt with somehow.

Ok, now we are back to the double standard, penalties for killing cats and dogs, kudos for killing pests such as prairie dogs. Thank you for helping to prove my point. Now, just to be clear, if it is a pest, it is ok to kill it. Apparently that pit bull was being a pest.

baulten wrote:Actually there are laws against it. It falls under animal abuse laws. The laws don't say "Kitties, doggies, and birdies!" They say animals.

So you claim. I have never seen such laws applied, and it has nothing to do with being or not being seen or caught. Have you ever even heard of anyone anywhere being sent to jail for cruelty to a porcupine, or a skunk, or a prairie dog?

baulten wrote:Covering everything, with exceptions for hunting and for vermins.

You say there are exceptions for vermin and hunting, so you effectively admit there is a double standard. So you say vermin are exceptions, and prairie dogs are vermin. Ok, so suppose I had a prairie dog for a pet and someone stomped it to death. Would that be a jailable cruelty to animals, or an excepted elimination of vermin? Keep in mind that shooting a prairie dog with a .22 may leave it alive and suffering for hours, and stomping a prairie dog could kill it in seconds. close(-)

Posted on: The All Things Sarah Palin thread!
at 11/25/2009 12:02pm

When do members here post a link, during a debate, that refutes the points they are trying to make and does not support ... more(+)

baulten wrote:No where did Eddie tell if he agreed or not with the man. He posted a link. Without content, by the way, which pisses me off, but nonetheless you're just looking for reasons to attack Eddie.

When do members here post a link, during a debate, that refutes the points they are trying to make and does not support those points?

Oh, and btw, I was actually dissing Depak in that comment. What a wingnut. close(-)

This user has not commented on any articles or features...