Second Challenge to all free willers and determinsit: Is human language a living creature

I think thing are OK now, I threatened Speechy with a cross so he went down the street to chat with the evil speech of Jay Leno for a while. They're playing Rummikub, so I think I have a while to post my last argument. Here goes. See, how I see it, my slave owner (alias, my speech) would tell me that slavery is GOOD, so I'd be more willing to be his slave. But I don't really like slavery. I think Speechy made a mistake in that regard. I mean, I don't blame him, something that's purely evil is bound to make little slip ups here and there. I mean, if these speech things really do have us as slaves, There's nothing we can do about it, except maybe join your insane cult, and I don't think I want to. Things really are fine, since these speech thingies are imperceptible and probably don't exist, I'd say they can own us if they want. But they don't have arms or legs or anything, they're just a bunch of little sound waves, so I'd say they can't do us much harm. Another quote from the Bible. I can't argue with the bible, it says what it says, but what it says isn't always true. Please try to understand that. I'm getting very tired of this debate. VERY tired. I'm a Christian, you can stop saying I'm not. I'm just not a nutty, berserk Christian like you. Maybe I can't escape my speech. Maybe I can't. But I don't care. Speechy doesn't bother me. He's what I say, alright? Imagine a world where nobody uses human speech. Just the word of God. Wouldn't that be worse? Human speech as it is now is so diverse. If everything we said came from the mouth of an omnipotent deity, it would suck. God is a nice guy, I'm sure. But I don't want to be saying what he wants me to say all the time. You're not the slave of Jesus Christ, you're the slave of Meth. Go to a help clinic and get off of it. Here are some of YOUR tactics: 1. No proof 2. Biased 3. Hypocritical 4. Denying his evident insanity 5. No evidence 6. Doesn't understand what Christianity is 7. Refers to me as a thing 8. Screams at the sky from his asylum window during a rainstorm 9. Nutty 10. Debate is not what it said it was about 11. Quotes the Bible too much 12. Lots of typos 13. Says he's a prophet 14. uses lots of buzz words 15. Hates good old Chomsky Some more Bible quotes. I swear, that's like, 75% of your argument. I get that it's nice to use because it's public domain and stuff, but you could always quote a few lines from Dante. His book is just as good, maybe even better, and it's much more clear and concise in its depictions of the afterlife. That next source you give is some kind of Satanic thing. You're really creeping me out. And again, you're bringing politics into this. This debate sure isn't about Hillary Clinton, I know that. But I appreciate her for talking to Eleanor Roosevelt. I like Eleanor too. I mean, don't pick on Hill for talking to the dead, Jesus brought a guy back from the dead. You know, Lazarus. That's really blasphemous. I mean, Hillary is just talking to Eleanor on her Quija board or whatever. That's fine. She can do that if she wants. I'm not one to judge. Eleanor was a fine woman and a great first lady, and I'm sure Hillary identifies with her. Talk about this food with the human sperm and blood in it. Give me an article. Then I'll believe you. OK? I offer sarcasm and folly because you won't accept anything logical. I mean, I can't take this seriously. I know it's wrong. I'm not on drugs, I'm not an atheist, and my own speech isn't trying to kill me. Please, judges, vote for me. You can vote for him if you want to, but then you'll be a kook too. OH GOD SPEECHYIS BACK AND HES POURING B LOOOD ON ME AND JUESUS IS COMING ITS HIS RESURRECVTION AND HNE SAYHS YOUI SHOULD NOTY HAVE HYAD FREE SOPEECH OLN LY SAYH WHNATG GOD WANTGS YIOUJ NTO AND IKT SAYH WJHYH DO WE HNAVE BTOL DOL THATG AND JMESYHS SAYHS BECAUSE HNES M, OREW IKM POTRTGANT THANH EVERFYONE ELSE AND OHN GIOD I9M GOPING TGOL HNELL Just kidding, as always. Good luck.