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.

Why did he kill himself then, Melinda, if not because he'd rather have no more tomorrows than to spend another day with you?

He killed himself because he was an Ashkenazi Jew who didn't come home to The Torah. He got the curses of the law on him (mental instability)
Porn does that shit as well.



Actually, that's EXACTLY what it means. If a married couple is okay with each other watching porn, then it ISN'T CHEATING. For someone who supposedly got her bachelor's degree, you sure do make some very retarded statements.

Yes, it IS cheating because it's Polyamory, no
posting using an IP in your area

Really now? I thought you didn't have your user IP addresses?


in an effort to get us to rush to defend ourselves

projection much?


She's more got the brain of an angry impoverished Arab mother

oh, this comment 😂

that's why you aren't getting sued lol

you're always the comic relief!


Shhhh, it's not your fault she's a sexually repressed insecure prude. @TamarYaelBatYah would have to find another guy on the internet to import from thousands of miles away if she caught Marshall appreciating a pretty woman, however politely or briefly.

Marshall and I signed a marriage contract (Ketubah) for Monogamy. If he wanted to be in a Polyamorous relationship, he could have picked someone else. He doesn't want me watching video porn. The same goes for him.



My grandmother was a 1950's housewife and would never have a thread here, unlike this sloppy slob skank.
What is Melinda's view on hardcore hentai?

Yes, because the women of the 1950s consented to Patriarchy, unlike me

Some things never change

View attachment amazon women.webp
 
He killed himself because he was an Ashkenazi Jew who didn't come home to The Torah. He got the curses of the law on him (mental instability)
Oh look you're too stupid to understand the causes of mental illness. Why am I not surprised?
Really now? I thought you didn't have your user IP addresses?
I said they're not stored in any database, not that staff couldn't check them. Btw are you aware of what a VPN is Piglinda? If not let me explain something.
VPN+Throw away protonmail email address=anonymity. Your not going to be able to find any of us using those two things and we're all smart enough to use them. In short you failed before you even began.

that's why you aren't getting sued lol
I mean to be fair none of us are actually going to be sued. You don't even know what country I live in let alone who I am.
 
Last edited:
You know, I'm reminded that maybe a month or two ago, I gave Linda carte blanche to start guessing my location and I'd even tell her honestly if she got any part of it correct, but she's never actually tried to find me. You'd think someone who had all our information and wanted to intimidate us would take advantage of that. Yet, nothing. Now, Linda, you wouldn't happen to be lying about knowing who and where we all are, right? Because you NEVER lie. Ever. Honest.
 
Yes, it IS cheating because it's Polyamory, no

NO! Polyamory means having having sex with multiple people (and all parties consenting). Porn is not a third partner. Porn is something that someone watches either solo, or with a partner (if they choose to). No couple has sex with porn. They have sex with each other after WATCHING porn (again, if they choose to).
 
  • Like
Reactions: lamp and Deadpool
Were you in contact with Marshall prior to the incidence of domestic violence that got Marshall arrested? You never answered that question, among many others. How is it Ok to try to get with a married man?
 
NO! Polyamory means having having sex with multiple people (and all parties consenting). Porn is not a third partner. Porn is something that someone watches either solo, or with a partner (if they choose to). No couple has sex with porn. They have sex with each other after WATCHING porn (again, if they choose to).

Talking with Linda is a lot like talking with Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland. She thinks every word " means just what [she] choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
 
Here are the copyright entries for Melinda L. Scott:
2020-07-14 13.32.13 cocatalog.loc.gov 22792fa24cd4.jpg


And the more recent one:
2020-07-14 13.32.43 cocatalog.loc.gov 236da9575204.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Miel67
VPN+Throw away protonmail email address=anonymity. Your not going to be able to find any of us using those two things and we're all smart enough to use them. In short you failed before you even began.
It really wouldn't matter if she even could find us anyways. Her limp-dick, child-killing husband is too much of a pussy to actually do anything, and she's as much of if not more of a pussy than he is. Any attempt at bringing lawsuits against us would be met with failure because she's just that incompetent. But, even if she did manage to draw me into a lawsuit, I'd hire the best, most expensive goddamn lawyer I could find just so she'd be forced to pay legal fees because she's a dumb pigwhore who thinks being a drop-out from law school makes her qualified to file suit against people in different states or even countries.

Law school dropouts aren't even qualified to shine my shoes.
 
NO! Polyamory means having having sex with multiple people (and all parties consenting). Porn is not a third partner. Porn is something that someone watches either solo, or with a partner (if they choose to). No couple has sex with porn. They have sex with each other after WATCHING porn (again, if they choose to).

Sex does not always mean penetratrion, hence the term "phone sex"

A relationship does not have to be sexual to be a romantic relationship either. The moment a third party enters a Monogamous relationship, whether emotionally or physically, it is either Polygyny, Polyandry, or Polyamory


Screenshot 2020-07-14 at 5.22.09 PM.png
 
Sex does not always mean penetratrion, hence the term "phone sex"

A relationship does not have to be sexual to be a romantic relationship either. The moment a third party enters a Monogamous relationship, whether emotionally or physically, it is either Polygyny, Polyandry, or Polyamory


View attachment 1448380
Your book is poorly written garbage, that absolutely no one needs. Seriously you don't say anything someone with a 95+ I.Q. wouldn't think of on their own. Clearly your education has been wasted. 0/10 would not buy or recommend.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Miel67
Were you in contact with Marshall prior to the incidence of domestic violence that got Marshall arrested? You never answered that question, among many others. How is it Ok to try to get with a married man?

Define "marriage" first of all. A legal contract with a secular nation is not "marriage" under The Torah.
It doesn't matter if Marshall's ex-wife (The Scorpion) and he had a legal contract, Elohim doesn't judge marriage and divorce based on secular contracts, He judges under HIS Torah.

According to The Torah, the wife of an Israelite man who will not follow The Torah and worship Elohim (not some other fictitious elohim) is to be sent off (divorced). "What Elohim has joined together, let no person put asunder". Elohim does not join together a man of Israel and a Goy. The Scorpion did not worship Elohim nor follow The Torah, therefore, is what a valid divorce the moment Marshall left her house (was arrested in this case).

And anyways, they didn't have a legal contract either. The Scorpion filed for a legal divorce in June 2016. Marshall and I began our Shidduch in July 2016. She did not even visit Marshall in jail (that is abandonment of a Covenant).

So I wasn't "getting with a married man". Refer to comment #6204 for more information

Your book is poorly written garbage, that absolutely no one needs. Seriously you don't say anything someone with a 95+ I.Q. wouldn't think of on their own. Clearly your education has been wasted. 0/10 would not buy or recommend.

Interesting, but a previous professor of mine recently told me she refers to my book all the time in her Event planning.
IE DONT CARE WHAT YA SAY DUMMY

§ 57-1. Act for religious freedom recited.
The General Assembly, on January 16, 1786, passed an act in the following words:

"Whereas, Almighty G-d hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishment, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who, being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, have established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical, and even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labors, for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right; that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing, with a monopoly of worldly honors and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though, indeed, those are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet, neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he, being of course judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rules of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere, when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail, if left to herself; that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate; errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:

"Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested or burthened, in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

"And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that, therefore, to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind; and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right."

Code 1919, § 34; 1985, c. 73.
 
Interesting, but a previous professor of mine recently told me she refers to my book all the time in her Event planning.
IE DONT CARE WHAT YA SAY DUMMY
More lies. Nobody believes a word you say Piglinda. Your book is poorly written garbage and you got bilked out of thousands of dollars to publish it. You'll never recoup the costs let alone make a profit. A simple Google search gives better advice and outdoor activities for free anyway.
§ 57-1. Act for religious freedom recited.
The General Assembly, on January 16, 1786, passed an act in the following words:

"Whereas, Almighty G-d hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishment, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who, being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, have established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical, and even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labors, for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right; that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing, with a monopoly of worldly honors and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though, indeed, those are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet, neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he, being of course judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rules of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere, when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail, if left to herself; that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate; errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:

"Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested or burthened, in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

"And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that, therefore, to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind; and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right."

Code 1919, § 34; 1985, c. 73.
TL: DR no 1 curr. You seem pissed off. Did CPS come back?
 
Interesting, but a previous professor of mine recently told me she refers to my book all the time in her Event planning.
IE DONT CARE WHAT YA SAY DUMMY

You know, that's like fucking a hooker and her saying "you're the best fuck I've ever had." It's pretty hollow and most definitely not true, but they'll tell you that so you can feel good about yourself after dumping a shitton of cash into what's effectively a waste
 
Back