Lolcow Melinda Leigh Scott & Marshall Castersen - Sue-happy couple. Flat earth conspiracists. Pretending to be Jewish. Believe Kiwi Farms is protected by the Masonic Order. 0-6 on lawsuits. Marshall is dead.

Melinda The Moron sure has some twisted logic.
Smashing someone’s cellphone is not OK. Full stop.
Physically abusing someone is not OK. Full stop.
I give zero fucks about what your religious beliefs are, and care even less if your “religion” makes the stuff I’ve listed OK in your terrible, uneducated mind.

You are a terrible, unholy, stupid person. May YHWH have mercy on you.

Nah. He’ll take one look at you and say PASS.
 
Where is the empathy for Marshall
I have no empathy for that abusive rapist manlet. I wouldn't have empathy for him if he was raped and set on fire. The only word we have to go on that she was on drugs are from you and @Marshall Castersen, and you're both unrepentant liars. If either of you told me water was wet I'd touch it to make sure.
 
A bunch of people who are adament that Narcissim is an issue but where is the empathy for Marshall and the stress he must've have been under dealing with a druggie for a spouse?

Please, do explain this contradiction in your moral philosophy!

The emphasis is on the must've. Most of what we call you sociopathic for is continuous or recent behavior, not something that happened over 4 years ago like Marshall beatin' his wife. And even then, the focus on narcissism is that you are the narcissist, not Marshall.

As for empathizing with Marshall, we don't know the whole story other than he smashed her phone and choked her out so she couldn't call. That ain't a good look, nobody wants to defend a wifebeater, and it's hard to believe you saying she's a druggie when you've presented no evidence in your case.
 
Melinda The Moron sure has some twisted logic.
Smashing someone’s cellphone is not OK. Full stop.
Physically abusing someone is not OK. Full stop.
I give zero fucks about what your religious beliefs are, and care even less if your “religion” makes the stuff I’ve listed OK in your terrible, uneducated mind.

You are a terrible, unholy, stupid person. May YHWH have mercy on you.

Nah. He’ll take one look at you and say PASS.

Putting someone in a headlock isnt physical abuse. It's a one time act and so I would classify that as "striking" a person.

By your logic the police are physically abusing people because they use physical violence all the time. So really I think you are just brainwashed to believe that violence is only a privilege of the Government and the common person should be a pacifist

Breaking someone's property may be justified too. Its not always wrong.
 
Putting someone in a headlock isnt physical abuse. It's a one time act and so I would classify that as "striking" a person.

By your logic the police are physically abusing people because they use physical violence all the time. So really I think you are just brainwashed to believe that violence is only a privilege of the Government and the common person should be a pacifist

Breaking someone's property may be justified too. Its not always wrong.

It may have been justified, but you haven't presented anything that would lead us to believe that it was justified other than "she's a druggie" and "she talked shit". Evidence is key here, why should we believe either of those claims with no proof?
 
I have no empathy for that abusive rapist manlet. I wouldn't have empathy for him if he was raped and set on fire. The only word we have to go on that she was on drugs are from you and @Marshall Castersen, and you're both unrepentant liars. If either of you told me water was wet I'd touch it to make sure.

Just the answer I was waiting for

So why is selective empathy Ok for you and not for me?
According to you, I'm a Narc because I show selective empathy but when you do that, you're a hero.

Please, do explain this contradiction in your moral philosophy!

It may have been justified, but you haven't presented anything that would lead us to believe that it was justified other than "she's a druggie" and "she talked shit". Evidence is key here, why should we believe either of those claims with no proof?

That's a two way street on that question:
Why do you believe that Marshall was guilty and she was innocent without proof?

I have proof, it's just sitting at our other rental and Im not driving there tonight
 
Can someone else on the farms in a relationship inform me is it the norm to have all this access to your SO's stuff and have a massive lack of privacy? Why would anyone want to be in a marriage if that's the case? Seems stifling to me

How would a phone give info that a person's on drugs? You know there are drug testing kits out there. Or he could have asked for a blood test. If you're having sex with someone the check up with the doctor seems a lot more reasonable then pouring over people's phone.

If she was on drugs did she get any diseases from say getting shot up? Some of them may have been passed on to marshal via sex then onto Linda here with their daily fucking. If course she's too chickenshit to find out and says she's totes clean because Torah or someshit
I wouldn't know, I don't care who my girl contacts because I trust her. Sounds to me that Marshall is insecure if he needs to check shit out, he is a manlet though so there's reasons for that.
 
So why is selective empathy Ok for you and not for me?
According to you, I'm a Narc because I show selective empathy but when you do that, you're a hero.
Choosing not to empathize with, or show compassion to a woman who has evidence that she is being beaten and abused is sociopathic. Choosing not to empathize with or show compassion to the stupid felon who gets off on beating his wife is normal human behavior. I know this distinction is difficult for someone of such low iq to understand, but try your best, Ms. College Graduate.
 
A bunch of people who are adament that Narcissim is an issue but where is the empathy for Marshall and the stress he must've have been under dealing with a druggie for a spouse?

Please, do explain this contradiction in your moral philosophy!

I do not feel empathy for an abuser who plays victim. I feel empathy for the abusee, even more so knowing she was a drug addict.

That's a two way street on that question:
Why do you believe that Marshall was guilty and she was innocent without proof

Marshall has a history of abusive behavior as seen in this thread. That’s proof enough.
 
That's a two way street on that question:
Why do you believe that Marshall was guilty and she was innocent without proof?

I have proof, it's just sitting at our other rental and Im not driving there tonight

Because the evidence that exists already isn't in his favor. I'm not gonna definitively say he's guilty at the total lack of information, but the information on Marshall leads us to believe that he's guilty, compared to your claims that she's a crackhead whore and deserved it, which are meritless because there's nothing at all. You can form a conclusion out of something, but not our of nothing

And if you can, present that proof tomorrow, surprise us.

I also kinda wanna point out that this thread is almost as long as Andrew's within a noticably shorter period of time. God damn, imagine being mi.lked for more cow material than the mentally ill je.wish dogfucking redneck hick.
 
Choosing not to empathize with, or show compassion to a woman who has evidence that she is being beaten and abused is sociopathic. Choosing not to empathize with or show compassion to the stupid felon who gets off on beating his wife is normal human behavior. I know this distinction is difficult for someone of such low iq to understand, but try your best, Ms. College Graduate.
I do not feel empathy for an abuser. I feel empathy for the abusee, even more so knowing she was a drug addict.

So at least you admit that you yourself do not have unconditional empathy.

But all that you said operates on the assumption that striking a person physically is never justified. Or that a woman is automatically innocent because she's a woman. With that, I just don't agree. Doesn't matter -- man OR woman -- some people provoke their own beating.

"A fool’s words get him into fights;
yes, his mouth calls out for a beating." (Prov 18:6)

We will just have to agree to disagree on this issue.
 
So at least you admit that you yourself do not have unconditional empathy.

When did I say I had unconditional empathy?
I do, however, have morals. Those morals prevent me from siding with an abusive rat.

But all that you said operates on the assumption that striking a person physically is never justified. Or that a woman is automatically innocent because she's a woman. With that, I just don't agree. Doesn't matter -- man OR woman -- some people provoke their own beating

Self defense is the only (legal) exception. Marshall was unprovoked and attacked first. He’s in the wrong.

I have to add: if I didn’t like Marshall and put him in headlock and broke his phone, that’s justified under your own views, right? I believe it’s ‘righteous violence’ because he goes against what I believe!
 
Just the answer I was waiting for

So why is selective empathy Ok for you and not for me?
According to you, I'm a Narc because I sho selective empathy but when you do that, you're a hero.
No you're a narc because you're so far up your own ass that you can't admit your flaws despite them being blatantly, glaringly, obvious to anyone with two braincells.

You're a CUNT because you don't have empathy torwards humanity except for others in your retarded little cult. This can be shown by you trying to take credit for covid. I lack empathy for sacks of pig shit like you and @Marshall Castersen.
 
Last edited:
So at least you admit that you yourself do not have unconditional empathy.

But all that you said operates on the assumption that striking a person physically is never justified. Or that a woman is automatically innocent because she's a woman. With that, I just don't agree. Doesn't matter -- man OR woman -- some people provoke their own beating.

You know, with the amount of injecting words into people's mouths that you do, one would think you're getting paid for it. No one here on this board has said that striking a person physically is never justified, only that simple words don't justify it. If the woman had been attacking Marshall with a weapon I would've been all for him putting her in as many headlocks as it took to subdue her. And any idiot with more than two brain cells to rub together understands that women are capable of abuse in any relationship-- it's just that none of us believe that convicted felon and noted "bitch discipliner" Marshall Castersen is the abused partner here.

"A fool’s words get him into fights;
yes, his mouth calls out for a beating." (Prov 18:6)

Proverbs 20:3-13.

"3 Foolish people are always fighting, but avoiding quarrels will bring you honor."

"7 The good people who live honest lives will be a blessing to their children. 8 When a king sits on his throne to judge, he knows evil when he sees it. 9 No one can say, "I am innocent; I have never done anything wrong.""
 
So at least you admit that you yourself do not have unconditional empathy.

But all that you said operates on the assumption that striking a person physically is never justified. Or that a woman is automatically innocent because she's a woman. With that, I just don't agree. Doesn't matter -- man OR woman -- some people provoke their own beating.

"A fool’s words get him into fights;
yes, his mouth calls out for a beating." (Prov 18:6)

We will just have to agree to disagree on this issue.
More evidence that she's not Jewish.
"A fool’s mouth is his destruction, and his lips are the snare of his soul"
In other words a man should control what he says. You constantly say stupid shit in this very thread Melinda, should we physically beat you for it?
 
A bunch of people who are adamwnt that Narcissim is an issue but wjeews


Because drug dealers bring problems onto entire families, not just the people buying from them




Because he took bad advice from a Paul follower who told Marshall not to leave her and ignored good advice from a man who told him to leave her because she didn't submit to The Torah.

"An evil wife is a yoke shaken to and fro: he that hath hold of her is as though he held a...

There you go again using the word YOKE. What is your obsession with the word YOKE? All I can think of is egg yolks.

Aha!! gotcha!!. Thats why you hate Paul the Apostle, because of a rando who gave marsh bad advice. It's because of some autistic anchoring that both you and Marshall have latched onto.
 
Since @TamarYaelBatYah feels like quoting Proverbs at me as if it supports Marshall being a violent wife-beating lunatic, here's some more verses that her and him can ponder deeply--


Proverbs 15:18-- 18 A hot-tempered person stirs up conflict, but the one who is patient calms a quarrel.

Proverbs 16:32-- 32 Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city.

Proverbs 20:3-- 3 It is to one’s honor to avoid strife, but every fool is quick to quarrel.

Proverbs 29:22-- 22 An angry person stirs up conflict, and a hot-tempered person commits many sins.

Proverbs 30:33-- 33 For as churning cream produces butter, and as twisting the nose produces blood, so stirring up anger produces strife.”

Proverbs 13:10-- 10 Where there is strife, there is pride, but wisdom is found in those who take advice.

Matthew 5:22-- 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

James 1:19-20-- 19 My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, 20 because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires.

Proverbs 29:11-- 11 Fools give full vent to their rage, but the wise bring calm in the end.

Proverbs 19:11-- 11 A person’s wisdom yields patience; it is to one’s glory to overlook an offense.

James 4:1-2-- 1 What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God.

Psalm 37:8-9-- 8 Refrain from anger and turn from wrath; do not fret—it leads only to evil. 9 For those who are evil will be destroyed, but those who hope in the LORD will inherit the land.

Proverbs 14:29-- 29 Whoever is patient has great understanding, but one who is quick-tempered displays folly.
 
A bunch of people who are adamwnt that Narcissim is an issue but wjeews


Because drug dealers bring problems onto entire families, not just the people buying from them




Because he took bad advice from a Paul follower who told Marshall not to leave her and ignored good advice from a man who told him to leave her because she didn't submit to The Torah.

"An evil wife is a yoke shaken to and fro: he that hath hold of her is as though he held a scorpion" (Ecclesiasticus 26:7)




Blind trust is foolish





Just because someone does not express their anger in a passive aggressive manner does not mean they are mentally cooky

A bunch of people who are adament that Narcissim is an issue but where is the empathy for Marshall and the stress he must've have been under dealing with a druggie for a spouse?

Please, do explain this contradiction in your moral philosophy!
I mean, it isn't blind. If you're married you should know well enough your partner's character.

If they are going to be dishonest they're going to find a way. I trust her not to be a duplicitous cunt. Your husband trusts you to turn over all your activities. I'm sure if you really set your mind to it you could cheat pretty fucking easily.

I just happen to not be so incredibly insecure to demand my wife hand over her daily log of activities. I married her because I love and trust her. If I can't trust her then who can I trust? Why am I with her if I can't trust her? The absurdly controlling dynamic of demanding literally every account login is abusive imo. Especially considering you're with a violent deranged lion that might wake up one day and decide the stuff that used to be okay isn't anymore, so he feeds you one. But that's okay, right? Because know you know that sets you off and you shouldn't be doing that.
So at least you admit that you yourself do not have unconditional empathy.

But all that you said operates on the assumption that striking a person physically is never justified. Or that a woman is automatically innocent because she's a woman. With that, I just don't agree. Doesn't matter -- man OR woman -- some people provoke their own beating.

"A fool’s words get him into fights;
yes, his mouth calls out for a beating." (Prov 18:6)

We will just have to agree to disagree on this issue.
My evidence that he's guilty is that he was found guilty. I'd be willing to bet he admitted his guilt in a court of law. He's guilty. That's why you had to have a meeting with his PO to get approval for him to move to VA. He's literally guilty as in he's being punished right now for something. He either admitted to his guilt, or the evidence was so damning that 12 random people he's never seen in his life were convinced beyond ANY REASONABLE DOUBT that he's guilty. Pretty fucking damning if you ask me. Also he can't own guns. I just like reminding you and him of this, that if he owns guns it's a felony. If you straw purchased them that's also a felony.
 
Last edited:
Back