You have stated repeatedly that a majority of this church's members voted for Obama. This is ludicrous and preposterous, as it is impossible to know.
I have presented evidence refuting your claim from a real person responding in her capacity for the church. You have presented nothing.
You cannot know what you claim to know.
“The issue is not, and it has never been, that you may have heard something.”
That has been the issue from the very beginning.
++++++++++++++++++++++
“but the issue has always been that you refuse to source your information, so no one can verify its accuracy.”
I have made it clear from the very start (from my second post - iirc) that I could not do that. I have given you a concrete reason why I can’t do that.
++++++++++++++++++++++
“You have stated repeatedly that a majority of this church’s members voted for Obama. This is ludicrous and preposterous, as it is impossible to know.”
I have stated repeatedly that I was TOLD that. And I WAS told that. And apparently it is not impossible to know, elsewise the source would have to be lying (which I find extremely unlikely.)
Is it impossible, ludicrous and preposterous that Andy would give an invocation at the Obama Inauguration, for an avowed, pro-abortion, socialist zealot??????
Is it impossible, ludicrous and preposterous that North Point would host an event for the big-spending, America-hating, race-baiting queen of corruption, Michelle Obama??????
Impossible????
Answer me that!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++
“I have presented evidence refuting your claim from a real person responding in her capacity for the church. You have presented nothing.”
Congratulations! You win... nothing. This is not a contest. I am relating what I know occurred. The person you quoted was not there and therefore she can not know what was said.
++++++++++++++++++++++
“You cannot know what you claim to know.”
I DO know it. I know what was said and have reported it accurately. Period!