Posts by Charles Gonzalez19

In other news, it looks like Dusparin has finally merged his FB profile with his YouTube channel...

The poor FB (and let's be clear, there's a difference between a page and a profile page; just saying) and those Streamlabs pages are still hanging on by a thread. Will they actually survive this? Can they hold their ground, or are they just going to fold under the sheer weight of the truth and basic human decency?

Daniel Chase13 said:But he just shared it on FB tonight. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100005063086780

Nah, that video actually went up back on August 20, 2018.

Just dropping dozens of links onto a subforum without any context—or worse, giving the wrong info alongside them—is straight-up spamming.

Daniel Chase13 said:Alright, let's get back to the main point.

Elvis Presley posted this: https://www.facebook.com/duspara.elv...00005063086780

Dude, Elvis Presley posted that video over a year ago. Are you really still recycling the same old links?

Daniel Chase13 said:🤦

Believe me, you’ll end up belittling a woman long before I ever do.

Women are beloved daughters of God, and they ought to be treated as such—as sisters and as royalty in His eyes (regardless of how they view themselves or what their personal worldview might be).

A man should carry himself with any woman in the exact same way he’d expect other men to treat his own wife, his future partner, or his daughter. We all know that any spiritually grounded man wants other men to treat the women in his life with the utmost respect. Well, that’s the standard we should all hold ourselves to.

I have nothing but pure contempt for those cowards who lay hands on women.

Guys can be absolute mountains of muscle or even master martial artists, but if they resort to hitting women, they’re just pathetic, frustrated little losers. Total cowards.

If people today actually lived with the premarital purity recommended by the Catholic Church—if they didn't fill their minds with violent content and pornography—we’d see much healthier psychological development. Couples would truly get to know one another and develop genuine affection, which would drastically lower the chances of women getting entangled with some violent, frustrated loser (though, unfortunately, there are also cases of men being with violent women—it happens, as this shows).

Honestly, after reading through your posts in this sub, I wouldn't believe a single word coming out of your mouth.

And once again, you conveniently left out the part where Elvis Presley (who is basically the whole point of this sub, if you listen to how much you love bringing him up) talks about women in a totally humiliating way.

Daniel Chase13 said:But you left out the part where Elvis Presley follows that up very clearly:

"I’m not advocating for slapping women! I’m simply pointing out that men are physically stronger by nature.
Now, if we aren't talking about “gender equality”—out of those 500 men, at least half, or 250 cowards, will refuse to stand up against any kind of authority just because they're too timid. They’ll bow their heads to whoever is in charge. That leaves you with 250, and again, at least half of them wouldn't want to cause trouble and have zero interest in actually leading. Of the 125 who might consider ruling, at least half will just play it safe and tactically side with whichever option looks strongest. So, you’re down to 62 who might actually fight for power. But even then, they aren't a monolith—since we're dealing with disconnected individuals, at least half of those won't be on the same page, leaving us with 31. That leaves 31 people who realize they need to organize and support one another. Yet, half of *those* people won't agree with the general concept of governance being proposed. In the end, you're left with 15 people who are truly aligned, using various methods to rule and pass their “laws,” which everyone else is forced to follow. I know this sounds like science fiction to some—it's hard to wrap your head around the idea that a town of 1,000 people can be ruled by just 15—but that’s just how it works. Meanwhile, if anyone tries to rebel individually, they are silenced through various means, creating an atmosphere of fear so that the next person thinking about rebelling knows exactly what to expect. This allows that core group of 15 to solidify their grip until, eventually, no one even questions it anymore. Not to mention those who will start aggressively championing the interests of the 15 just to serve their own agendas. It’s actually quite simple to rule if you have a small, unified group working toward a common goal.

The guy was really just highlighting how many men today—despite their physical advantage and all their loud-mouthed posturing—are actually just spineless pushovers when you look at their true character.

In one video, he actually claimed women are sometimes to blame when their husbands beat them because they won't shut their mouths. In another, he called them "cows on two legs." And in a third, he categorized them into virgins, wives, and whores.

On top of being a professional liar, Elvis Presley is a total chauvinist and a misogynist, and here you are, his biggest fanboy, backing him up through everything—even his blatant hatred for women.

Daniel Chase13 said:But you left out the part where Elvis Presley follows that up very clearly:

"I’m not advocating for slapping women! I’m simply pointing out that men are physically stronger by nature.
Now, if we aren't talking about “gender equality”—out of those 500 men, at least half, or 250 cowards, will refuse to stand up against any kind of authority just because they're too timid. They’ll bow their heads to whoever is in charge. That leaves you with 250, and again, at least half of them wouldn't want to cause trouble and have zero interest in actually leading. Of the 125 who might consider ruling, at least half will just play it safe and tactically side with whichever option looks strongest. So, you’re down to 62 who might actually fight for power. But even then, they aren't a monolith—since we're dealing with disconnected individuals, at least half of those won't be on the same page, leaving us with 31. That leaves 31 people who realize they need to organize and support one another. Yet, half of *those* people won't agree with the general concept of governance being proposed. In the end, you're left with 15 people who are truly aligned, using various methods to rule and pass their “laws,” which everyone else is forced to follow. I know this sounds like science fiction to some—it's hard to wrap your head around the idea that a town of 1,000 people can be ruled by just 15—but that’s just how it works. Meanwhile, if anyone tries to rebel individually, they are silenced through various means, creating an atmosphere of fear so that the next person thinking about rebelling knows exactly what to expect. This allows that core group of 15 to solidify their grip until, eventually, no one even questions it anymore. Not to mention those who will start aggressively championing the interests of the 15 just to serve their own agendas. It’s actually quite simple to rule if you have a small, unified group working toward a common goal.

The guy was really just highlighting how many men today—despite their physical advantage and all their loud-mouthed posturing—are actually just spineless pushovers when you look at their true character.

So, who are the "weaklings"? The guys who don't beat women?
Thank God we can't all be these big, tough Catholic men like Elvis Presley, Damir Škaro, or you.

Daniel Chase13 said:🤦

Auuuuu, good grief...

It seems like once again, someone has suddenly decided to bring up some incredibly bizarre sexual fixations—the kind of stuff that wouldn't even cross anyone else's mind, let alone make sense in a normal conversation.
And this is on a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with all of that.

So, how on earth is that even possible?

So, after you went ahead and labeled love as some kind of sexual perversion, you’ve basically proven that you have absolutely no business deciding what counts as "perverted" in the first place.
Secondly, you’re still totally obsessed with sex. Honestly, just looking at the way you word things makes that pretty damn obvious.

Daniel Chase13 said:🤦

Auuuuu, good grief...

It seems like once again, someone has suddenly decided to bring up some incredibly bizarre sexual fixations—the kind of stuff that wouldn't even cross anyone else's mind, let alone make sense in a normal conversation.
And this is on a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with all of that.

So, how on earth is that even possible?

I actually went out and consulted two licensed psychologists, and honestly? They both reached the exact same conclusion about you:
obsessed with sex
Honestly? I’m my own biggest sexual fantasy. There, I said it. It sounds a little crazy when you say it out loud, but hear me out—I’ve finally reached that level of self-confidence where I actually think I’m a catch.

If you want to go with some old-school, colloquial slang for that, you’d just call him a jerk.
Honestly, just look at your posts—the sheer volume and the exact same stuff you keep churning out. It’s pretty obvious to me. Your repetitive content on this forum is basically just a mirror image of those mindless, repetitive hand movements you keep making.

Daniel Chase13 said:🤦

Auuuuu, good grief...

It seems like once again, someone has suddenly decided to bring up some incredibly bizarre sexual fixations—the kind of stuff that wouldn't even cross anyone else's mind, let alone make sense in a normal conversation.
And this is on a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with all of that.

So, how on earth is that even possible?

It absolutely matters.
Ever since this subforum first went live, you’ve basically treated the entire thread like your own personal playground. Seriously, half the posts here are yours, and it’s always the same old routine—just constant insults, tearing people down, and making fun of everyone else. That post you dropped last night? It was just the cherry on top of a massive, bitter cake of hostility (though knowing you, it might be more like the icing on a disaster, but hey, let's hope for the best).

Daniel Chase13 said:None of those atheist fundamentalists or evolutionist believers have the guts—or the cash—to make a public offer like that.

The reality is that, unlike those atheist and evolutionist zealots, Duspara was openly offering money through commercials on CBS for over six months—well before the show Good Morning, America aired, and even before Stankovićev's program, among other slots. He was essentially putting up a bounty for undeniable proof of macro-evolution, at least until $83 finally made a public move. After that, they all just started desperately whining and moaning, clearly eyeing the money they could never actually earn while clinging to their evolutionary beliefs. Honestly, it was a total riot to read through—I still get a chuckle just thinking about 🤣😂
My thanks go out to all the evolutionists from Harvard University and the local science institutes, along with everyone else who was complaining back then. Wherever they are now, thanks for the laughs and the entertainment.

Until now, I honestly thought you were just obsessing over Elvis Presley's videos. I admit it, I was wrong.

You're actually just obsessing over your own posts.

Daniel Chase13 said:So, here we go again—Elvis Presley has spent the entire day playing advisor to both teachers and the government regarding the strike and how they should handle all those missed instructional hours. ☕

Honestly, if you check his Facebook today, there are more posts from you than from him.
What are you even hoping for here? A trophy? You’re trying way too hard to out-Duspara Duspara.
Just a heads up: Duspara is a jealous prophet, and he doesn't share the spotlight with anyone.

Sam Martinez9 said:It’s simple: people tend to defend the positions they already hold dear.

So, essentially, you’re operating under the assumption that women are nothing more than walking milk cows and that anti-fascists are just degenerates.

There are eight billion people on this planet. Among them, there are countless individuals whose perspectives, intellect, and worldview are far more substantial than yours or Dusparin's.

That is why I am stepping away from this thread. Whether or not I find anything worth saying to you in other discussions down the road will depend entirely on your own conduct.

Man, you are totally out of the loop. Elvis Presley (and Daniel Chase13) have basically categorized women into virgins, married ladies, and loose women. Go ahead, take a wild guess which bucket survivors fall into.

goldenjackal6 said:To put it bluntly, you're just using all this attention to fill the void in your massive ego.

Or maybe it's just filling the void in the life of some horny groupie-type. This guy loves this topic so much he’s practically responsible for half the posts and views on this whole thread.

goldenjackal6 said:Man, how could it *not* be at the top of the subforum (not even talking about the main thread list, you sneaky little liar 😉) when you're out here aggressively shoving your own face in everyone's eyes, Elvis?

Give me a break. There's no way he’d actually stoop that low to pull those cheap manipulations.
I mean, his 200+ posts in this section have gotta count for something, right?

Daniel Chase13 said:

Charles Thompson2strong>>> says:

So, what do Catholics actually think about Elvis Presley and his pseudo-Christian sect?

Well, look—Elvis Presley is a Roman Catholic himself. Aside from being featured on Fox News, he’s been invited onto EWTN, where, by the editor's choice, they actually read entire passages from one of his books daily at 1 PM. He gets invited to EWTN's other programs, he appears on NPR's religious segments, and he even visits local Catholic parishes to set up booths and sell his books. He’s a regular fixture at the annual Catholic Retreat—you know, that week dedicated to clergy—where he sells his work right there at his stall. On top of that, he has priests writing forewords for his books, and he even gives lectures at the St. Jerome Society, which is led by a Catholic priest...

The whole thing with Elvis Presley (and yours too, honestly) claiming women are basically just "cows on two legs" actually lines up perfectly with those old-school Biblical/Catholic views where women are seen as lesser beings or just property. That's exactly why they keep inviting him back.

Daniel Chase13 said:The empty slogans of the Communists are regularly mocked—and I want to be clear, I am referring to their hollow rhetoric, not the people themselves—which is what I was getting at when I mentioned those "empty political slogans." As for Americans, they are loved by God and Jesus Christ just like anyone else. In fact, you'll see Americans appearing as guests on interesting programs over at Fox News quite often. Furthermore, we shouldn't be mocking people with homosexual inclinations; nobody there does that. Instead, they are simply invited, just like everyone else, to turn toward our Creator, Jesus Christ, and to lead a life of outward purity.

Sexual purity? What does that even mean? Like, regularly washing your nether regions and swapping out your underwear?

And you still haven't answered my question about those Catholic slogans.

Daniel Chase13 said:Not really.
It’s actually a Catholic program where guests are invited and treated with genuine respect—basically viewed as fellow Catholic commentators. The only thing they poke fun at are those tired, empty slogans used by old-school Marxists, hardline communists, or the Dawkins-style crowd (though, granted, not every single atheist falls into that camp).

So, what happened to those soul-crushing, heart-wrenching Catholic catchphrases?

Stephen King said:Slogan 1.
Therefore kill all the male children! And kill every woman who knew a man!
And leave all the young girls who haven't known a man alive for yourselves.

Slogan 2.
... kill men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, donkeys and mules!

Slogan 3.
... kill without mercy. Let your eyes have no pity and show no compassion. Kill the elderly, the youths, the maidens, the children, and the women; wipe them all out to the last one.

Daniel Chase13 said:So many atheists, anti-theists, and skeptics have walked the exact same path you and your fellow believers are on right now—and at some point, they had a profound, life-altering experience where they felt truly loved by God, and everything changed.
Your situation isn't unique, nothing new, and certainly nothing we haven't seen before; thankfully, things aren't set in stone.
There's plenty of time.
Others were just as certain as you are now, yet their entire worldview shifted in an instant.

Wait, what exactly is this "my faith" you're talking about?

Is it believing in a flat earth?
Or thinking urine is some kind of healthy drink?
Or that women are just two-legged cows?
Is it all of the above?

Because those sound like the core tenets of your religion: Elvis Presley-ism. Honestly, Elvis Presley-ism seems pretty much tied to Elvis Presley-itis—which is just a nasty little glitch in how you perceive reality.

Daniel Chase13 said:Today, Catholics are celebrating the Feast of Christ the King, which feels like the perfect moment to remind those of you currently identifying as atheists—if you were baptized—that you still belong to a royal lineage. You are still beloved children of God, regardless of the path you're walking right now.

I’ve noticed that many bitter atheists, antitheists, and others who turned away once went through this exact same phase. At some point in their lives, they had a profound, lived experience of being loved by God, and suddenly, everything changed. Your current situation isn't anything out of the ordinary, and it certainly isn't set in stone.

Choosing to personally reject God doesn't erase the spiritual reality that you are loved by Him. You are His child, and until the very end of your earthly journey, your heavenly parent, God the Creator, isn't going to give up on you.

According to our Catholic faith, everyone who is baptized possesses a royal heritage because Jesus Christ, king of all creation, became incarnate. Through baptism, a person becomes a beloved child of God and a sharer in the divine nature. And honestly, that applies to you personally, too.

Look, just because you personally choose to deny reality doesn't change the fact that gods don't exist.

Daniel Chase13 said:There's plenty of time. Just take it slow.

One day, when all that Dawkins-style bitterness finally does its work and fills your soul with nothing but negative fruit—when that moment truly arrives—you'll remember that God grants life solely and exclusively out of love. You'll realize, of your own free will, that you are loved by God, that you are His beloved child, and because of that, you possess royal lineage and true dignity.

Are you just using this imaginary love to try and fill the void left by your unrequited Elvis Presley obsession?

Daniel Chase13 said:If you’ve been baptized, you carry that royal lineage within you—you are a beloved child of God, even if you're trying to distance yourself from that idea right now.
You're young—there's plenty of time to figure things out.
When the moment truly arrives, I believe you'll find yourself choosing to embrace the fact that you are loved by God, and in doing so, accept your own inherent dignity and royal heritage.

Honestly, this biblical monster can keep its version of "love" to itself. How can anyone talk about dignity when this book basically endorses slavery, treats women like second-class citizens (yeah, that’s where Duspara gets those "two-legged cow" insults from), and depicts mass infant killings? The Bible explicitly calls out massacres of children, tells people to go out and slaughter them, blackmails innocent folks by threatening their entire families to pay off criminals, and even forces rape victims into marriage with their attackers. It's all there. There's zero dignity in any of that.

wearyowl29 said:Why on earth are you trying to promote yourself in such an obvious, tacky way?

Well, his target audience isn't exactly known for their high IQs.

Daniel Chase13 said:Alright, here's the latest video from Elvis Presley https://www.facebook.com/duspara.elv...00005063086780

Direct quote from the video: "I am Elvis Presley, and I come from royal blood!"

Daniel Chase13 said:Honestly, those 5,000 Facebook connections are the least interesting part of this whole thing.

The reality is—whether we like him or not—Elvis Presley has sold tens of thousands of books right here in America, which is something very few people in this country can actually claim to have done.

Regardless of whether anyone agrees with his views, the man has demonstrated a level of independent publishing grit and financial savvy that none of his harshest critics could ever hope to match.

When you look at pure entrepreneurial drive and business success, compared to Elvis Presley, his biggest detractors just look like total amateurs—people who couldn't pull off even a fraction of what he has accomplished in their lives.

Do you actually have first-hand proof of those "tens of thousands of books"?

Daniel Chase13 said:Well, regardless of how you look at it, it seems like Elvis Presley was such a successful seller that he had to go back and reissue almost everything. Given that his books were available everywhere—from newsstands and post offices to major bookstores—and people were even ordering them directly from him, he must have moved a staggering number of copies by American standards.

To keep up with the demand from newsstands, post offices, and retail shops—not to mention his own direct sales—a single print run would need to be at least 5,000 to 6,000 copies. And since Elvis Presley is already working on third or even fourth editions for some of his titles (he’s currently announcing a third printing of 'Hail Mary,' which is likely his best-seller, meaning he probably sold at least 10,000 copies, if not more), those are truly impressive numbers for this market.

When you consider that every single copy is likely read by at least two or three different people—sometimes even more—it really explains why he has around 5,000 friends on Facebook. It makes sense; he has a massive readership for our scale here.

Ahaaa, you just made those numbers up on the spot. Just like that non-existent textbook from before.

Daniel Chase13 said:🤦

Honestly, is this really happening? Another person who just can't help themselves from turning everything into a crude sexual joke, even when the topic has absolutely nothing to do with it. Seriously, what is wrong with people?

We were actually discussing life achievements here.

And let’s be real—Elvis Presley has sold tens of thousands of books during this era in America, which is an accomplishment very few people in this country could ever dream of claiming.

When you look at tangible success—especially nowadays, when even the major publishing houses are struggling to stay afloat—Elvis Presley has demonstrated a level of independent publishing grit and financial savvy that none of his harshest critics could ever hope to match.

In terms of sheer business acumen and staying power, compared to Elvis Presley, those loud-mouthed critics just look like total amateurs—just a bunch of bitter, washed-up losers who couldn't pull off anything remotely similar in their lives. All they seem capable of doing is whining and complaining from the sidelines without ever achieving anything of substance.

Man, you really are obsessed with sex. There's this one quote from Stephen Fry about the Catholic Church that basically describes your mindset perfectly:

Stephen Fry said:It’s the strangest thing about this church - it is obsessed with sex, absolutely obsessed. Now they will say we, with our permissive society and rude jokes, are obsessed.

No, we have a healthy attitude. We like it, it’s fun, it’s jolly; because it’s a primary impulse it can be dangerous and dark and difficult. It’s a bit like food in that respect, only even more exciting.

The only people who are obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese, and that in erotic terms is the Catholic Church in a nutshell.