So how long will Ben last this time?

[Kidlicious]

All of my Muslim friends have always spoken out against the radical elements. Much like most of my Catholic friends have spoken out against their radical elements.
I see no difference.

This is coming from a person who says that there are good things about Marxism, so one should not judge people who have been influenced by it.

[rah]

Which has nothing to do with my comment.

Try an actual argument you buffoon.

[Kidlicious]

That's like saying that blacks weren't given the right to vote because there was no movement for them to get that right.

Blacks always had the right to vote. Slaves did not have the right to vote. Slaves got the right to vote when they were emancipated. You can't blame the Northerners for not granting slaves the right to vote. There would be no union if they tried that.

[rah]

You can't even keep you own story straight for 20 minutes.
You posted

Women were denied the right to vote because of their gender after each state passed laws granting white men suffrage regardless of social status.

[Kidlicious]

Which has nothing to do with my comment.

Try an actual argument you buffoon.

There's nothing wrong with being a radical Catholic. So I don't care if your friends speak out against them. Don't compare apples to oranges. The fact that you do has a lot to do with the fact that you don't judge people who have been heavily influenced by Marxism when they run for president.

I doubt if you make any harsh judgments against your "Muslim friends" because you probably see the as victims, which is as ridiculous as you thinking Obama is a victim. For all I can tell, some of them might be terrorists and you would never know.

[kentonio]

And there are over 30 thousand names in my database. If we accept your bold assertion as 200 marriages that is less than a percent of the total.

So that would mean that 99+ percent of the European nobility was not inbred.

That's examples of royal families with uncle/aunt-nephew/niece relationships. Include cousins into that, and you're well into the thousands.

Where did you pull this 30,000 figure from other than your ass? What period and which countries royal lines is that suspicious 30,000 figure actually supposed to represent?

The actual data doesn't back up your claim.

You're a ******. Saying 'I have an unspecified database of unspecified data that means you're wrong' doesn't mean a goddamn thing to anyone other than you.

You are right that noble families did intermarry, but there are more families than you might expect, particularly in Germany. That, combined with outcrossings about every third generation prevented inbreeding.

Except it didn't you idiot, which is why inbreeding led to so much physical and mental disability in the European monarchies. Even Victoria married her first cousin ffs.

Yes, and there's also a reason he's a notable exception to the general rule.

He was the result of centuries of inbreeding you fucking idiot, he was the culmination of the rule not the exception to it.

And, from what I see, the vast majority of those were not inbred because of the Papal restrictions on 4th order intermarriage.

Your only reason for backing this idiotic position (apart from retardation probably caused by inbreeding, and the fact that you're a bitter little troll who just likes to be contrary) is because an incredibly long list of popes were more than happy to sanction royal inbreeding for political and financial favors. The former heads of your religion had no problem letting people marry their nephews, nieces, uncles and aunts, and because you're stupid you can't put that in its proper historical context and just deal with it, you have to try and rewrite history (yet again) to be more palatable to your idiotic fundamentalist beliefs.

TLDR: You're an idiot.

[rah]

There's nothing wrong with being a radical Catholic.

So you support radical Catholics that use violence? Why am I not surprised. You're as bad as those you condemn.

[Kidlicious]

So you support radical Catholics that use violence? Why am I not surprised. You're as bad as those you condemn.

Mother Teresa was a radical Catholic. Osama bin Ladin was a radical Muslim.

[Ming]

Yeah... in Kidland, radical Muslims are terrorists, but there is nothing wrong with radical Catholics that kill people.

Radical Catholics/Christians are terrorists... You can't have it both ways Kid.

[Kidlicious]

Yeah... in Kidland, radical Muslims are terrorists, but there is nothing wrong with radical Catholics that kill people.

Radical Catholics/Christians are terrorists... You can't have it both ways Kid.

You obviously don't know how to use words correctly. A religious radical obeys their religious scriptures. Radical doesn't mean violent. That's not some alternate reality. That is reality. Come to reality Ming!

[rah]

A religious radical obeys their religious scriptures. Radical doesn't mean violent.

Yes not all radical Muslims use violence.
Not all radical Muslims are Osama bin Ladin
Not all radical Christians are Mother Teresa
Many radical Christians use violence.

[Kidlicious]

Yes not all radical Muslims use violence.
Not all radical Muslims are Osama bin Ladin
Not all radical Christians are Mother Teresa
Many radical Christians use violence.

No

[rah]

So you believe that no radical christian has used violence? Talk about alternative realities.

[Kidlicious]

So you believe that no radical christian has used violence? Talk about alternative realities.

I said radical Christians don't terrorize and innocent people. I don't necessarily exclude self-defense or enforcing God's law.

[rah]

Hmm Muslims believe they are enforcing God's law so you must approve of that also.