-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
C
Ok, so if I'm in public, no matter who I'm with- I never order spaghetti (even tho it's awesome). I rarely have a chance to eat the ghetti by myself, but if those stars align, you're right good hair don't care. So basically, I'm penalized by my inability and lack of athleticism in enjoying spaghetti. The fork-rollup technique is like the perfect storm of anxiety for me. "When will I reach the end of this noodle." or "Dear God I've rolled up so much relative mass of spaghetti, is it proportionate to my bite size". Is there help for people like me?
Yes, just eat it in private, with others who don't care/are the same, or anywhere if you don't care what others think. Long ago I stopped caring what others thought about me. I do so many things in ways that I am not supposed to, and I have gotten to the point with those things that I can do it better than the people who do it "correctly." I guess I just like messing with people and seeing their expressions when they realize what just happened.
U
I use a butterknife to eat spaghetti what does that make me? 
Jk I use spoon or fork as well or if we have a Spork (the half spoon/half fork) that KFC sells with their sides lol......
I like the spoon the best b/c you can eat the spaghetti in chunks ....ain't nobody got time for that.... to twiddle fingers with a fork to roll up spaghetti....
Jk I use spoon or fork as well or if we have a Spork (the half spoon/half fork) that KFC sells with their sides lol......I like the spoon the best b/c you can eat the spaghetti in chunks ....ain't nobody got time for that.... to twiddle fingers with a fork to roll up spaghetti....
Dude653,
It's really time to BACK UP YOUR ACCUSATIONS.
-- All you've done is slander, and accuse, with ZERO EVIDENCE to support your accusations against Pence.
-- If you can't back up your accusations... that's what we call slander, not debate.
If you have evidence of his tyrannical views, which are documented, and in context... we'd all like to see it.
I'm always open to seeing facts and evidence.
Your Tactics So Far:
1. You made accusations against Pence.
No problem. Lets dig into that... see if it's true.
2. You have failed, for 7pages, to even ATTEMPT to give any evidence for your accusations.
3. When asked to give evidence for your accusations, you simply ignore all requests.
4. You ignore all requests for evidence, over and over... as if you don't hear it. I'll admit this is probably convenient for you, but it certainly gives the impression you have no evidence.
4. If you have evidence for your accusations, then give the evidence... we'll all listen. Maybe we'll learn something.
I'm always happy to listen to facts and evidence.
5. If you have no evidence... then you're just SLANDERING people because you don't like them.
It isn't debate, and it isn't logic, and it isn't rational... it's just someone being angry.
It's your right to be angry and dislike the VP... but being angry isn't debate or reason.
6. To reiterate, you've been asked several times to PROVIDE EVIDENCE for your accusations... and you IGNORE these requests, and keep REPEATING LITTLE MANTRAS like you're brain washed.
Conclusions:
* If you provide evidence, and debate like an adult, you'll receive respect even from those who disagree.
I'm sure most people here are open to rational discussion. I'm certainly open to rational discussion. In fact, I really don't know much about Pence at all... but I DO recognize the difference between EVIDENCE and SLANDER.
* If you refuse to provide evidence, and keep repeating mantras like you're brainwashed and can't think for yourself... well... that's how you're going to be treated.
I'm sorry about that, but most of us are trying to live in reality.
If you have evidence, then provide it.
- If you don't have evidence then you should do exactly as the ADL was forced to do recently... they were forced to ADMIT they had ZERO evidence of Steve Bannon EVER saying anything anti-semitic.
- If you don't have evidence for your accusations against Pence, then you should ADMIT you have no evidence.
* We should listen, or ignore you, depending on your evidence.
- If you have facts and evidence for your accusations, then we should all listen attentively, and give it consideration.
- If you have no facts or evidence, then we all need to ignore you.
It's really time to BACK UP YOUR ACCUSATIONS.
-- All you've done is slander, and accuse, with ZERO EVIDENCE to support your accusations against Pence.
-- If you can't back up your accusations... that's what we call slander, not debate.
If you have evidence of his tyrannical views, which are documented, and in context... we'd all like to see it.
I'm always open to seeing facts and evidence.
Your Tactics So Far:
1. You made accusations against Pence.
No problem. Lets dig into that... see if it's true.
2. You have failed, for 7pages, to even ATTEMPT to give any evidence for your accusations.
3. When asked to give evidence for your accusations, you simply ignore all requests.
4. You ignore all requests for evidence, over and over... as if you don't hear it. I'll admit this is probably convenient for you, but it certainly gives the impression you have no evidence.
4. If you have evidence for your accusations, then give the evidence... we'll all listen. Maybe we'll learn something.
I'm always happy to listen to facts and evidence.
5. If you have no evidence... then you're just SLANDERING people because you don't like them.
It isn't debate, and it isn't logic, and it isn't rational... it's just someone being angry.
It's your right to be angry and dislike the VP... but being angry isn't debate or reason.
6. To reiterate, you've been asked several times to PROVIDE EVIDENCE for your accusations... and you IGNORE these requests, and keep REPEATING LITTLE MANTRAS like you're brain washed.
Conclusions:
* If you provide evidence, and debate like an adult, you'll receive respect even from those who disagree.
I'm sure most people here are open to rational discussion. I'm certainly open to rational discussion. In fact, I really don't know much about Pence at all... but I DO recognize the difference between EVIDENCE and SLANDER.
* If you refuse to provide evidence, and keep repeating mantras like you're brainwashed and can't think for yourself... well... that's how you're going to be treated.
I'm sorry about that, but most of us are trying to live in reality.
If you have evidence, then provide it.
- If you don't have evidence then you should do exactly as the ADL was forced to do recently... they were forced to ADMIT they had ZERO evidence of Steve Bannon EVER saying anything anti-semitic.
- If you don't have evidence for your accusations against Pence, then you should ADMIT you have no evidence.
* We should listen, or ignore you, depending on your evidence.
- If you have facts and evidence for your accusations, then we should all listen attentively, and give it consideration.
- If you have no facts or evidence, then we all need to ignore you.
This was more DEFLECTION... ZERO evidence.
1. NOT EVIDENCE:
You say you can provide more "editorial pieces".... this isn't evidence of any kind... editorials are opinion... not documentation.
An "editorial piece" is just another journalistic title for "opinion piece"... opinion... not facts.
Editorials are opinion.
This is NOT documentation, this is NOT evidence.
2. NOT EVIDENCE:
You say you can you provide "plenty" of editorial pieces... again... the VOLUME of OPINION does NOT magically TURN OPINION INTO FACT.
It doesn't matter HOW MANY opinion pieces you provide... opinion is still opinion.
If you have documented quotations, and evidence, you need to provide them.
3. TOTALITY OF YOUR EVIDENCE:
To verify YOUR OPINIONS, you offer us MORE OPINIONS from other people who have opinions... nowhere do you offer any facts or documentation of ANYTHING.
This is utter absurdity.
To verify your opinions, you offer us more opinions.
This is just ridiculous.
If you have proof some politician is a tyrant... show it.
I'm all for that.
I'm open to that.
We should ALL be open to that.
But we should ALL stop with slander and hearsay... really... it isn't biblical, isn't honest, and it isn't even logical.
1. NOT EVIDENCE:
You say you can provide more "editorial pieces".... this isn't evidence of any kind... editorials are opinion... not documentation.
An "editorial piece" is just another journalistic title for "opinion piece"... opinion... not facts.
Editorials are opinion.
This is NOT documentation, this is NOT evidence.
2. NOT EVIDENCE:
You say you can you provide "plenty" of editorial pieces... again... the VOLUME of OPINION does NOT magically TURN OPINION INTO FACT.
It doesn't matter HOW MANY opinion pieces you provide... opinion is still opinion.
If you have documented quotations, and evidence, you need to provide them.
3. TOTALITY OF YOUR EVIDENCE:
To verify YOUR OPINIONS, you offer us MORE OPINIONS from other people who have opinions... nowhere do you offer any facts or documentation of ANYTHING.
This is utter absurdity.
To verify your opinions, you offer us more opinions.
This is just ridiculous.
If you have proof some politician is a tyrant... show it.
I'm all for that.
I'm open to that.
We should ALL be open to that.
But we should ALL stop with slander and hearsay... really... it isn't biblical, isn't honest, and it isn't even logical.
Last edited:
L
not gonna happen
already off looking for more opinions to replace any known facts
this style of posting is commonly called spammenting
you can recognize this particular style by the following traits:
1. first post will resemble a word grenade rather than actual comments or response to the op
2. continues to add more creative verbiage to back up first grenade but offers no effort to respond to the actual op through reasoning or facts
3. does not answer questions....ever
4. creates a false dichotomy of God vs everyone in order to back up views that the rest of us cannot find in scripture no matter how hard we may try
5. will often make statements that have been proven false, but continues to post same in an effort to override common sense and actual truth
6. will on occasion twist what another poster says when it becomes painfully obvious that poster is able to refute wild claims and create a situation wherein said spammenter must either fess up, apologize or just drop out of the conversation
7. said spammenter will try the above tactic in the hopes of putting the reasonable and lucid poster on the defensive...this seldom works as a lucid and reasonable person is aware of this childish tactic
8. hangs on to spamments somewhat like a dog with false teeth...the teeth keep working long after the falseness of the spamment has been identified, coded, filed and put to bed without brushing its teeth
etc
already off looking for more opinions to replace any known facts
this style of posting is commonly called spammenting
you can recognize this particular style by the following traits:
1. first post will resemble a word grenade rather than actual comments or response to the op
2. continues to add more creative verbiage to back up first grenade but offers no effort to respond to the actual op through reasoning or facts
3. does not answer questions....ever
4. creates a false dichotomy of God vs everyone in order to back up views that the rest of us cannot find in scripture no matter how hard we may try
5. will often make statements that have been proven false, but continues to post same in an effort to override common sense and actual truth
6. will on occasion twist what another poster says when it becomes painfully obvious that poster is able to refute wild claims and create a situation wherein said spammenter must either fess up, apologize or just drop out of the conversation
7. said spammenter will try the above tactic in the hopes of putting the reasonable and lucid poster on the defensive...this seldom works as a lucid and reasonable person is aware of this childish tactic
8. hangs on to spamments somewhat like a dog with false teeth...the teeth keep working long after the falseness of the spamment has been identified, coded, filed and put to bed without brushing its teeth
etc