born liar lesley ("liesley") lied again:
> "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message
> k.net...
> >
> > William wrote:
>
> Leif wrote:
> <..>
> > >>>>>> bestiality
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I very much doubt that.
>
> Thank you. For the record...

For the record:

*As long as the feelings are mutual*,
and there's *no coercion or force involved,* why
should you be concerned? Personally, I have no
problem with people's personal choices *as long as
they don't harm or cause distress to another*- be it
human or animal. [emphasis in original]
lesley ("liesley") - http://tinyurl.com/dwzj7


> > >>>>I thought you were open minded?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>You can doubt things while being open-minded about them.
> > >>
> > >>You're not being honestly open-minded about it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Yes I am,
> >
> > No, you aren't.
> >
> > Her endorsement of it was correctly inferred from her
> > failure to state her opposition to it following her
> > statement of support for someone (Karen Winter) who
> > openly endorses it. lesley was asked repeatedly if she
> > wanted to distance herself from Karen on at least that
> > one issue, and she refused to do so. That is implicit
> > support for it.
>
> From: pearl

Yes, from lesley:

*As long as the feelings are mutual*,
and there's *no coercion or force involved,* why
should you be concerned? Personally, I have no
problem with people's personal choices *as long as
they don't harm or cause distress to another*- be it
human or animal. [emphasis in original]
http://tinyurl.com/dwzj7


>
> > >>>>"The side" is wall to wall with paedophiles,
> > >>>>zoophiles, blackmailers, would-be human vivisectionists
> > >>>>and horse traders like yourself
>
> > >>>Ipse dixit.
>
> > >>No, it's substantiated by posts over the last three weeks addressing those
> > >>issues. Your silence over Karen's repeated support of bestiality tells us plenty
> > >>about you.
>
> > > I don't recall reading that support. I seldom read off-topic posts.
>
> > It wasn't off topic.
>
> If I didn't read it, it was within an off-topic post/thread.

Bullshit.

> > >>>>The guy was an ex-convict.
>
> He did a stint in prison. Where you should be.

I have committed no crime. You married a violent felon.


>
> > He was a skinhead when she hooked up with him. That's *why* she got
> > >>>>together with him: she was aroused by it.
>
> False.

No, *true*.

> > >>>You can't possibly know all that. Soryy, but I don't believe you.
> > >>
> > >>I do know all of it.
>
> Deductive as ever.

Correct.


>
> > > Then you should be quiet and stop all your nonsense.
> > >
> > > cut
> >
> > Why did you cut, you chickenshit closed-minded ****wit?
> >
> > <restore>
> >
> > She went out of town, and he got into her computer and
> > started posting, right here in this newsgroup - a lot
> > of wild, violence-tinged stuff. He found and began
> > posting in some skinhead-oriented groups as well. Here
> > is his post: http://tinyurl.com/p6lp8. He was using
> > her computer and her pseudonym at that time, "lilweed".
>
> Following an inappropriate comment to a serious accident.

Who gives a **** why or how? The point is, he revealed a lot about
you.


> Ball complaining about violent out-of-control skinheads - lol!

Right. Also complaining about shitbags like you who enable violent
out-of-control skinheads.


> > your closed-mindedness.
>
> 'There are those who believe that science is not just mistaken
> on some interesting theoretical possibilities, but IRREDEEMIBLY
> wrong on the most fundamental questions science can ask.

Your utter lack of scientific credentials couldn't be more thoroughly
established than it has been by your posting this rabidly anti-science
bit of bullshit.