Respectful Politics Thread (Let's Just See)

[D'Snowth]

Wow, missed the last couple of pages. Lots to catch up on. MWoO and D'Snowth pretty much owned Censored today.

Whaddya say? Should we bring MWoO with us on our next trip to Stuckey's?

Agree with everything here except the last line. Did you mean to say "I"M AN EXPERT ON CHILDREN BECAUSE I SEE A CHILD PSYCHIATRIST." ? It would be more accurate.

 

[LittleJerry92]

 

[MuppetsRule]

Whaddya say? Should we bring MWoO with us on our next trip to Stuckey's?

I say we invite everybody except Censored!!! Now, which Stuckey's is convenient for everybody?

 

[D'Snowth]

 

[Censored]

Are you saying sexual orientation is not about sex? I'm pretty sure it's about sex. Who you wish to have it with or not have it with. How else would you define sexual orientation?

Not just about it. That’s a shallow adolescent viewpoint.

 

[Censored]

I say we invite everybody except Censored!!! Now, which Stuckey's is convenient for everybody?

How awful...From this blow I may never recover...

 

[Censored]

No, what people don't like is HOW you do it. You reduce a nuanced argument down to a basic one, usually avoiding the actual point of the argument, so that you can mis-frame the issue and more easily provide a counter. When a person goes more into depth with what they say to make it harder for you to do that, you ignore them because "you didn't ask for a book". You aren't just bringing arguments to their logical conclusion, you attack people, call them names, and put words in their mouth. You refuse to ever admit fault in anything...ever.



You got a direct answer a couple times already, you just refuse to acknowledge it because then you can't claim you never got one. But what the heck, one more go.

Direct Answer: A business owner does NOT have the right to refuse service to any group. However, they have the right to refuse to provide a specific service if they do not wish to. They can not decide WHO they will serve, but they can decide WHAT they will serve.

Counter example: Is an African American owner bakery required to make a cake for a KKK meeting and decorate it with racial slurs? Is a Jewish owned bakery required to make a cake for Good Friday that depicts Jesus' crucifixion complete with the phrase "Our Lord and Savior"? Should a Christian bakery be forced to make an erotic cake, complete with sex acts depicted on it?

My argument is purely legal. There should be no law that requires you provide a service you do not wish to provide, but if you are providing a service you can not choose to not provide that service to an entire group.

One can be morally opposed to an act and still not think it should be illegal. I can exercise my freedom to not patronize a business that chooses to exercise their freedom not to provide certain services.



No. Please see above. But this right here is what is wrong with how you argue as explained in this video:

Are you saying sexual orientation is not about sex? I'm pretty sure it's about sex. Who you wish to have it with or not have it with. How else would you define sexual orientation?

Good to know you’re for discrimination across the board. Thank God you weren’t making the laws during the Civil Rights Movement.

 

[Censored]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, sums up his posting history.

Same old record.

 

[Censored]

Agree with everything here except the last line. Did you mean to say "I"M AN EXPERT ON CHILDREN BECAUSE I SEE A CHILD PSYCHIATRIST." ? It would be more accurate.

I’m afraid I can’t help you. I don’t do lobotomies.

 

[Censored]

No, what people don't like is HOW you do it. You reduce a nuanced argument down to a basic one, usually avoiding the actual point of the argument, so that you can mis-frame the issue and more easily provide a counter. When a person goes more into depth with what they say to make it harder for you to do that, you ignore them because "you didn't ask for a book". You aren't just bringing arguments to their logical conclusion, you attack people, call them names, and put words in their mouth. You refuse to ever admit fault in anything...ever.



You got a direct answer a couple times already, you just refuse to acknowledge it because then you can't claim you never got one. But what the heck, one more go.

Direct Answer: A business owner does NOT have the right to refuse service to any group. However, they have the right to refuse to provide a specific service if they do not wish to. They can not decide WHO they will serve, but they can decide WHAT they will serve.

Counter example: Is an African American owner bakery required to make a cake for a KKK meeting and decorate it with racial slurs? Is a Jewish owned bakery required to make a cake for Good Friday that depicts Jesus' crucifixion complete with the phrase "Our Lord and Savior"? Should a Christian bakery be forced to make an erotic cake, complete with sex acts depicted on it?

My argument is purely legal. There should be no law that requires you provide a service you do not wish to provide, but if you are providing a service you can not choose to not provide that service to an entire group.

One can be morally opposed to an act and still not think it should be illegal. I can exercise my freedom to not patronize a business that chooses to exercise their freedom not to provide certain services.



No. Please see above. But this right here is what is wrong with how you argue as explained in this video:

Are you saying sexual orientation is not about sex? I'm pretty sure it's about sex. Who you wish to have it with or not have it with. How else would you define sexual orientation?

Yadda, yadda, yadda. You’re for legal discrimination. I get it.