₦airaland Forum

Logicboy03:

Oh, now you want to be silent?

Tell us, are you gay or not?

carefreewannabe: Wow! That early on a Saturday. You are an early bird.

I have just had a quick at this article. I'll have a closer look later.

But please also consider that men die earlier. If the woman is much younger, she will become a young widow, which I think is not desirable.
It would be nice to become old together. From my point of view

For you, it will be nice. Other people make other choices.

Not everyone has interest in your fairytales.

sucad: Sometimes i feel like white people ended slavery a little too early.

Most times you must feel like an achievementless person.

As I said, women will always find there security even if it is an older man.

Is this perverted too?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20276610

Patreaus and Broadwell. 20 years age gap between them.

Logicboy03: Yawn. Go and gargle on your boyfriends ballz.

Your fucktardery is not needed here before you derail the thread

person, stop sharing your gay issues.

I can already see how you are passionate about being accepted and call accepting you "progressive".

FufuKing: it's because you guys eat too much food, overweight fat bantus. You people are so corrupt, blame your negro DNA

person, we have food, you Somalis don't.

We are nice enough to feed you.

Logicboy03: Yawn.


Arrogant, douchey and nonsensical.


wise up

person, as your God, I think you need to show more reverence.

This is what is called "blasfemi" in Sagamu.

Logicboy03: Yawn, I didnt read poast the second sentence. Your claims are always exaggerated and nonsensical. You have some nerve talking about logic

I have numbered them to be able to easily reference when you err.

You just broke rule (3).

Can you see why I am quick to call you person?

Logicboy03: Whatever our argument is, could you stop using abusive words? hmmm?

1) Answer questions that challenge your claims.

2) Accept when your argument is killed instead of claiming senseless, unwarranted, chimeral victories or refusing to answer any further questions.

3) Be polite to your superiors except you can prove they are not, it is good chance to learn; grab it.

4) Don't attempt strawmans to deviate from a stewpid point you made that has been highlighted.

5) Don't try and twist arguments when you see you are stuck.

6) Don't use conjectures or make up figures.

7) Apply common sense to your deductions.

8.) And MOST IMPORTANTLY, defend your arguments with logic and sense.

Then I would not have any need to insult you.

I insult people that can't do all that and then claim to be intelligent or logical.

Logicboy03: The hypocrisy on the African-American Romney Voters
The claim from this camp is that Mitt Romney will bring back the traditional or christian American values. They have problems with Obama's support of gay marriage and Obama's liberal/progressive views on certain social issues such as abortion and climate change. It is clear that many of these African-Americans are religious conservatives or at the very least conservative in their principles.

Huh!

So you see liberal and progressive as the same thing and conservative as the opposite?

Logicboy03: Seriously?

Wouldnt it have made more sense if you just kept quiet?

That is what they call "Saved by the Bell".

It was a pleasure intellectually slaughtering you.

I will look out for the next opportunity to do so.

Logicboy03: Everyone can see that you have lost the argument. You have shifted the goal posts so far and pulled so many straw men that the argument has become almost too foolish to engage in.

You rain abuses to cover up your losses.

Me, shifted the goalpost?

ROFLMAO!

I am the one that is moving from priest to monks to actually "drop that"?

Let me guarantee you something: By the time I finish with you, the common yab you will get in the Religion section is "I will get Sagamite to come and deal with you again".

Logicboy03: Strawmen, you have played;

-Russia is in the EU (who said this)

You are a person, this is what I asked you:

"Show me 5 EU countries that are not on the wikipedia page, that practice conjugal visits.

If you show me, especially if it is practiced widespread in those countries, then I will accept it is not a rarity".

So why is Russia in your list of EU countries?

Can you see how dumb you are?

Logicboy03: -Raped victims are not gay (who implied the opposite of this)

No 1, I never said you said that. I just stated it is a common logic.

No 2, considering you are so dumb to think men in jail engaging in gay sex are gay, I would not be surprised if you say that.

Cretin, understand strawmans before you claim it.

Logicboy is in the abbatoir o!

Logicboy03: -Rarity as part of my argument. (is)

Huh!

Logicboy03: When exposed that when you were shouting 10/23 countries in Europe, you were using a 1982 source of information, you restort to shouting "this is 2012" as if it is a valid response.

The link you used is a 1982 citation. A lot has changed since then.


Who ever said that Russia is an EU country? See how you nitpick nonsense and play strawmen? European countries in the link, bro.


Italy allows conjugal visits
http://digitaljournal.com/article/258754



See how I back my claims with evidence? You are yet to prove that conjugal visits is a rarity, especially using Europe as a model which you claimed it is in Europe.

Furthermore, the interpretation EU laws on humans rights and family puts pressure on most of it members to have some form of conjugal visits.


Furthermore, common sense will tell you that most EU or European countries are not Official English speaking countries. Some of their info is not available in English. I learnt this when looking for the best cheap hotels in the north of france.

You are a person!

YOU produced a 1982 citation, not me.

YOU claimed conjugal visits are increasing in EU, back up the claim. This is 2012.

So YOU said: "....the interpretation EU laws on humans rights and family puts pressure on most of it members to have some form of conjugal visits". Where did you get that from? From your arsse?

If not from your arsse, show us where. I am sure it would have been in English for you to understand it and state it here.

person, show us how conjugal visit is common in Europe. Let me guide you since you are so stewpid to know how to prove.

1) Show a majority of countries allow conjugal visits.

2) Then move on to show that in these majority of countries, it is permitted for at least half of prisoners if not majority or all.

3) If you want to now kill it by showing it is not a rarity but actually common. Prove conjugal visits are common in the World as a whole.

You are too moronic, I have lent you a brain wave.

Logicboy03: Yawn. Replying your foolishness will get more deviations from you from the original topic. I have already given you evidence that monks abuse children but you claim that they have no access to children.


Anyways lets stick to the original argument; A prisoner that engages in gay sex is a gay.

You are a person!

When you built your moronic analogy, what you needed to prove was that priests (okay lets make it monks since you shifted ) that molests kids do not have access to other choices. This is to support that your analogy made sense.

So I asked you:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Answers please.

Stop running otherwise I will Paxman you!

Paxman is coming!

Logicboy03: I didnt read past your second sentence.

I gave a valid and logical reason why I asked you if you were a liberal (because you mentioned liberals). Yet, you throw it away. Goodluck with reading my mind from the computer screen and creating false theories about me and your claim that progressivism is under liberalism

You are a person!

You did not ask if I was a liberal. You asked if I was a conservative.

https://www.nairaland.com/1072447/could-atheism-considered-gay-religion/4#12575678

FOOOOOL!

Now answer me: Why did you ask if I was conservative, why did you not ask if I was a progressive? THAT IS WHAT YOU SHOULD ANSWER, person!

Greatpius: Education: He should create more school most especially Higher Institutions.
Employment: He should also create mass employment.
Security, electricity Power supply, health care services, good roads, construction of companys and water supply. May God help.

It is not normally the job of goverments to create employment.

They are there to create the environment for people to engage in economic activity (e.g. people setting up businesses and creating employment).

[quote author=uj_sizzle]1. Money
2. 'Right' woman not yet found.
3. Immaturity

in that order.[/quote]What do you mean by immaturity?

People that are not married are immature?

Logicboy03: So you use a 1982 database to say something is rare? 10/23 countries? 45% is rare? Not only that, you are foolish enough to believe that the database wont increase

The database list only 10 countries that do conjugal visits; Switzerland, Germany, Holland , Norway, Yugoslavia, Russia, Denmark, Spain, UK (home visits)

could add many more countries eg France, Belgium, Ireland, Italy

So you see how foolish you are? So how do you know that it is a minority? ow do you know that it is rare in the world without evidence? Fail

You are a person!

This is not 1982. This is 2012, the Age of the Internet.

Not the Age of moronic conjecture by an ediot that moronically has "logic" in his name.

Show us that the majority of EU countries provided conjugal visits and mostly give it to all or majority of prisoners.

In the era of the internet, such information should be available on the net, especially for developed countries (i.e. EU).

Have you ever heard of Google?

Secondly, dumbfuck, since when did Russia become part of the EU?

Thirdly, where did you see that Italy gives conjugal visits?

Logicboy03: Yawn.....keep running from the original argument!

A male prisoner that sleeps with another male prisoner is a gay.

person, apart from common sense (which you obviously lack ), I have shown you a report that says majority of people that rape in prison. Obviously, common sense will tell those that have it that majority of those that get raped are not gay.

Your daft arsse, through your rorku (you must kill me today) attitude, stuck with your moronic sense assumption and tried to make an analogy with priests that molest children.

When I pointed to you that priests have exactly the same choices as you so do not need to molest anyone, but prisoners do not have such choices, you then tried to shift from priests to monks (who hardly have access to children). Then you talked about "young men" instead of "children" and Hermit monks, not all monks o, staying "far away" (ROFLMAO ). Part of the confusion that arises when Sagamite is slaughtering fucktards.

So I asked you:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Answers please.

You were answering my questions but the brainpower behind those quesions got you battered, confused and more stuck as you throw more moronic "Hermit-like" answers flailingly. When you now saw that you were intelluctually slaughtered, you have now refused to answer the questions anymore but jus make your moronic assertions you cannot back up.

Logicboy03: Answer; I asked you if you were a liberal because you mentioned liberals. This is the last time i will answer this question

You are a person!

That is not an answer.

I mentioned liberals, and so?

If I mentioned liberals, why did you ask me if I was a conservative? Why did you not ask if I was a progressive since you argue moronically that the term liberals don't cover for progressive.

Why did you ask if I was conservative, why did you not ask if I was a progressive? THAT IS WHAT YOU SHOULD ANSWER, person!

I mentioned liberals, and so?

Did I mention progressive too then? Or you figured that progressives can fall under liberals in generic terms?

Then when you were looking at grasping at straws to think you can catch you God out, you started your moronic arguments that progressives are completely different from liberals despite the dictionary definition of liberal includes progressive.

You have been intellectually slaughtered!

Logicboy03: lol....You are using insults to cover up. Everyone can see that you have lost the argument.


1) The argument was simple- Prisoners had a choice of masturbation or conjugal visits or both.

-You claimed conjugal visits are rare- I countered that the rarity had nothing to do with the original argument
-You claimed that conjugal visits are rare. I countered that you didnt put up any evidence that it is rare (still no evidence from you on the rest of the world)
-I put up evidence showing that it is not rare (10 out 23 countries in Europe). You went to shift the argument to how the conjugal visits are enforced
-I told you that the number of countries in Europe has increased since 1982 on conjugal visits. You ignored this fact.
-I hope you know that that figure of 10 countries allowing conjugal visits has increased?

The biggest fact here is that you have never put one single piece of evidence forward showing your rarity. Your claims on Africa is false. Swaziland allows conjugal visits. Please, put up evidence and shut up. I have provided evidence for my claims.

You are daft!

You have put up the evidence it is rare!

It is practiced by a minority of countries in the WEST, talkless of minority of countries in the WORLD, and only given to a minority of prisoners in these countries.

You were slaughtered!

You are a person!

What fact? In your moronic world, your conjectures are what you call "facts".

Show me how it has increased.

Logicboy03: 2) You said that prisoners who have gay sex are not gay. I countered by saying any man that has gay sex is gay.

I gave an example of a sexually frustrated (wich is the reason cited at times) Preist molesting a boy. He is always a pedophile. How can a prisoner claim he is not gay with the same excuse of sexual frustration?

It is the action we judge not intentions. Unless you are a mind reader

How can you be daft enough to use Priests as analogy with prisoners? Is that an intelligent analogy?

Again, what I asked you was:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Answers please.

Logicboy03: 3) You ran away from the liberal/progressive argument.

You have lost the argument and it is clear! You fail. You have tried to lie and not put any evidence. You have ran away from 3 of your original positions to nitpick

Everyone can see whether you put any link for the rarity of conjugal visits (none) Then you were nitpicking at European conjugal visit laws which are far more liberla than American ones (epic fail).

You have lost

All I am waiting for is:

Why you did not ask me if I was a progressive? STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!

I said you would be breakfast. You are toast!

People are watching in scary awe. Saga does not have mouth. Saga does EXACTLY what he said he is going to do.

Slaughter you!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpF-oUvwruI&

funkybaby: ok, if you say so.

the sagamite i know. . . . everybody that does not agree with his opinion is a cretin or person

**sighs**

Nah! If I pick someone's opinion to critique, it is because it is too fucktardious, that is why it appears like if everybody that disagrees with me.

People have disagreed with me on NL peacefully. Most I don't even bother challenging.

When I challenge, it is because I can smell a pure person!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BpcArRYTpE

funkybaby: yeah, o bad gan. that why i loff ijebu men! very brainy! i love reading your arguments.

lemme throw you a challenge . . . . . . . put your points across without mentioning 'person' and the rest. can you do that

I can (like with Reygivus) but I just choose not to with fucktards like Logicboy.

Logicboy, you are in the intellectual abbatoir!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAUDWVuOUq0

funkybaby: ^^^^^^ you should be in bed and not here discussing conjugal visits.

you have/can never change.

you can never have an 'intellectual' argument without throwing in your buzz words - 'person', 'm.oron',

funkybaby, omoge westside!

Sho ri bi mo she cut person yi up?

Mo baaad gan!

Welcome back to the bloody entertainment.

Logicboy03: Your dishonesty is quite frightening. You have already lost the argument

1) You claimed that rarity is part of my argument. It was a lie. Rarity had nothing to do with my argument
2) You claimed that conjugal visits are rare. is 10 out of 23 rare? 45% is rare? Are you foolish?
3) You asked for 5 countries and I gave you 5 and now you are nitpicking to save face

4) Let us visit the link

a) The link was from 1982 and only 10 out of 23 European countries then had conjugal visits. France and Belgium were not mentioned in those 10 countries. Furthermore, many countries are adopting a harmonised EU law and so some more European countries have allowed conjugal visits since 1982.

b) I mentioned 3 countries from that 1982 link. 2 of which have very liberal takes on conjugal visits (Sweden and Norway).
You went ahead to remix the link to say that only 3 european countries have liberal policies on conjugal visits (nitpicking and lying)

The quote for other countries you put up is also a liberal policy on conjugal visit compared to modern day american states that have so many restrictiosn.

"The Netherlands, Switzerland, West Germany, and Yugoslavia permit visits for selected groups, usually inmates who have served much of their sentences".

"Inmates in open prisons are allowed a three-night home stay every three months. Conjugal visits are only permitted to high security prisoners if their spouse is an inmate as well".

Only Sweden, Norway, and Denmark have very liberal policies for all prisoners.

You are a person!

Say "Yes, Sir"!

10 out of 23 countries practice conjugal visit. That is a minority.

Out of this 10, majority only give conjugal visit to a minority of prisoners. That breaksdown the minority to more of a minority.

How is that not a rarity?

I asked you to:

"Show me 5 EU countries that are not on the wikipedia page, that practice conjugal visits.

If you show me, especially if it is practiced widespread in those countries, then I will accept it is not a rarity".

Your moronic arsse showed me 3 countries, of which one (Denmark) was already on the wikipedia list and you talk about dishonesty and losing the argument?



You are a person!

Those facts alone stand on the argument that conjugal visits are a rarity.

NOW ADD the fact that only few countries in the world give conjugal visits out of the over 200 in the world. First of all, none of the 56 countries in Africa does. In the countries it is offered, it is normally only to a minority of select group of prisoners.

person that calls himself Logicboy, is conjugal visit not a rarity?

Back up your conjecture, it is Saga Saga you are debating with. YOUR GOD!

"Furthermore, many countries are adopting a harmonised EU law and so some more European countries have allowed conjugal visits since 1982."

Back it up!

HYENAS DON'T STEP TO LIONS! LIONS ARE THE KINGS! You are stewpid for attempting!

Logicboy03: You are switiching and changing to move away from the the main argument.

You lose.

A man that sleeps with another man is not gay according to you. Simple.

I maintain that a man that sleeps with another man is gay or bisexual.

You are a person! I am not switching anything, you tried to switch from priest to monks when you got stuck. I am asking you questions based on your moronic analogy.

Fucktards make moronic analogies, as I said, and then you proved consequently. How did you compare PRIESTS that have exactly the same choices as YOU to prisoners that do not, person!

Again, what I asked you was:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Answers please.

Logicboy03: You are free to look at my previous comments.

In summary, I have been providing evidence and debunking you only for you to switch and shift the argument.

You fail

You are a person!

Show me!

Put the link down.

So you can run and go and dig out links on conjugal visits when you moronically felt confident you could catch your God out but you are running from providing a link to show you answered a question, which is a simpler task?

Logicboy03: Sweden, Norway, Holland
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=89568

France,
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main47.asp?filename=Cr091010Conjugal_visit.asp

Beligum
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/812165.stm


Wow Sagamite, you have just been debunked!!!

Ye, Ye, Ye!

My belle o, my head o!

Let me take extracts from your own link:

"Conjugal visiting is permitted in 10 of the 23 European countries surveyed. Sweden, Norway, and Denmark have very liberal policies for all prisoners".

So it is in a minority of countries?

Now let us move close to how widespread the practice are in those countries:

"The Netherlands, Switzerland, West Germany, and Yugoslavia permit visits for selected groups, usually inmates who have served much of their sentences".

"In Belgium: Inmates in open prisons are allowed a three-night home stay every three months. Conjugal visits are only permitted to high security prisoners if their spouse is an inmate as well".

Only Sweden, Norway, and Denmark have very liberal policies for all prisoners.


Can you see how daft you are?

Only a minority of countries offer conjugal visits and it is normally only to a select group of prisoners, not to all or majority of prisoners.

Logicboy, you are a ................person!

Logicboy03: The fails.......lord, save me from the fails!!!!!


Your questions are quite irrelevant.


1)Many monks are priests and monks have molested boys in the past http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_the_English_Benedictine_Congregation

2)Hermit monks live away from society.

[size=14pt]
3) The main point was that male prisoners that sleep with men are gay. Which you have failed to disprove[/size]

You are a person! The questions are relevant because it proves your analogy is daft, just like fucktards struggle with analogies AS I SAID, AND YOU PROVED.

Again, what I asked you was:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Answers please.

Logicboy03: Fail....I have answered the question many times. Keep asking, dummy

Show me ONE of the many times where you answered it.

Logicboy03: Rarity? You have no evidence that it is a rarity. You also miss the point that rarity has nothing to do with my original argument.


[size=14pt]Pollock, who was part of a gang that made millions from dealing speed and cannabis after flooding the British market, said: "I would like to know why prisoners in England and Wales are not permitted conjugal visits when this practice is widespread in other European countries.
"Indeed, whilst spending some time in a Spanish jail, such visits were recognised as being important to the family unit.
[/size]


Do you hear that? That is the sound of Sagamite's arguments being hammered and destroyed!

Show me it is widespread, don't give me the conjecture of a prisoner. Which schools failed you?

Let me help you out.

Show me 5 EU countries that are not on the wikipedia page, that practice conjugal visits.

Then that will be proof that "many European countries are not mentioned in the list wile most EU countries accept conjugal visits or home visits".

You dumbfcuk!

If you show me, especially if it is practiced widespread in those countries, then I will accept it is not a rarity.

Logicboy03: lol....save me from the fails and ignorance!

1) Many monks are priests. I guess you were never a catholic.
2) Hermit monks live away from the society

A man that has sex is gay or bisexual. End of story.


You lose!

What I asked you was:

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now?

Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"?

So Monks molest "young men"?

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

You have only answered the first question. Try again. Don't dodge my questions, you are on the slaughter slab.

Reyginus, can you see how I slaughter fucktards! CAN YOU?

Logicboy03: After being debunked, you shift the issue to a question that I have already answered!

I asked you if you were a liberal because you mentioned liberals. Had you mentioned progressives, I would have asked the same.

Sorry, Sagamite, you lose

Show me where you answered the question. I am still waiting for an answer.

Logicboy03: 1) And when or where did I ever use rarity as a central argument? Why do you lie so much? You love straw men?


2) Wait, you dont know what happens in the rest of the countries not listed in the wikipedia list, yet you claim that conjugal visits are not allowed there or are very rare around the world? I hope you know that many European countries are not mentioned in the list wile most EU countries accept conjugal visits or home visits.

[size=14pt]
You see how you lie and then claim victory?[/size]

The rarity you used is CONJUGAL VISIT. Learn to comprehend.

You are getting confused?

Prove "many European countries are not mentioned in the list wile most EU countries accept conjugal visits or home visits".

I wait.

Logicboy03: Lol....you keep failing


There are priests who do not have access to women. These are mainly monks and hermit monks who live among themselves. These monks will have young men who are in training to become monks or priests


Even if the situation is different, the labelling is the same. If a man sleeps with a 10 year old, he is a pedophile. If a preist sleeps with a child, he is a pedophile. It is the action that determines the label.

A man that sleeps with another man is gay or bisexual. simple.



You keep failing and then claiming victory. You're sad.

So it has changed from Priests to Monks now? Since when did "young men" equate to the same thing as "children"? So Monks molest "young men"?



My Belle o, My Head o!

First of all, show me how it is prevalent for monks to molest young boys. Please don't struggle and switch back to priest when you get stuck.

Secondly, explain to me how monks do not have access to women. Are they locked up in monasteries?

Also, I asked you:

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

Start sweating!

Logicboy03: 1) You are beating around the bush progressivism is not under liberalism because you can also have progressive conservativism

2) Progressive and liberal are used interchangeably because they have some overlapping ideals but they are not the same. Never.

3) There are left wing conservatives, ignoramus.

4) I answered your question. You mentioned liberals and that is why I asked if you're a liberal.

No, you daft arsse is beating around the bush.

Now answer my quesiton:

Why you did not ask me if I was a progressive? STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!

Logicboy03:

You just made a statement that you cant back up. (look at point number 2)

1) The rate of conjugal visits in the world is quite irrelevant to my argument. It was either conjugal visits or masturbation or both if possible.

2) Out of the countires we know of (thanks to the wikipedia page), most of them allow conjugal visits. Claiming that it is rare is quite foolish, unless you have contrary evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugal_visit

You are a person!

You are struggling.

You realise you are on the slab at the abattoir?

If you use a rarity as a central argument, then the rarity is relevant, mugu.

No 2, your daft arsse is too stewpid to deduce that the listed countries are the core of the few countries (out of the over 200 countries in the world) that allow conjugal visits. WORSE still, some (if not most) only allow it in segments of the country or to very few prisoners.

You are daft!

You are a foool!

I said it before.

Logicboy03: Fail....Oh lord, deliver me from Sagamite's Epic fails!!!!!



Some priests have access to young boys, some to nuns and some to women or young girls.

It is the same situation where some prisoners have access to conjugal visits and some to only fellow prisoners.


The priests that sleep with children are pedophiles

The prisoners that sleep with fellow men are gay.


Simple logic which you fail at

Let me laugh for a minute.



My belle o, my head o!

And this cretin will then turn around and say conjugal visits are not central to his argument?

How is it the same?

1) ALL priest have access to exactly the same choices YOU have.

2) Tell me what proportion of prisoners have access to conjugal visits?

You are a person! Don't attempt analogy.

Reyginus, can you see the way I cut people up? Can you see the way I murder people.

I AM BADDD!!!

Logicboy03: Liberal is used interchangeably with progressive since many liberals are progressive but it doesnt mean that they are the same thing or one is under another.


There are progressive conservatives;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_conservatism


Soon, you will tell me that prossivism is under conservatism. No Progressivism is an ideology on its own.

So generally, liberal can be an umbrella term for progressives?

Read the first line of the link you provided:

Progressive conservatism is a conservative ideology that incorporates progressive policies alongside conservative policies.

That is a centre-right movement that has taken a few left (liberal) views.

Here is the link to Progressivism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

"In contemporary times, the term progressivism is used to describe a wide range of views associated with left-wing political movements."

Tell me, is it conservatives that are left-wing?

Adn you still have not answered why you did not ask me if I was a progressive. STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!

F00028: I know you don't have it.
God.d.amned mental midget

I don't have your daft madrassa type of education.

I have the top education of the superior civilisation that is why I can never be as daft as you.

ashmanpolo: 'SagamitefuckTardcretin' is like A poor man I met 2day trekking and selling books title "How to make 5 million naira in two weeks"

Is this in English, person?

F00028: rule number 1, that mental midget, sagamouse, is only good for laughs and not to be taken seriously- it's a waste of bandwidth.

rule number 2, never use the word "educated" in reference to him in any sense- it's an insult to educated people.

Madrassa cretin, what do you know about education?

Logicboy03: Yes, so how did you reach from there all the way to claiming that I said that conjugal visits are the norm? Fail....epic fail.

How is conjugal visits being the norm even central to my argument when it is not even what I said?

You are person!

Conjugal visits are very rare/low globally. Very few countries practice it and few prisoners in the countries that practice it get the right to it. So why bring it up if it is not central to your argument?

Logicboy03: lets flip your argument. If a sexually frustrated priest (because of celibacy) has sex with a pre-teen boy, the priest is not a pedophile because of sexual frustration?

Sagamite, you have just been pwned.

I told you not to attempt analogy, you are too stewpid to do one.

A sexually frustrated priest has access to other forms of sex without anyone stopping him or knowing. He can go to a whorehouse and get his fix if he wanted. If he ignores all other options and focus on pre-teen boys, he is then likely a paedophile.

Cretin, how is your daft analogy similar to a prisoner locked up and who has only access to other same sex prisoners?

Did I not say it that moorons don't know how to develop analogies?

Breakfast!

Logicboy03: Progressive doesnt fall under liberal. Epic fail. They have overlapping ideals. Epic fail is epic


Secondly, I asked you about being liberla because you mentioned liberals in the first place!


Keep on failing!

person, why did you not ask me if I was a progressive or a liberal? Why did you ask conservative? You know progressives and liberals are virtually similar?

How come the dictionary definition of liberal includes progressive?

When I tell fucktards like you that you are not at my intellectual level, you say I am arrogant.

ashmanpolo: 1) You are foool.

U go fear grammar na

Shut up, person.

Logicboy03: 1) Straw man. It was not central to my argument.

2) Osama did not believe that he was a terrorist, rather he believed that he was a man of god. So because a prisoner that engages himself in gay sex doesnt believe that he is gay, he is no more gay?

lol....if you engage in gay sex, you are gay or bisexual. Simple logic.

3) Lies. You mentioned something about liberal atheists and that is why I asked you if you were an atheist.


Keep exploding with the insults to cover your epic fails

1) You are foool. I said people engage in gay sex in prisons are not gay. Your dumb arsse says if they do, they are gay because they can have conjugal visits or self-service. Cretin, that is a central argument.

2) You are a person! It is common sense that sexually frustrated animals (including humans) engage in any available sexual activity. Saying a prisoner that is locked up and decides to use a man as a substitute for a woman is gay shows how dumb you are. As I said, I don't call people names they do not deserve. You are a cretin!

3) Here are the facts, cretin: https://www.nairaland.com/1072447/could-atheism-considered-gay-religion/4#12575678 Why did you not ask me "Are you a progressive? If you can throw "liberal" around, you should know what a progressive is"? Your dumb arsse knew that progressive generally falls under liberal?

You are a person!

I will slaughter you anyday!

ashmanpolo: I'll just logically deduce right now that this guy has a natural head ache

I said shut up, person!

Logicboy03: Epic fail


1) I never implied or said it was the norm. Strawman. I twas never central to my argument. Fail.

2) There are prisoners that dont engage in such acts. Masturbation or celibacy. A man has to be gay to think of another man's azz. There are priests that have sex with nuns and there are those that have with young boys. Sexual frustration can not turn you gay. Unless your argument is that sexual frustration turned priests into pedophiles

3) Lies. You mention liberals and thats why I asked you if you were liberal.

Furthermore, saying that they are under the same umbrella is a meaningless statement. It would be like saying Islam and christianity are under the same umbrella which can be both true and false.

1) You are a fool, it was central to your arguments.

2) You are a person! It is common sense that not all prisoners that engage in homosexual sex in prisons are gay or bi. http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/prison/report4.html#_1_26

"This terminology is deceptive, however, in that it ignores the fact that the vast majority of prison rapists do not view themselves as gay. Rather, most such rapists view themselves as heterosexuals and see the victim as substituting for a woman.". Fcking mooron!

3) You are a fuckard! So why did you not ask me if I was a progressive or a liberal? Why did you ask if I was a conservative or liberal? Fooooooool.

This is the same moooron that does not know the difference between being gay and demonstrating gay behaviours.

Your intellect is below my feet. And stop the poor analogy. It is just a sign you are dumb as I said.

ashmanpolo: Cyberspace is not the place to demonstrated "academic" arguments like "There is no smoke without fire" as your proofing system.


Now read this comment again and justify ur grammar. Educated illiterate. This is the umpteenth time you are making an erratic statement here. Biiizaaga

Shut the fck up, cretin!

ashmanpolo: Only eediots talk like u. Ϋя problem is dat u don't know anything, yet u don't know dat u don't know. Bastard local champion coming here †Φ argue trash. *just passing*

Shut up, person!

Dumb arsse foool with the intellect of a rat thinking he is superior to human beings that are mostly sharper than him but are just unlucky to be poor in a country of fucktards like him in power.