Re: Better a child be eaten alive than become a ward of the state!

[Doan]

On Wed, 17 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > Hahaha! This is funny! You cited a source that cited a source that cited
> > a source???
>
> That's not "funny." It's simply a fact. As long as all are listed, what
> is your problem?
>
Hihihi! And a very reliable source according to the logic of the
anti-spanking zealotS!

> > IT'S A LIE!
>
> Oh? Please write Sue Lawrence and tell her she is a liar.
>
Who is Sue Lawrence? Is she another one of your master? ;-)
Tell her to post to this newsgroup and see if she can defend what
she wrote. Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)


> > Doug already dissected the USDHS to show you that the claim
> > is FALSE
>
> Doug did his usual spinning. One year does not an average make.
>
Huh? You were the one that provided the data, STUPID!

> > and I already pointed you the NEJM site to show you that no such
> > information exist.
>
> Oh? How do YOU know it doesn't exist? You a miracle worker now? Proving
> the negative? Not finding it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It may
> simply not be referenced or not in a way that is searchable by common
> terms.
>
The burden of proof is on the one that claim it existed! Prove it,
ignoranus kane0! I DARE YOU! ;-)

> > The anti-spanking agenda can only be supported by LIES!
>
> Are you calling Sue Lawrence and Holly liars? Please be clear on this,
> Doan.
>
Who are they? Tell them to post here and defend the claim you made.
Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)

> Have you written them to discuss their lying, coward?
>
The coward is you! You don't even have the courage to stand behind
the claim you made, trying to pass it off to some unknowns. Hihihi!
Is your mother still proud of you? ;-)

> And you are still running from the other information I posted. Your
> usual behavior. Find one thing to question, do a lot of hysterical
> monkeyboy dancing and RUN RUN RUN, from the other information.
>
> So tell us, Droan. Exactly where do you think the cut off should be in
> numbers where we no longer care if spanking escalated to violence,
> injury, and death?
>
> Are 400 okay, 300, 200, 100, 5? Where, Doan. Or do you not care?
>
It's not the 1000 that you claimed. ;-)

> Now dodge again so you don't have to answer that question.
>
Hihihi!


Doan

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Doan wrote:
>>> Hahaha! This is funny! You cited a source that cited a source that cited
>>> a source???
>> That's not "funny." It's simply a fact. As long as all are listed, what
>> is your problem?
>>
> Hihihi! And a very reliable source according to the logic of the
> anti-spanking zealotS!

I made no claim of the original source, but of the secondary
citation...NEJM and the USDHHS. Are you saying their are lying simply
because YOU can't find the information there?

>>> IT'S A LIE!
>> Oh? Please write Sue Lawrence and tell her she is a liar.
>>
> Who is Sue Lawrence?

I posted who she is. I gave you a locator. Now you are going to turn
into a cowa....oh wait, that wouldn't require a bit of a change.

> Is she another one of your master? ;-)

Nope. Just someone that is against spanking.

> Tell her to post to this newsgroup

You are the one claiming your statement is a lie, Droaner. You give it a
shot. I didn't call her a liar, YOU DID.

> and see if she can defend what
> she wrote. Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)

Go ahead, I dare you, coward. YOU are the one saying she's lying. Are
you not?

>
>>> Doug already dissected the USDHS to show you that the claim
>>> is FALSE
>> Doug did his usual spinning. One year does not an average make.
>>
> Huh? You were the one that provided the data, STUPID!

All one has to do is search more and you'll find plenty of support for
the contention that parents do escalate CP to fatalities and severe
injuries.

You and he want to argue numbers and avoid the real issue, don't you,
monkeyboy?

>>> and I already pointed you the NEJM site to show you that no such
>>> information exist.
>> Oh? How do YOU know it doesn't exist? You a miracle worker now? Proving
>> the negative? Not finding it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It may
>> simply not be referenced or not in a way that is searchable by common
>> terms.
>>
> The burden of proof is on the one that claim it existed! Prove it,
> ignoranus kane0! I DARE YOU! ;-)

Even if "I" was wrong, YOU are still running from the truth. That
parents using CP do in fact kill their children.

>>> The anti-spanking agenda can only be supported by LIES!
>> Are you calling Sue Lawrence and Holly liars? Please be clear on this,
>> Doan.
>>
> Who are they? Tell them to post here and defend the claim you made.
> Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)

No, you know who they are. I posted with email address and location for
them. Go for it.

>
>> Have you written them to discuss their lying, coward?
>>
> The coward is you!

Nope. I posted what one printed, and the other said in interview. How
would that make me a coward. YOU are the one challenging, dancing
hysterical lying monkeyboy. Go for it.

> You don't even have the courage to stand behind
> the claim you made, trying to pass it off to some unknowns.

YOU call someone a liar and you want ME to confront those you libel?

Now that has to be about the stupidest thing you've ever posted, monkeyboy.

Hihihi!
> Is your mother still proud of you? ;-)

If she were around to see how I just made you dance? Absolutely.


>> And you are still running from the other information I posted. Your
>> usual behavior. Find one thing to question, do a lot of hysterical
>> monkeyboy dancing and RUN RUN RUN, from the other information.
>>
>> So tell us, Droan. Exactly where do you think the cut off should be in
>> numbers where we no longer care if spanking escalated to violence,
>> injury, and death?
>>
>> Are 400 okay, 300, 200, 100, 5? Where, Doan. Or do you not care?
>>
> It's not the 1000 that you claimed. ;-)

Regardless, you haven't answered my question.

I was not the source, who you have claimed are lying, and YOU won't
confront them. Until you DO that information stands, stupid.
>
>> Now dodge again so you don't have to answer that question.
>>
> Hihihi!

Not even any grace in the dodging dance. Just lies and cowardly retreat
from your own bs.

> Doan

0:->

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

[Doan]

On Thu, 18 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> Doan wrote:
> >>> Hahaha! This is funny! You cited a source that cited a source that cited
> >>> a source???
> >> That's not "funny." It's simply a fact. As long as all are listed, what
> >> is your problem?
> >>
> > Hihihi! And a very reliable source according to the logic of the
> > anti-spanking zealotS!
>
> I made no claim of the original source, but of the secondary
> citation...NEJM and the USDHHS. Are you saying their are lying simply
> because YOU can't find the information there?
>
You can't find something that DOESN'T EXIST!

> >>> IT'S A LIE!
> >> Oh? Please write Sue Lawrence and tell her she is a liar.
> >>
> > Who is Sue Lawrence?
>
> I posted who she is. I gave you a locator. Now you are going to turn
> into a cowa....oh wait, that wouldn't require a bit of a change.
>
Just as I thought, an unknown. You have to be very STUPID to believe some
one like that. You believe her, right? ;-)

> > Is she another one of your master? ;-)
>
> Nope. Just someone that is against spanking.
>
Hihihi! Just as I thought, an anti-spanking zealotS!

> > Tell her to post to this newsgroup
>
> You are the one claiming your statement is a lie, Droaner. You give it a
> shot. I didn't call her a liar, YOU DID.
>
I called YOU a liar! You didn't have the courage to take responsibility
for your post and COWARDLY blame it on some unknown person.

> > and see if she can defend what
> > she wrote. Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
>
> Go ahead, I dare you, coward. YOU are the one saying she's lying. Are
> you not?
>
Hihihi! Can't even get her to come to your defense? What happenned?
You are not worth to be her kane9 companion? ;-)

> >
> >>> Doug already dissected the USDHS to show you that the claim
> >>> is FALSE
> >> Doug did his usual spinning. One year does not an average make.
> >>
> > Huh? You were the one that provided the data, STUPID!
>
> All one has to do is search more and you'll find plenty of support for
> the contention that parents do escalate CP to fatalities and severe
> injuries.
>
Not 1000, STUPID!

> You and he want to argue numbers and avoid the real issue, don't you,
> monkeyboy?
>
Hihihi! So 1000 is a LIE?

> >>> and I already pointed you the NEJM site to show you that no such
> >>> information exist.
> >> Oh? How do YOU know it doesn't exist? You a miracle worker now? Proving
> >> the negative? Not finding it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It may
> >> simply not be referenced or not in a way that is searchable by common
> >> terms.
> >>
> > The burden of proof is on the one that claim it existed! Prove it,
> > ignoranus kane0! I DARE YOU! ;-)
>
> Even if "I" was wrong, YOU are still running from the truth. That
> parents using CP do in fact kill their children.
>
Not 1000, STUPID!

> >>> The anti-spanking agenda can only be supported by LIES!
> >> Are you calling Sue Lawrence and Holly liars? Please be clear on this,
> >> Doan.
> >>
> > Who are they? Tell them to post here and defend the claim you made.
> > Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
>
> No, you know who they are. I posted with email address and location for
> them. Go for it.
>
How do I know that they are real. You haven't proven that they are real.
Tell them to post here. Come one. Go for it! ;-)

> >
> >> Have you written them to discuss their lying, coward?
> >>
> > The coward is you!
>
> Nope. I posted what one printed, and the other said in interview. How
> would that make me a coward. YOU are the one challenging, dancing
> hysterical lying monkeyboy. Go for it.
>
The claim has been proven to be false and you have proven publicly to
be a fool in believing such LIES! ;-)

> > You don't even have the courage to stand behind
> > the claim you made, trying to pass it off to some unknowns.
>
> YOU call someone a liar and you want ME to confront those you libel?
>
I have proven the claim to be FALSE! And neither you nor they can defend
it!

> Now that has to be about the stupidest thing you've ever posted, monkeyboy.
>
You are the the STUPID one! ;-)

> Hihihi!
> > Is your mother still proud of you? ;-)
>
> If she were around to see how I just made you dance? Absolutely.
>
Hihihi! She must be turning in her grave!
>
> >> And you are still running from the other information I posted. Your
> >> usual behavior. Find one thing to question, do a lot of hysterical
> >> monkeyboy dancing and RUN RUN RUN, from the other information.
> >>
> >> So tell us, Droan. Exactly where do you think the cut off should be in
> >> numbers where we no longer care if spanking escalated to violence,
> >> injury, and death?
> >>
> >> Are 400 okay, 300, 200, 100, 5? Where, Doan. Or do you not care?
> >>
> > It's not the 1000 that you claimed. ;-)
>
> Regardless, you haven't answered my question.
>
A LIE! LIE! LIE!

> I was not the source, who you have claimed are lying, and YOU won't
> confront them. Until you DO that information stands, stupid.

So you were STUPID in believing such a lie?

> >
> >> Now dodge again so you don't have to answer that question.
> >>
> > Hihihi!
>
> Not even any grace in the dodging dance. Just lies and cowardly retreat
> from your own bs.
>
That would be you, liar! ;-)

Doan

> > Doan
>
> 0:->
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
>

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Doan wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Doan wrote:
>>>>> Hahaha! This is funny! You cited a source that cited a source that cited
>>>>> a source???
>>>> That's not "funny." It's simply a fact. As long as all are listed, what
>>>> is your problem?
>>>>
>>> Hihihi! And a very reliable source according to the logic of the
>>> anti-spanking zealotS!
>> I made no claim of the original source, but of the secondary
>> citation...NEJM and the USDHHS. Are you saying their are lying simply
>> because YOU can't find the information there?
>>
> You can't find something that DOESN'T EXIST!

If you can't find it you cannot prove it doesn't exist. We have ancient
fish said to be extinct for the last couple of hundred years because we
couldn't find one, and low and behold, we did.

>>>>> IT'S A LIE!
>>>> Oh? Please write Sue Lawrence and tell her she is a liar.
>>>>
>>> Who is Sue Lawrence?
>> I posted who she is. I gave you a locator. Now you are going to turn
>> into a cowa....oh wait, that wouldn't require a bit of a change.
>>
> Just as I thought, an unknown.

An unknown? Sue. She's communicated with the US government on this
issue. She cited on a number of websites other than her own. And what
difference would her notoriety make to her information one way or the other?

If she was a celebrity she'd be more credible?

She put her self on the line to fight The Rod and other such instruments
of assault and torture.

What have you done, coward?

> You have to be very STUPID to believe some
> one like that.

You have to be very stupid to state that someone is "unknown" that is
not and then claim it's stupid to believe 'some one like that.'

> You believe her, right? ;-)

Unless I can find evidence to the contrary I have not reason not to.

Remember the extinct fish?

>>> Is she another one of your master? ;-)
>> Nope. Just someone that is against spanking.
>>
> Hihihi! Just as I thought, an anti-spanking zealotS!

Just as I thought, nothing but ad hom, no argument. No logic. No facts.

Just a screeching, hysterical, dancing arm waving lying monkeyboy.

>>> Tell her to post to this newsgroup
>> You are the one claiming your statement is a lie, Droaner. You give it a
>> shot. I didn't call her a liar, YOU DID.
>>
> I called YOU a liar!

So what?

> You didn't have the courage to take responsibility
> for your post and COWARDLY blame it on some unknown person.

You are lying now. I take responsibility for my post and its contents as
stated. You are avoiding being responsible for YOURS.

YOU called her a liar. YOU follow through.
>
>> > and see if she can defend what
>>> she wrote. Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
>> Go ahead, I dare you, coward. YOU are the one saying she's lying. Are
>> you not?
>>
> Hihihi! Can't even get her to come to your defense? What happenned?
> You are not worth to be her kane9 companion? ;-)

In other words you ARE a coward and afraid to back up your name calling
of her.

>>>>> Doug already dissected the USDHS to show you that the claim
>>>>> is FALSE
>>>> Doug did his usual spinning. One year does not an average make.
>>>>
>>> Huh? You were the one that provided the data, STUPID!
>> All one has to do is search more and you'll find plenty of support for
>> the contention that parents do escalate CP to fatalities and severe
>> injuries.
>>
> Not 1000, STUPID!

I don't know. I can only post what is published. I asked you a series of
questions regarding what would be an acceptable number to wake you up to
the deaths and injury as a serious problem. So far I've not reasonable
answer from you.

>> You and he want to argue numbers and avoid the real issue, don't you,
>> monkeyboy?
>>
> Hihihi! So 1000 is a LIE?

It's a lie to claim I said it was. And it's a lie used to avoid the real
issue..that concerning the risks of the use of CP. This is one of them.

Give me the number you'd accept as being serious enough to be concerned
about it.

>>>>> and I already pointed you the NEJM site to show you that no such
>>>>> information exist.
>>>> Oh? How do YOU know it doesn't exist? You a miracle worker now? Proving
>>>> the negative? Not finding it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It may
>>>> simply not be referenced or not in a way that is searchable by common
>>>> terms.
>>>>
>>> The burden of proof is on the one that claim it existed! Prove it,
>>> ignoranus kane0! I DARE YOU! ;-)
>> Even if "I" was wrong, YOU are still running from the truth. That
>> parents using CP do in fact kill their children.
>>
> Not 1000, STUPID!

Dance some more.

>>>>> The anti-spanking agenda can only be supported by LIES!
>>>> Are you calling Sue Lawrence and Holly liars? Please be clear on this,
>>>> Doan.
>>>>
>>> Who are they? Tell them to post here and defend the claim you made.
>>> Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
>> No, you know who they are. I posted with email address and location for
>> them. Go for it.
>>
> How do I know that they are real.

You can find out.

> You haven't proven that they are real.

How would I do that? I could fake them, like you did Alina, liar.

> Tell them to post here. Come one. Go for it! ;-)

YOU contact and prove they aren't real. YOU call them liars as you have
here, brave little monkey.

YOU asked for source, I gave it. Then YOU claim they lie. Ball is in
your court.

>>>> Have you written them to discuss their lying, coward?
>>>>
>>> The coward is you!
>> Nope. I posted what one printed, and the other said in interview. How
>> would that make me a coward. YOU are the one challenging, dancing
>> hysterical lying monkeyboy. Go for it.
>>
> The claim has been proven to be false

No it hasn't. It's been proven not searchable at this time. We don't
know from which place with the USDHHS and NEJM Sue Lawrence gets her
figures.

> and you have proven publicly to
> be a fool in believing such LIES! ;-)

You have proven publicly you are unethical and immoral and a liar as
well as a coward. Nothing new there of course. You have been doing it
for years.

I present the source. You called them liars. I challenge you to prove
they are liars and confront them, and you choke.

Typical of cowards.

Especially those that would rather fling ad hom than debate the actual
issues.

You have a couple of questions from me floating around. Afraid to respond?

The motive for parents killing their children, please.

And what is the number of deaths and injury by CP escalation that you
would find high enough to consider it an important issue?

>
>> > You don't even have the courage to stand behind
>>> the claim you made, trying to pass it off to some unknowns.
>> YOU call someone a liar and you want ME to confront those you libel?
>>
> I have proven the claim to be FALSE!

Nope. You proved YOU couldn't find it.

> And neither you nor they can defend
> it!

Since I didn't originate it I'm not the one in the position to defend
it. They originated, they are the ones you should be speaking to.

Afraid to?

I've always known you are a coward, now others get to see it again.

>> Now that has to be about the stupidest thing you've ever posted, monkeyboy.
>>
> You are the the STUPID one! ;-)

For demanding you go to the people you are calling liars and confront
them? That's not the least stupid, unfortunately for you, monkeyboy.

Now you have a task and two questions to deal with, coward.


0:->



>
>> Hihihi!
>>> Is your mother still proud of you? ;-)
>> If she were around to see how I just made you dance? Absolutely.
>>
> Hihihi! She must be turning in her grave!
>>>> And you are still running from the other information I posted. Your
>>>> usual behavior. Find one thing to question, do a lot of hysterical
>>>> monkeyboy dancing and RUN RUN RUN, from the other information.
>>>>
>>>> So tell us, Droan. Exactly where do you think the cut off should be in
>>>> numbers where we no longer care if spanking escalated to violence,
>>>> injury, and death?
>>>>
>>>> Are 400 okay, 300, 200, 100, 5? Where, Doan. Or do you not care?
>>>>
>>> It's not the 1000 that you claimed. ;-)
>> Regardless, you haven't answered my question.
>>
> A LIE! LIE! LIE!
>
>> I was not the source, who you have claimed are lying, and YOU won't
>> confront them. Until you DO that information stands, stupid.
>
> So you were STUPID in believing such a lie?
>
>>>> Now dodge again so you don't have to answer that question.
>>>>
>>> Hihihi!
>> Not even any grace in the dodging dance. Just lies and cowardly retreat
>> from your own bs.
>>
> That would be you, liar! ;-)
>
> Doan
>
>>> Doan
>> 0:->
>>
>> --
>> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
>> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
>> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
>>
>


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

[Doan]

On Thu, 18 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> Doan wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 17 May 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Doan wrote:
> >>>>> Hahaha! This is funny! You cited a source that cited a source that cited
> >>>>> a source???
> >>>> That's not "funny." It's simply a fact. As long as all are listed, what
> >>>> is your problem?
> >>>>
> >>> Hihihi! And a very reliable source according to the logic of the
> >>> anti-spanking zealotS!
> >> I made no claim of the original source, but of the secondary
> >> citation...NEJM and the USDHHS. Are you saying their are lying simply
> >> because YOU can't find the information there?
> >>
> > You can't find something that DOESN'T EXIST!
>
> If you can't find it you cannot prove it doesn't exist. We have ancient
> fish said to be extinct for the last couple of hundred years because we
> couldn't find one, and low and behold, we did.
>
That is why the burden of proof is on the one who made the claim, not on
me to prove a negative! You cited the NEJM and the USDHHS. Now prove it!

> >>>>> IT'S A LIE!
> >>>> Oh? Please write Sue Lawrence and tell her she is a liar.
> >>>>
> >>> Who is Sue Lawrence?
> >> I posted who she is. I gave you a locator. Now you are going to turn
> >> into a cowa....oh wait, that wouldn't require a bit of a change.
> >>
> > Just as I thought, an unknown.
>
> An unknown? Sue. She's communicated with the US government on this
> issue. She cited on a number of websites other than her own. And what
> difference would her notoriety make to her information one way or the other?
>
Hihihi! And you believe her?

> If she was a celebrity she'd be more credible?
>
If she is telling the truth, she will be more credible.

> She put her self on the line to fight The Rod and other such instruments
> of assault and torture.
>
> What have you done, coward?
>
I pointed out what a LIAR and a coward you are! ;-)

> > You have to be very STUPID to believe some
> > one like that.
>
> You have to be very stupid to state that someone is "unknown" that is
> not and then claim it's stupid to believe 'some one like that.'
>
Hihihi! So now she is well-known?

> > You believe her, right? ;-)
>
> Unless I can find evidence to the contrary I have not reason not to.
>
That is why you are STUPID!

> Remember the extinct fish?
>
Remember the Embry Study? ;-)

> >>> Is she another one of your master? ;-)
> >> Nope. Just someone that is against spanking.
> >>
> > Hihihi! Just as I thought, an anti-spanking zealotS!
>
> Just as I thought, nothing but ad hom, no argument. No logic. No facts.
>
That's you! ;-)

> Just a screeching, hysterical, dancing arm waving lying monkeyboy.
>
Just an ignoranus kane0! ;-)

> >>> Tell her to post to this newsgroup
> >> You are the one claiming your statement is a lie, Droaner. You give it a
> >> shot. I didn't call her a liar, YOU DID.
> >>
> > I called YOU a liar!
>
> So what?
>
It's the truth! ;-)

> > You didn't have the courage to take responsibility
> > for your post and COWARDLY blame it on some unknown person.
>
> You are lying now. I take responsibility for my post and its contents as
> stated. You are avoiding being responsible for YOURS.
>
> YOU called her a liar. YOU follow through.

I don't know her. She is an unknown to me. You brought her in, you deal
with it. Tell her to defend you and the claim.

> >
> >> > and see if she can defend what
> >>> she wrote. Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
> >> Go ahead, I dare you, coward. YOU are the one saying she's lying. Are
> >> you not?
> >>
> > Hihihi! Can't even get her to come to your defense? What happenned?
> > You are not worth to be her kane9 companion? ;-)
>
> In other words you ARE a coward and afraid to back up your name calling
> of her.
>
I am here! Where is she and why are you hiding behind her? The COWARD
is you, not me.

> >>>>> Doug already dissected the USDHS to show you that the claim
> >>>>> is FALSE
> >>>> Doug did his usual spinning. One year does not an average make.
> >>>>
> >>> Huh? You were the one that provided the data, STUPID!
> >> All one has to do is search more and you'll find plenty of support for
> >> the contention that parents do escalate CP to fatalities and severe
> >> injuries.
> >>
> > Not 1000, STUPID!
>
> I don't know. I can only post what is published. I asked you a series of
> questions regarding what would be an acceptable number to wake you up to
> the deaths and injury as a serious problem. So far I've not reasonable
> answer from you.
>
You don't know how to think for yourself?

> >> You and he want to argue numbers and avoid the real issue, don't you,
> >> monkeyboy?
> >>
> > Hihihi! So 1000 is a LIE?
>
> It's a lie to claim I said it was. And it's a lie used to avoid the real
> issue..that concerning the risks of the use of CP. This is one of them.
>
So you are a liar! ;-)

> Give me the number you'd accept as being serious enough to be concerned
> about it.
>
It's not 1000, STUPID!

> >>>>> and I already pointed you the NEJM site to show you that no such
> >>>>> information exist.
> >>>> Oh? How do YOU know it doesn't exist? You a miracle worker now? Proving
> >>>> the negative? Not finding it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It may
> >>>> simply not be referenced or not in a way that is searchable by common
> >>>> terms.
> >>>>
> >>> The burden of proof is on the one that claim it existed! Prove it,
> >>> ignoranus kane0! I DARE YOU! ;-)
> >> Even if "I" was wrong, YOU are still running from the truth. That
> >> parents using CP do in fact kill their children.
> >>
> > Not 1000, STUPID!
>
> Dance some more.
>
Lie some more, kane!

> >>>>> The anti-spanking agenda can only be supported by LIES!
> >>>> Are you calling Sue Lawrence and Holly liars? Please be clear on this,
> >>>> Doan.
> >>>>
> >>> Who are they? Tell them to post here and defend the claim you made.
> >>> Come on. I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU! ;-)
> >> No, you know who they are. I posted with email address and location for
> >> them. Go for it.
> >>
> > How do I know that they are real.
>
> You can find out.
>
Why should I?

> > You haven't proven that they are real.
>
> How would I do that? I could fake them, like you did Alina, liar.
>
If Alina is a fake, how is it that you were able to send her a copy?
YOU ARE SO STUPID! ;-)

> > Tell them to post here. Come one. Go for it! ;-)
>
> YOU contact and prove they aren't real. YOU call them liars as you have
> here, brave little monkey.
>
I can't prove a negative, STUPID! You brought them up, the burden of
proof is on you!

> YOU asked for source, I gave it. Then YOU claim they lie. Ball is in
> your court.
>
I don't know them. You do!

> >>>> Have you written them to discuss their lying, coward?
> >>>>
> >>> The coward is you!
> >> Nope. I posted what one printed, and the other said in interview. How
> >> would that make me a coward. YOU are the one challenging, dancing
> >> hysterical lying monkeyboy. Go for it.
> >>
> > The claim has been proven to be false
>
> No it hasn't. It's been proven not searchable at this time. We don't
> know from which place with the USDHHS and NEJM Sue Lawrence gets her
> figures.
>
Hihihi! So you can't confirm the veracity of her claim, yet took
it in whole, hook, line and sinker???

> > and you have proven publicly to
> > be a fool in believing such LIES! ;-)
>
> You have proven publicly you are unethical and immoral and a liar as
> well as a coward. Nothing new there of course. You have been doing it
> for years.
>
Nope! You are describing yourself! ;-)

> I present the source. You called them liars. I challenge you to prove
> they are liars and confront them, and you choke.
>
You prensted the source, I prove to the that the source is false. The
burden of proof is on you. Where is the 1000? You can't back it up.
The liar is you!

> Typical of cowards.
>
That's you!

> Especially those that would rather fling ad hom than debate the actual
> issues.
>
That's you, again! ;-)

> You have a couple of questions from me floating around. Afraid to respond?
>
> The motive for parents killing their children, please.
>
> And what is the number of deaths and injury by CP escalation that you
> would find high enough to consider it an important issue?

Not 1000! That's a LIE! ;-)

> >
> >> > You don't even have the courage to stand behind
> >>> the claim you made, trying to pass it off to some unknowns.
> >> YOU call someone a liar and you want ME to confront those you libel?
> >>
> > I have proven the claim to be FALSE!
>
> Nope. You proved YOU couldn't find it.

So it's false until you can prove it to be true. That is how logic works,
STUPID!
>
> > And neither you nor they can defend
> > it!
>
> Since I didn't originate it I'm not the one in the position to defend
> it. They originated, they are the ones you should be speaking to.
>
You posted it. Defend it or tell them to come here and defend it.

> Afraid to?
>
Ask them?

> I've always known you are a coward, now others get to see it again.
>
Hihihi! You are making a fool of yourself in public!

> >> Now that has to be about the stupidest thing you've ever posted, monkeyboy.
> >>
> > You are the the STUPID one! ;-)
>
> For demanding you go to the people you are calling liars and confront
> them? That's not the least stupid, unfortunately for you, monkeyboy.
>
For not able to defend what you claim or to call on those who made the
claim to defend it when challenged.

> Now you have a task and two questions to deal with, coward.
>
Hihihi! STUPID LIAR!

Doan

>
> 0:->
>
>
>
> >
> >> Hihihi!
> >>> Is your mother still proud of you? ;-)
> >> If she were around to see how I just made you dance? Absolutely.
> >>
> > Hihihi! She must be turning in her grave!
> >>>> And you are still running from the other information I posted. Your
> >>>> usual behavior. Find one thing to question, do a lot of hysterical
> >>>> monkeyboy dancing and RUN RUN RUN, from the other information.
> >>>>
> >>>> So tell us, Droan. Exactly where do you think the cut off should be in
> >>>> numbers where we no longer care if spanking escalated to violence,
> >>>> injury, and death?
> >>>>
> >>>> Are 400 okay, 300, 200, 100, 5? Where, Doan. Or do you not care?
> >>>>
> >>> It's not the 1000 that you claimed. ;-)
> >> Regardless, you haven't answered my question.
> >>
> > A LIE! LIE! LIE!
> >
> >> I was not the source, who you have claimed are lying, and YOU won't
> >> confront them. Until you DO that information stands, stupid.
> >
> > So you were STUPID in believing such a lie?
> >
> >>>> Now dodge again so you don't have to answer that question.
> >>>>
> >>> Hihihi!
> >> Not even any grace in the dodging dance. Just lies and cowardly retreat
> >> from your own bs.
> >>
> > That would be you, liar! ;-)
> >
> > Doan
> >
> >>> Doan
> >> 0:->
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> >> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> >> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
>