[newgeezer]

You keep regurgitating that line about how I made some statements and later denied them.

Yet, for some reason, you cannot or will not produce any evidence to back up your charge. To give yourself any credibility, all you would have to do is quote two contradictory statements. That should be easy, if such evidence exists. (You know it doesn't.)

Let me know when you have something. Until then, you're just trusting your feelings and emotions, and expecting that will suffice. Again, you act as if you're right simply because you're right. In fact, because you will not provide any evidence to support your charges, you reduce your own credibility to zero.

Furthermore, your tacit and steadfast refusal to provide any shred of evidence to support your growing stream of accusations makes you out to be a common liar bearing false witness against your neighbor.

Have a nice day.

Likewise.

[BykrBayb]

You already acknowleged in post 162 that you did not agree with those who said Terri's right to life was the relevant issue. For you, it was a matter choosing what other person had the right to decide for her. At the time you made that statement, it was pretty clear you were talking about her life. Now you claim your words no longer mean what they meant back then. What do those words mean now? That he had the right to speak in her presence, for her listening pleasure? That he had the right to be a ventriloquist, and "speak for her" in that manner?

I suspect you know how morally void your argument was, and would now like to pretend you never made that argument.