• Announcements

    • Nemesis

      Contact Us Broken   09/27/2016

      Users, It has come to our attention that the contact us feature on the site is broken.  Please do not use this feature to contact board admins.  Please go through normal channels.  If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied. Also if you try to email us that email address is pretty much ignored.  Also don't contact us to complain, ask for favors, donations, or any other thing that you may think would annoy us.  Nemesis

Kenngo1969

Contributor
  • Content count

    6,707
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Kenngo1969 last won the day on October 24 2015

Kenngo1969 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,013 Excellent

About Kenngo1969

  • Rank
    Master of Bombast

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

5,473 profile views
  1. Kinda like MormonLeaks. What? Oh. Sorry. Don't mind me. Carry on! P.S.: And I freaking swear ... I'm gonna punch the next person who says anything about punching anybody in the face, in the face.
  2. Triplicate?
  3. Duncan's a meatatarian.
  4. That reminds me of one of my favorite President Romney stories. He was giving an address, and his eyesight wouldn't allow him to read off of a teleprompter then (though they're probably a lot more advanced now that they were in "them thar" days: the font size can probably be increased to, say, 36 points, or maybe even bigger). But, then, he, in the likely absence of such technology, had to read off of a hard-copy text. He was giving an awesome (and I do mean awesome: even I, as a young priesthood holder then, was quite impressed ) address on priesthood power. Suddenly, he stopped and was silent for several seconds when he realized the pages of his address weren't all in their proper order. There was some paper shuffling, and he looked up and said, in his characteristic measured delivery, "I don't have the power to find the pages." It was pretty funny.
  5. I didn't want to bite. Honestly, I would prefer to leave you to your own ignorance, and happily so, but here's a clue for you: I don't see any of the religiously devout arguing that secularists should be excluded from full participation in the public square. The reverse, on the other hand ...
  6. Fine. I will happily leave you to your ignorance.
  7. And who here, pray tell, is arguing that secularism in government is a threat to religion? Not I: The fact that government is secular has precisely nothing to do with any argument I have made on this thread. Hint (Again): While co-opting government and its institutions in the service of a secularizing assault on faith and on its adherents certainly doesn't hurt that cause, it is not a sin qua non for conducting that assault.
  8. I don't know who here is arguing for the commingling of religion and government. (Hint: While co-opting government and its institutions in the service of a secularizing assault on faith and on its adherents certainly doesn't hurt that cause, it is not a sin qua non for conducting that assault.) And if you truly think that the United States of America is a heartbeat away from becoming another Iran, you're welcome to that opinion, but I don't know too many people (even among those who are of a decidedly secular bent or who are antipathetic toward religion) who would agree with you ... none, actually. That sort of argument seems, to me, to be the rough equivalent of a Godwin's Law Violation. And you didn't answer my question: Who are "they," and who is arguing that "they" should be allowed to sicken and die?
  9. Okey-doke. Uhhh ... what are "they," and who is arguing that "they" should be allowed to sicken and die?
  10. I'm not sure how that's responsive to what I wrote, but ... Thanks for chiming in?
  11. Hmmm. Before you read my mind and told me so, I wasn't aware that that was what I was referring to. Thank you for clearing that up!
  12. I've posted similar thoughts on another thread very recently, but ... What the heck?! ... I'm a fan of repeating myself when I accidentally stumble into saying something at least coherent, if not profound . If anything good will come of the ongoing secularist assault on religion, it will be that many of the faithful will realize that the doctrinal and sectarian differences which so many of us thought were so crucial as require that we vehemently voice our disagreements with one another will fade into insignificance in favor of uniting over what we have in common. Perhaps, at least to a degree, a similar realization (revelation? ) finally is dawning on Mr. Hannegraaf. P.S.: Perhaps nothing has a greater tendency to force us to jettison the excess baggage in which we carry trivial things than a sudden, jolting reminder of one's own mortality. Perhaps Mr. Hannegraaf is experiencing a bit of that now. Whatever differences we may have that are legion in number and (some of them) gargantuan in size, nonetheless, I wish him well.
  13. Ummm, wouldn't your appointment simply be the latest scandal for the Trump Administration. I kid, I kid!
  14. "I know Ed Lloyd. Ed Lloyd is a friend of mine. Scott, you're no Ed Lloyd." * * No, I don't know the "other" Mr. Lloyd. I simply borrowed and altered the famous put-down that "Lord" Lloyd Bentsen put to such effective use during the 1988 Vice Presidential Debate between Dan Quayle and him. (Though I don't know how effective it was: Michael Dukakis and he lost the election. ) P.S.: I don't know about Ed Lloyd, Scott, but you're A-OK in my book! P.P.S: Actually, we should turn that around: "Ed, we know Scott Lloyd. Scott Lloyd is a friend of ours. Ed, you're no Scott Lloyd."