https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Goldstein#Views_on_religion
The only claim I'm making in this post is that this wikipedia article exists and that it contains text, Dom.
In his 2004 book XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul, Luke Ford wrote about a conversation with Goldstein, in which Ford asked Goldstein why Jews were dramatically overrepresented in the porn industry. He answered, "The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism. Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged." Ford then asked, "What does it mean to you to be a Jew?" To which Goldstein responded, "It doesn't mean anything. It means that I'm called a kike."
Is it? Have you ever even opened the book? If so, why did you cite your Wikipedia and not the actual book?
If only you try to stonewall enough, that will prove that no one else has a proper rationale for... responding.
It's definitely impotence to... call you out for citing Wikipedia.,
Let's skip a few posts. If you had a PDF of the book in question and of the code for libel in the USA, would that be meaningful to you or affect your natural biases or your opinion on any of the subject matter in any way?
If you had a PDF of the book in question, would you cite Wikipedia?
Yes? Then you're an idiot. I don't think you are. You're clearly clever enough to try to evade the subject as best as you can, and try to entice people to talk about something else.
So why did you cite Wikipedia? Because you do not have a PDF of the book.
It's OK to admit to mistakes.
Wikipedia... is le not a source and therefore "you shilled wikipedia" is not an argument in regard to the subject matter. You can repeat it all you want, but I'm the only one reading and I don't respect you.
I can tell you how to find the pdf if you're interested in arguing about, like, something that could be construed as an argument. I said I was charitable!
You already make that claim, and that was already addressed. Do keep up.
Suit yourself.
Did you find it? Then why didn't you use it?