Is Homosexuality Really A Sin?

[MPaler 72]

Working in restaurants over the years the word "marry" has indeed been used.

 

Also, your tone reminds me of Smash, but that can't be. He died long ago.

 

Sure, yet used in what manner? Did you ever hear "marry one cup of onions together with one cup of onions in your saucepan"? Does that make sense? Why does that not make sense? This is my point, ladies and gents. Screw the ketchup. Please, if you would, tell me why that does or does not make sense. How about you, irishguy. Care to take a crack at that one?

[irishguy 14]

Sure, yet used in what manner? Did you ever hear "marry one cup of onions together with one cup of onions in your saucepan"? Does that make sense? Why does that not make sense? This is my point, ladies and gents. Screw the ketchup. Please, if you would, tell me why that does or does not make sense. How about you, irishguy. Care to take a crack at that one?

Screw the ketchups? Because your example didn't work? How about "marry the salts" "marry the vinegars" "marry the mustards" which falls into the same category and are also used daily in restaurants. How about the millions of recipes that call for a bunch of ingredients to be married including things such as black and white pepper? So if you can marry black pepper and white pepper is it okay for interracial gays couples to call it marriage? Just not couples of the same colour?

[irishguy 14]

Did you notice anything odd about your examples? No? Nothing at all? Not one is a mention of this older than 2009. That probably does not strike you as odd, if you are one who believes everything you read on the web as gospel. I do not. Not saying it is wrong, but hey - since this is such a common thing to say and since, well, forever!; perhaps we could find 4 examples of this being used in this manner older than say, 2000? How about 1993? Yes, lets see if we can find any good example of this as far back as 1993, older than at least 2000. That is only 10-20 years and using that expression is far older than even that, right? Sure it is! They would not just start using that expression for something that has been around (since, well, I don't know, but longer than 1990, I know that for a fact) for much longer. So, this should not be a problem. Should it? I mean, it's not like this just started getting used in this manner in the last four or five years, now has it? Right about the time that the idea of gay marriage started really taking root? For that to be true, I would have to believe in conspiracies and that is most certainly not me. I just do not buy into the "vast left wing" or the "vast right wing" or the "media" conspiracy crap, do you? I hope not. (I think we did go to the moon, JFK was shot by one loon, 911 was hijacked airplanes, etc;) Right, then, so lets both look and see what we can find. Because I think that is just a little weird. What, we woke up one day and started saying "marry" the ketchups instead of "combine" them? I doubt that very seriously. Either I do not correctly remember what terminology we used at all those restaurants I worked in and managed after saying it a ga-jillion times, and hearing it as many times again, or this is damn peculiar.

 

Are you up for that?

 

By the way, how many restaurants have you worked at here in America where you heard it/used that expression? Not just across the border, but within America? I have in Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Arizona, Nevada and California. Mostly sit-down-and-order style places, nothing fancy though. And in the Navy, although that was not my primary job. I spent a week while in Australia with a rather cheeky fellow teaching him how to make Fried Chicken, "American" style. Not one of them once, in all those places, all that time, not once did I ever hear that term for anything other than "marrying" two different ingredients together. I know the piece equipment, such as it is, for combining the liquid condiments together though.

So now you have an issue with the timing? I've been in the industry since the mid 90's and have spoken at the National Food Show, first time being late 90's, I've consulted for American company's moving into Canada for 12 years, done direct consulting as up to date as March in New York, Maine, California, Washington and Arizona and have used the term used as I've described at every venue. I've also written hundreds of articles for numerous Restaurant related magazines many have which have been printed in the U.S.A at least six of which have used mention of the term "marry" in the context I've described and not once had an editor, reader etc comment on the use being "wrong" as you put it. As part of my consulting I've written training manuals for American Nation Wide restaurants where I've also used the term and 6 years later it's still in there....

[irishguy 14]

http://forums.foodservice.com/index.cfm?FSF_action=view_thread&FSF_UI_tab=forum&FSF_ID=9669

http://www.amateurgourmet.com/2004/03/on_ketchup.html

http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=108;t=000396;p=1

http://www.bottlesup.com/browseproducts/Ketchup-Saver.HTML There's some links from the early 2000's and even products being sold advertising using "marry the ketchups" I know this is after 2000 so you believe it to be all a part of the liberal media pushing an agenda-cus that makes a lot more sense then you being wrong but, you don't believe in conspiracies lol ya right. I've got a restaurant opening in two days but if I get time I can scan the pages from a ton of text books (written by American's) pre 2000 using the term in the same context I've described.

[MPaler 72]

http://forums.foodservice.com/index.cfm?FSF_action=view_thread&FSF_UI_tab=forum&FSF_ID=9669

http://www.amateurgourmet.com/2004/03/on_ketchup.html

http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=108;t=000396;p=1

http://www.bottlesup.com/browseproducts/Ketchup-Saver.HTML There's some links from the early 2000's and even products being sold advertising using "marry the ketchups" I know this is after 2000 so you believe it to be all a part of the liberal media pushing an agenda-cus that makes a lot more sense then you being wrong but, you don't believe in conspiracies lol ya right. I've got a restaurant opening in two days but if I get time I can scan the pages from a ton of text books (written by American's) pre 2000 using the term in the same context I've described.

 

Still nothing older than 2003. What is up with that?

[MPaler 72]

Screw the ketchups? Because your example didn't work? How about "marry the salts" "marry the vinegars" "marry the mustards" which falls into the same category and are also used daily in restaurants. How about the millions of recipes that call for a bunch of ingredients to be married including things such as black and white pepper? So if you can marry black pepper and white pepper is it okay for interracial gays couples to call it marriage? Just not couples of the same colour?

 

Nope, we are at an impasse with ketchup, clearly. We gotta move on, so maybe you can allow me to say it was a bad example on my part, since you clearly believe you are right and I believe I am. I say it and have heard it said one way, you another, so fair enough, screw the ketchup, alright? Forget the dates of origin, all that, alright? Because now we are arguing over who uses the term in what way, derailing my original point. Since this is clearly not going to make you understand where I am coming from, please allow me to put it another way that we can both understand; IOW, I think I have an example that might make more sense to you than those damn ketchups.

So, what about these simple questions:

Did you ever hear "marry one cup of onions together with one cup of onions in your saucepan" in your kitchen? Does that make sense? Why does that not make sense? Please, if you would, tell me why that does or does not make sense to you.

(hint: you almost hit on it when you said "you can marry black pepper and white pepper" but you are wrong about it being a color issue, it is not about black people and white people. Would you say "you can marry black pepper and black pepper" Yes? No? Why?)

[irishguy 14]

Nope, we are at an impasse with ketchup, clearly. We gotta move on, so maybe you can allow me to say it was a bad example on my part, since you clearly believe you are right and I believe I am. I say it and have heard it said one way, you another, so fair enough, screw the ketchup, alright? Forget the dates of origin, all that, alright? Because now we are arguing over who uses the term in what way, derailing my original point. Since this is clearly not going to make you understand where I am coming from, please allow me to put it another way that we can both understand; IOW, I think I have an example that might make more sense to you than those damn ketchups.

So, what about these simple questions:

Did you ever hear "marry one cup of onions together with one cup of onions in your saucepan" in your kitchen? Does that make sense? Why does that not make sense? Please, if you would, tell me why that does or does not make sense to you.

(hint: you almost hit on it when you said "you can marry black pepper and white pepper" but you are wrong about it being a color issue, it is not about black people and white people. Would you say "you can marry black pepper and black pepper" Yes? No? Why?)

While I can't say that you're wrong in never hearing it because who knows if you have-you stated I was wrong and that anyone with any sense wouldn't use "marry" as such- I have proven with a pretty significant amount of evidence that it is a fairly common expression within the restaurant industry even in your country. That seems to be to prove you wrong. "marry one cup of onion with one cup of onions" sounds stupid but so does "join one cup of onions with one cup of onions" however, as I've stated from the get go "marry" can/is often used with the same meaning as join (which I've proven with the ketchup example) so "can you marry those cups of onions and throw them in the frying pan" is something that is both used commonly and correctly and sounds as appropriate as "can you join those cups of onions and throw them in the frying pan". I'm sure now you've been proven wrong once you'll continue this ridiculous attempt to prove your point but I'm pretty sure when I've backed this one up with just as much proof that the term is used in this concept we'll be at this same point again-you wanting to move on with out admitting that you are wrong.

[MPaler 72]

While I can't say that you're wrong in never hearing it because who knows if you have-you stated I was wrong and that anyone with any sense wouldn't use "marry" as such- I have proven with a pretty significant amount of evidence that it is a fairly common expression within the restaurant industry even in your country. That seems to be to prove you wrong. "marry one cup of onion with one cup of onions" sounds stupid but so does "join one cup of onions with one cup of onions" however, as I've stated from the get go "marry" can/is often used with the same meaning as join (which I've proven with the ketchup example) so "can you marry those cups of onions and throw them in the frying pan" is something that is both used commonly and correctly and sounds as appropriate as "can you join those cups of onions and throw them in the frying pan". I'm sure now you've been proven wrong once you'll continue this ridiculous attempt to prove your point but I'm pretty sure when I've backed this one up with just as much proof that the term is used in this concept we'll be at this same point again-you wanting to move on with out admitting that you are wrong.

 

Well, now we are getting somewhere. See, we are over-using the term marry. We are incorrectly using it in place of join/add/combine. It may well be said to "marry ketchup and ketchup", but it is still incorrect to say it this way. Go right ahead and say "marry the vinegars", just realize you are not marrying them, YOU ARE COMBINING THEM. It is incorrect use of the word marry. The onions example proves that. You did answer me that "marry one cup of onions with one cup of onions" sounds stupid." We agree on that, right? Does this make PERFECT sense then: "Marry one onion to one apple"? Why, yes, that does make perfect sense. BECAUSE THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. So, therefore, "MARRY ONE MAN TO ONE MAN" makes no more Goddamn sense than saying "MARRY ONE ONION TO ONE ONION", now does it? GET IT? Now do you understand? If you would not say that about the 2 onions, why the fudge would you say that about 2 Men or 2 Women? Are you with me now? Is it finally sinking in?

 

I have nothing against civil unions, but you cannot call it a marriage. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE as it is an improper use of the word "marry". You may not want to read the rest of this. Because now I am going to prove you wrong and myself correct, using math. As in 1+1=2. No tricks. Just the math.

 

So, then, lets see if it works out, shall we? We are, after all, poker players, right? Math is easy for poker players.

 

Question: Which makes more sense? Marry one onion (man) to one onion (man), or Marry one onion (man) to one apple (woman)?

 

2I = The 2 items (1 onion/1 apple, 1 man/1 woman)

(4) = Total number of choices that could make sense: Marry/Combine/Add/Join

(number) = Number of choices that do make sense;

Subtract the two numbers to get answer "Can we use the term "Marry?".

0 = all 4 make sense, (you can use Marry, it makes sense). 1 = only 3 make sense (you cannot use Marry, it does not make sense)

 

With "...1 onion and 1 apple" you can say MARRY (1) them together or COMBINE (2) them together or JOIN (3) them together or ADD (4) them together. Onion+Apple=(2I=4-4) which equals 0. If the two items are different, then all 4 ways of saying it make sense (0). Yes, it is correct to use the term "Marry".

With "...1 onion and 1 onion" you can say COMBINE (1) them or JOIN (2) them together or ADD (3) them together. Onion+Onion=(2I=3-4) which equals 1. If the two items are the same, only 3 of the 4 ways of saying it make sense (1). No, it is incorrect to use the term "Marry".

So, if you replace 1 onion and 1 apple with 1 Man and 1 Woman, then you would of course get 1 Man + 1 Woman = (2I=4-4)=0; can use term "Marry": 1 Man + 1 Man = (2I=3-4)=1; Cannot use term "Marry": 1 Woman + 1 Woman = (2I=3-4)=1 Cannot use term "Marry"

 

However, if you still insist that you can somehow disprove this math, which clearly proves I am correct, then by all means do so. You can take it to a Math teacher, professor, or anyone over my head in math, to see if it is not 100.0% correct. If it's not correct, then 1+1 would not equal 2, now would it?

 

I think that is check and mate, correct?

[irishguy 14]

Well, now we are getting somewhere. See, we are over-using the term marry. We are incorrectly using it in place of join/add/combine. It may well be said to "marry ketchup and ketchup", but it is still incorrect to say it this way. Go right ahead and say "marry the vinegars", just realize you are not marrying them, YOU ARE COMBINING THEM. It is incorrect use of the word marry. The onions example proves that. You did answer me that "marry one cup of onions with one cup of onions" sounds stupid." We agree on that, right? Does this make PERFECT sense then: "Marry one onion to one apple"? Why, yes, that does make perfect sense. BECAUSE THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. So, therefore, "MARRY ONE MAN TO ONE MAN" makes no more Goddamn sense than saying "MARRY ONE ONION TO ONE ONION", now does it? GET IT? Now do you understand? If you would not say that about the 2 onions, why the fudge would you say that about 2 Men or 2 Women? Are you with me now? Is it finally sinking in?It is not over using a word or misusing it simply because you say so! Again marry/marriage are used commonly as join-it is even listed as in dictionary's as "to join" or "to join to individual items" your point is basically saying two individual ketchups or two individual onions are not individuals but are one ketchup/one onion all along. I say/dictionary's say/common use of terminology says that there is such things as two individuals of the say type can be married to create one. You keep deliberately using the singular form "marry one onion to one onion" which doesn't sound any more stupid to saying "combine one onion to one onion" or "join one onion one on onion" they are more fluid and all equally sound more appropriate as "combine two onions", "join two onions", "marry two onions", "marry two men". Do you GET IT? DO you UNDERSTAND? You would say it about two ketchups, onions, bottles of wine and why the fudge would you not say it about to men?

 

I have nothing against civil unions, but you cannot call it a marriage. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE as it is an improper use of the word "marry". You may not want to read the rest of this. Because now I am going to prove you wrong and myself correct, using math. As in 1+1=2. No tricks. Just the math. You do not own the rights to a word and the fact that I've proven marry is used the same as join in a bunch of contexts proves that.

 

So, then, lets see if it works out, shall we? We are, after all, poker players, right? Math is easy for poker players.

 

Question: Which makes more sense? Marry one onion (man) to one onion (man), or Marry one onion (man) to one apple (woman)?

 

2I = The 2 items (1 onion/1 apple, 1 man/1 woman)

(4) = Total number of choices that could make sense: Marry/Combine/Add/Join

(number) = Number of choices that do make sense;

Subtract the two numbers to get answer "Can we use the term "Marry?".

0 = all 4 make sense, (you can use Marry, it makes sense). 1 = only 3 make sense (you cannot use Marry, it does not make sense)

 

With "...1 onion and 1 apple" you can say MARRY (1) them together or COMBINE (2) them together or JOIN (3) them together or ADD (4) them together. Onion+Apple=(2I=4-4) which equals 0. If the two items are different, then all 4 ways of saying it make sense (0). Yes, it is correct to use the term "Marry".

With "...1 onion and 1 onion" you can say COMBINE (1) them or JOIN (2) them together or ADD (3) them together. Onion+Onion=(2I=3-4) which equals 1. If the two items are the same, only 3 of the 4 ways of saying it make sense (1). No, it is incorrect to use the term "Marry".

So, if you replace 1 onion and 1 apple with 1 Man and 1 Woman, then you would of course get 1 Man + 1 Woman = (2I=4-4)=0; can use term "Marry": 1 Man + 1 Man = (2I=3-4)=1; Cannot use term "Marry": 1 Woman + 1 Woman = (2I=3-4)=1 Cannot use term "Marry"

 

However, if you still insist that you can somehow disprove this math, which clearly proves I am correct, then by all means do so. You can take it to a Math teacher, professor, or anyone over my head in math, to see if it is not 100.0% correct. If it's not correct, then 1+1 would not equal 2, now would it? This is beyond retarded-again you do not own the rights to a word-it doesn't automatically become what you want it to just because you want it to. Again millions of people use it as the same as join.

 

I think that is check and mate, correct?This has to be a level, right? right? By your own reasoning if we replace "man and man" and "man and woman" with names you say marry is now right? So you can "marry Jamie and Chris" but you can't say "marry Jamie and Jamie", I say "marry Jamie and Jamie" is right but sounds dumb and would be better worded "marry the Jamie's" or "marry two Jamie's". You're entire argument hinges on your belief that there is no such thing as two individual items of the same likeness, my great uncle Don and aunt Don would be devastated by this....if you get bored we can start strolling through the rest of the English language so you can tell everyone how you think each word should be used regardless of how millions of people use them. This is beyond stupid-it hurts my head and my heart to realize there are people this dumb out there...

[MPaler 72]

 

Just the response I expected: none at all. You do not think that the proper use and meanings of words matters, but cannot give ANY reasonable argument as to why not. So, if you want to start calling day night, and night day, that is just ok, don't anyone dare correct you! And since MILLIONS of people do so, that now makes it accurate? RIGHT. You cannot find a rebuttal to my argument or the math, so you just start rattling on and on about things I did not say, adding in peoples names now. A guy and a girl both named Jamie, which has not one thing to do with what I am saying and you damn well know it, is just gibberish meant to derail my argument since you cannot fault it. Nowhere in my argument did I even come close to suggesting to you that your Uncle Don and your Aunt Don could not be "married" as they have the same name. Are you that ignorant or that incapable of admitting defeat once you lose the argument? Speaking of, if they are both the same name and sex, how on earth would you expect people to know which one you are talking about when you say Uncle Don or Aunt Don? What makes one man named Uncle Don different from one man named Aunt Don? Why is Uncle Don not called Aunt Don or vice-versa? How are people expected to know that? Just take a guess? Embarrass them when they meet and they call your uncle Don Aunt Don incorrectly? You see, in this way, It is the same for gay marriage. Which is the husband and which is the wife? This is why you differentiate between the two using "marriage" or "Civil Union". Do you expect people to "just know" which is which? Here, does this help you understand it?

 

So, if you replace 1 onion and 1 apple with 1 Man named Don and 1 Woman named Don, then you would of course get 1 Man named Don+ 1 Woman named Don= (2I=4-4)=0; can use term "Marry": 1 Man named Don + 1 Man named Don=(2I=3-4)=1; Cannot use term "Marry": 1 Woman named Don + 1 Woman named Don= (2I=3-4)=1 Cannot use term "Marry" IF YOU WANT TO MAKE SENSE WHEN USING THE WORD "MARRY".

 

Notice they can all be named EXACTLY the same name, IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE MATH nor does it change the argument. It is not a deliberate insult either. What will your next brilliant rebuttal to me be? Asexual species on other planets called Fred? It still will not win this argument for you. Apparently, I can agree 99% with you (civil unions), but if I don't go that extra 1% ("marriage" for all sexes), I am being a hurtful, hateful person with contempt for others.

 

SO TYPICAL. Maybe this explains the backlash to Gay Marriage in the United States. Clearly, It is either YOUR WAY or the HIGHWAY, despite any and all sound arguments to the contrary. For you, there simply are no valid arguments to the contrary. You are just correct and that is that, even if you cannot refute arguments against it. Even when clearly proven wrong, you just ignore facts and insist that "I am correct, no proof needed. Just take MY word for it."

 

BULL.

[irishguy 14]

Just the response I expected: none at all. You do not think that the proper use and meanings of words matters, but cannot give ANY reasonable argument as to why not. So, if you want to start calling day night, and night day, that is just ok, don't anyone dare correct you! And since MILLIONS of people do so, that now makes it accurate? RIGHT. You cannot find a rebuttal to my argument or the math, so you just start rattling on and on about things I did not say, adding in peoples names now. A guy and a girl both named Jamie, which has not one thing to do with what I am saying and you damn well know it, is just gibberish meant to derail my argument since you cannot fault it. Nowhere in my argument did I even come close to suggesting to you that your Uncle Don and your Aunt Don could not be "married" as they have the same name. Are you that ignorant or that incapable of admitting defeat once you lose the argument? Speaking of, if they are both the same name and sex, how on earth would you expect people to know which one you are talking about when you say Uncle Don or Aunt Don? What makes one man named Uncle Don different from one man named Aunt Don? Why is Uncle Don not called Aunt Don or vice-versa? How are people expected to know that? Just take a guess? Embarrass them when they meet and they call your uncle Don Aunt Don incorrectly? You see, in this way, It is the same for gay marriage. Which is the husband and which is the wife? This is why you differentiate between the two using "marriage" or "Civil Union". Do you expect people to "just know" which is which? Here, does this help you understand it?

Are you deliberately ignorant or just childish? This whole thing started with you saying the word couldn't be used in a certain manner/have a certain meaning I proved without ANY doubt that the word is indeed used with that meaning worldwide yet you continue to say it doesn't mean it. You've offered no proof just opinion on what you believe the word means and how it should be used-you're wrong and I've shown it. Now if you were going to say that "marry or marriage as a word has it's origin in a man taking a woman as his bride" that'd be one argument, the fact that the word has changed through the years to be used in other venues such as cooking "marry the salt and pepper" kills your point-you can not be the drawing point of when a word can grow or change and the place a starting point. As for the last part-my example has everything to do with what you said- two ketchups/two onions/two men are all individuals marrying/joining/combining is acceptable-your argument is beyond ignorant. I've got friends by the dozens referring to step parents as mom/dad not step mom/step dad...**** I grew up with two uncle Ken's when your point comes down to "which is the husband and which is the wife...Do you expect people to "just know" shows how ignorant you are.

So, if you replace 1 onion and 1 apple with 1 Man named Don and 1 Woman named Don, then you would of course get 1 Man named Don+ 1 Woman named Don= (2I=4-4)=0; can use term "Marry": 1 Man named Don + 1 Man named Don=(2I=3-4)=1; Cannot use term "Marry": 1 Woman named Don + 1 Woman named Don= (2I=3-4)=1 Cannot use term "Marry" IF YOU WANT TO MAKE SENSE WHEN USING THE WORD "MARRY".

 

Notice they can all be named EXACTLY the same name, IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE MATH nor does it change the argument. It is not a deliberate insult either. What will your next brilliant rebuttal to me be? Asexual species on other planets called Fred? It still will not win this argument for you. Apparently, I can agree 99% with you (civil unions), but if I don't go that extra 1% ("marriage" for all sexes), I am being a hurtful, hateful person with contempt for others. The math isn't affected by the word-it IS AFFECTED BECAUSE YOU"VE DONE THIS RETARDED EQUATION BASED ON THE FACT THAT YOU CLAIM PERSONAL/DIRECT OWNERSHIP OF THE WORD MARRY WITHOUT SHOWING ANY PROOF THAT IT IS IN FACT THE CASE. IN FACT YOU"VE BEEN GIVEN COUNTLESS PROOF THAT THE WORD DOESN"T MEAN JUST WHAT YOU SAY IT DOES. This may be the single stupidest thing I've seen on the internet...right in line with idiots who have zero ability to form ranges but always make the ranges big enough to justify their shitty calls/shitty shoves

 

SO TYPICAL. Maybe this explains the backlash to Gay Marriage in the United States. Clearly, It is either YOUR WAY or the HIGHWAY, despite any and all sound arguments to the contrary. For you, there simply are no valid arguments to the contrary. You are just correct and that is that, even if you cannot refute arguments against it. Even when clearly proven wrong, you just ignore facts and insist that "I am correct, no proof needed. Just take MY word for it." How is it either my way or the highway? I simply showed proof that the word is used in a context that used it wasn't. You offered zero proof or evidence and even if you did-it's already a beaten point when I've proved the word is commonly used in a way you said it isn't. Just for kicks here's more proof non restaurant related http://caribbean-pirates.com/nautical_glossary.php the term marry as in "marry the rope" why don't you google the origin of that and see how long ago that's been used?

 

BULL.

Here's a few more fun one for you proof

/pro͞of/

 

 

Noun

Evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement. fact

/fakt/

 

 

Noun

• A thing that is indisputably the case.
  
• Information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
  

Clearly there are multiple words in the English language that you don't understand.

[MPaler 72]

Here's a few more fun one for you proof

/pro͞of/

 

 

Noun

Evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement. fact

/fakt/

 

 

Noun

• A thing that is indisputably the case.
  
• Information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
  

Clearly there are multiple words in the English language that you don't understand.

 

Recipe for "winning" the debate (liberal dictionary):

Start with some paragraphs using all caps, as that alone helps prove your point. Add a refusal to answer most questions asked to one cup of answering the rest with off-putting pettifogging of the issue, as that also helps prove your point and sprinkle in some nonsense like "I simply showed proof that the word is used in a context that used it wasn't." Toss in some downright contradictory statements that attempt to cover your azz like "You offered zero proof or evidence and even if you did-it's already a beaten point", (since it was "beaten" as you declared it so, it must remain so forever as evidence that it is not beaten must therefore be simply ignored; that is what you basically are saying, rofl) simmer over a fire until confused beyond all recognition, add garash in the form of definitions that you screwed up but can instead accuse the other party of botching, and serve hot in a medium sized bowl.

 

And, here is the most important part; when the person you feed it to barfs, blame them for not understanding your clearly superior cooking skills.

 

You cannot refute the argument that I am making without going into left field, cannot give simple answers to simple questions and you offer a counterpoint that basically says "some people call the daytime nighttime and the nighttime daytime, so that alone erases the fact it clearly makes no sense. Therefore, we can do this with anything, it doesn't matter if makes sense or not!"

 

Congrats! You win! Chalk one up for you! Clap, clap, clap.

 

 

 

non·sense [non-sens, -suhns]

noun

1.

words or language having little or no sense or meaning.

2.

conduct, action, etc., that is senseless, foolish, or absurd: to have tolerated enough nonsense.

3.

impudent, insubordinate, or otherwise objectionable behavior: He doesn't have to take that nonsense from you.

4.

something absurd or fatuous: the utter nonsense of such a suggestion.

5.

anything of trifling importance or of little or no use.

 

Thesaurus

Main Entry:

nonsense  [non-sens, -suhns] absurdity, babble, balderdash, baloney, bananas,bombast, bull*, bunk, claptrap, drivel, fatuity,flightiness, folly, foolishness, fun, gibberish,giddiness, hogwash, hooey, hot air, imprudence,inanity, irrationality, jazz, jest, jive, joke,ludicrousness, madness, mumbo jumbo, palaver,poppycock, prattle, pretense, ranting, rashness,rot, rubbish, scrawl, scribble, senselessness,silliness, soft soap, stupidity, thoughtlessness,trash*, tripe Antonyms: clarity, common sense, fact, intelligibility, sense,truth, understanding

Main Entry: drivel Part of Speech: noun Definition: foolish talk Synonyms: Greek, babble, balderdash, blather, bunk,double-talk, gibberish, gobbledygook, hogwash,hooey, jabber, nonsense, poppycock, prating,rot*, rubbish*, tripe, twaddle Antonyms: sense

* = informal/non-formal usage

Main Entry: falderal Part of Speech: noun Definition: folderol, foolishness Synonyms: absurdity, baloney, bunk, craziness, garbage,gibberish, gobbledygook, horse feathers, lunacy,nonsense, stupidity, twaddle

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

I'll reference my old analogy of arguing with a retarded kid in the grocery store. MPaler is the retarded kid in the fruit section holding up a tomato and screaming "I got a banana, I got a banana".

 

You politely tell the retard that he's holding a tomato. The retard yells back "BANANA, BANANA"

 

Now, if you keep trying to convince the retard that he's holding a tomato and he keeps resisting, then you become the retard for arguing with a retard.

 

 

Long winded way to say, MPaler is out of his fcking mind. So much so that it seems to be a level. Marrying ketchups is a common term in the restaurant biz.

[ShakeZuma 585]

wait wait wait... I read this thread like a week ago and saw where he said nobody says "marrying the ketchups." that's not still being argued is it? please don't tell me it is.

[Essay21 2,385]

[MPaler 72]

I'll reference my old analogy of arguing with a retarded kid in the grocery store. MPaler is the retarded kid in the fruit section holding up a tomato and screaming "I got a banana, I got a banana".

 

You politely tell the retard that he's holding a tomato. The retard yells back "BANANA, BANANA"

 

Now, if you keep trying to convince the retard that he's holding a tomato and he keeps resisting, then you become the retard for arguing with a retard.

 

 

Long winded way to say, MPaler is out of his fcking mind. So much so that it seems to be a level. Marrying ketchups is a common term in the restaurant biz.

 

That's so cute. Too bad you cannot read, as Irish guy would clearly be calling the Tomato a banana. I would be the one trying to correct him. You are correct though; me trying to educate or correct a close minded fool does make me look like a fool myself, but I just did not realize how stupid he was. Thanks for showing me I should not argue with you either for the exact same reason, as you should clearly work harder at improving your reading comprehension skills before anyone does. Plus, you clearly think if we start "commonly" referring to the daylight hours as nighttime, that makes it "nightime" at high noon. Right...and you think I am out of my fcking mind.

 

​Well, that's because you are a fcking idiot.

 

I'll take your advice, as that was good; I suppose even a broken clock can be right twice a day.

Note to self; Avoid Ron_Mexico in any posts; low reading skills/IQ equal to number of cards in typical deck. Without jokers.

[ShakeZuma 585]

OH SNAP YO WITHOUT JOKERS

[MPaler 72]

OH SNAP YO WITHOUT JOKERS

 

Or the two extra cards that explain the game and advertise the card maker

[NickCave 194]

Marry doesn't even sound like a word to me anymore.

[MPaler 72]

Marry doesn't even sound like a word to me anymore.

 

We should just change every single word and all syntax in our language with "BOOB".

 

Boob, boob. Boob boob? Boob. Boob boob? BOOB BOOB BOOB!! (It's a knock-knock joke, get it?)

[funyet 53]

We should just change every single word and all syntax in our language with "BOOB".

 

Boob, boob. Boob boob? Boob. Boob boob? BOOB BOOB BOOB!! (It's a knock-knock joke, get it?)

 

[NickCave 194]

[ShakeZuma 585]

[Essay21 2,385]

[MPaler 72]