Liberals Can't Have Their Cake And Eat It To

[MrWonka]

Let me know when you guys post something rational.

Sorry, but you don't get to decide what is and is not rational. The fact that you would post a link to an article with zero rational points, and then claim it's full of good ones demonstrates your own irrationality. I have logically decimated every "point" in your stupid article, and have offered not one single solitary retort to my actual points other than to claim I'm somehow biased. You're no different than the crazies on Fox News or Donald Trump who just yells fake news and liberal bias every time someone presents facts that blow your narrative out of the water.

You have to show us that you can recognize a rational argument before you get to anoint yourself the judge of them.

 

[MrWonka]

In other words, you can't rebut anything in the editorial.

The editorial has been sufficiently destroyed by multiple posters including myself. You have offered nothing in response to our posts but accusations of bias. You're the pot calling the kettle black. Grow up or quit wasting our time.

 

[Moderate Right]

You know what's rabid partisanship? Six straight years of telling us we weren't going to believe what Trump's "top people" were finding about Obama's real birth certificate?

No one but the far extremes ever believed that BS. Not even Bill O'Reilly believed that. But, of course, you want to paint with the broad brush.

 

[Moderate Right]

Believing the world to be round doesn't make you biased in favor of a round planet it means you're intelligent enough to recognize the truth. Believing that 2+2=4, not 5 doesn't make you biased in favor of the number 4, it means you have a basic understanding of how math works. At this point, there is only one political party in America you can support if you want to consider yourself a decent and intelligent human being. I live in a world of facts, data, math, and evidence. It's not my fault it all points to the same inescapable conclusion or that you're too obtuse to recognize it.

Your biased partisan head has it all figured out, doesn't it?

 

[Moderate Right]

Sorry, but you don't get to decide what is and is not rational. The fact that you would post a link to an article with zero rational points, and then claim it's full of good ones demonstrates your own irrationality. I have logically decimated every "point" in your stupid article, and have offered not one single solitary retort to my actual points other than to claim I'm somehow biased. You're no different than the crazies on Fox News or Donald Trump who just yells fake news and liberal bias every time someone presents facts that blow your narrative out of the water.

You have to show us that you can recognize a rational argument before you get to anoint yourself the judge of them.

Says the people that accuse me of not being rational. More liberal hypocrisy.

 

[Sampson Simpson]

LOL. Of course, being a liberal, you would think all that.

Of course being a conservative you are incapable of posting more than a stupid one liner, trolling deflection offering zero intelligence to this forum. Why does the forum tolerate this obvious trolling?

 

[Moderate Right]

The editorial has been sufficiently destroyed by multiple posters including myself. You have offered nothing in response to our posts but accusations of bias. You're the pot calling the kettle black. Grow up or quit wasting our time.

Partisan BS does not refute anything. At best you've got a draw, one side's view vs. the other side's view.

 

[Sampson Simpson]

No.

If any group is thrown out because they’re wearing the hats, that would be legal (but not necessarily right).
If any group is thrown out because of their race or gender (including white males), that would be illegal.

The motive of the business is the key (one of the reasons such cases are difficult to sort out). If an establishment threw you out because they thought you were gay, they’d be guilty of discrimination even if they were mistaken.

Actually bars do that all the time to try to keep gangs out of their bars/clubs. No bandanas. I had a friend get kicked out of a bar because he kept putting his bandana on.THey did it to keep gang members out. other places ban hats, or have other attire. Granted, all hats are banned, not just particular types

 

[ataraxia]

No one but the far extremes ever believed that BS. Not even Bill O'Reilly believed that. But, of course, you want to paint with the broad brush.

You guys just voted for the guy who ran that nonsense for 6 years straight. So obviously either you believed it, or you knew they were lies and were perfectly OK with someone spreading vicious lies like that. And he also told you that he saw Muslims cheering on NJ rooftops on 9/11. And that he would cover the legal fees of anyone who physically beat protestors at his rallies. And that every single scientific organization on the planet is wrong and global warming is just a Chinese hoax.

Sorry. But at some point along the way it stopped being a broad brush.

 

[Xelor]

In other words, you can't rebut anything in the editorial.

Well, you just keep thinking that....

 

[MrWonka]

Partisan BS does not refute anything.

It's not partisan. It's flawless logic. You just keep saying it's partisan because you don't have an answer to any of our points.

 

[MrWonka]

Says the people that accuse me of not being rational.

Nope, other way around. My first post in response to your OP contained flawless logical arguments which absolutely blew your stupid article out of the water. You have not come back with a single solitary attempt at rebutting what I have said. You're just crying about partisanship because you can't admit how foolish you look. The very first reply to your silly OP exposed your so-called "good points" for the stupidity it was, and you have nothing to come back with. You are the textbook definition of an irrational partisan.

 

[Moderate Right]

Of course being a conservative you are incapable of posting more than a stupid one liner, trolling deflection offering zero intelligence to this forum. Why does the forum tolerate this obvious trolling?

In other words, you are calling all conservatives stupid. And that's not trolling?

 

[Moderate Right]

You guys just voted for the guy who ran that nonsense for 6 years straight. So obviously either you believed it, or you knew they were lies and were perfectly OK with someone spreading vicious lies like that. And he also told you that he saw Muslims cheering on NJ rooftops on 9/11. And that he would cover the legal fees of anyone who physically beat protestors at his rallies. And that every single scientific organization on the planet is wrong and global warming is just a Chinese hoax.

Sorry. But at some point along the way it stopped being a broad brush.

You must be talking to the wrong person. I didn't vote for Trump.

 

[Moderate Right]

It's not partisan. It's flawless logic. You just keep saying it's partisan because you don't have an answer to any of our points.

Everyone has flawless logic - to themselves.

 

[MrWonka]

Everyone has flawless logic - to themselves.

Well, if my logic is so flawed why are you so terrified to try and poke a hole in it? Why do you keep hiding behind bull**** accusations of partisanship? You seemed to think you were qualified to identify the "good points" in the original article. If you can't rebut my criticism of those points then you are the one who tries to claim rationality when there is no there is no evidence of any to justify it.

 

[MrWonka]

In other words, you are calling all conservatives stupid. And that's not trolling?

Calling out trolling is not itself trolling. Just like killing a murderer is not itself murder, and fighting fire with fire is not itself arson.

 

[Moderate Right]

Well, if my logic is so flawed why are you so terrified to try and poke a hole in it? Why do you keep hiding behind bull**** accusations of partisanship? You seemed to think you were qualified to identify the "good points" in the original article. If you can't rebut my criticism of those points then you are the one who tries to claim rationality when there is no there is no evidence of any to justify it.

You can't poke a hole in partisan logic. You only see what you want to see. No one could convince you of anything different.

 

[veritas1]

If businesses aren't free to deny making a cake for a gay wedding then neither are they free to throw conservatives out of bars. The left wants selective laws to stifle their opponents while keeping themselves free to do as they please. IOW, they favor the legislating of ideas and thoughts they don't like while leaving others alone.

 

[Moderate Right]

Calling out trolling is not itself trolling. Just like killing a murderer is not itself murder, and fighting fire with fire is not itself arson.

Killing a murderer is not murder? You might want to double check on that.

 

[veritas1]

Well, if my logic is so flawed why are you so terrified to try and poke a hole in it? Why do you keep hiding behind bull**** accusations of partisanship? You seemed to think you were qualified to identify the "good points" in the original article. If you can't rebut my criticism of those points then you are the one who tries to claim rationality when there is no there is no evidence of any to justify it.

Your criticism is based wholly on the idea that your positions are somehow intrinsically "right" or "good" and those of conservatives are not. You go through quite a few contortions to justify shutting people up. However, if you allow conservatives to be shut up, then the same goes for liberals. So, can conservative schools prevent liberals from speaking at open forums? Can conservative bar owners throw somebody wearing Impeach Trump shirts out of their bar because other patrons object?

 

[MrWonka]

Your criticism is based wholly on the idea that your positions are somehow intrinsically "right" or "good" and those of conservatives are not.

no, they are not. They are explained quite logically. I thoroughly explained why discrimination against a religion is not the same as discrimination against a political affiliation. The op article claims they should be treated the same, I explained why they are different, and why one is acceptable but the other is not. It is very clear within the law that one is a protected class, and the other is not, and there are valid reasons why. You have no rebuttal whatsoever.

So, can conservative schools prevent liberals from speaking at open forums?

They do that all the time. Apparently, you don't recall, but early in his first term, Notre Dame alumni tried to prevent President Obama from giving a commencement speech. Not some random Liberal Troll, but the actual President of the United States.

The reason you don't hear about it happening even more often is that...
1.) Conservative School is an oxymoron.
2.) Liberals trolls aren't showing up at conservative "schools" trying to antagonize the student body under the guise of free speech.
3.) When liberals do speak at conservative "schools" they offer reasoned arguments not hate speech.

Can conservative bar owners throw somebody wearing Impeach Trump shirts out of their bar because other patrons object?

Yes.

 

[MrWonka]

Killing a murderer is not murder? You might want to double check on that.

Don't need to. That's called self-defense. Remember? That's what all these Gun Nuts seem to think they need to use their guns for. It's perfectly legal to kill someone in self-defense.

 

[MrWonka]

If businesses aren't free to deny making a cake for a gay wedding then neither are they free to throw conservatives out of bars.

Yes, they are. You cannot discriminate against a customer based on religious grounds, however, you can discriminate based upon political affiliation. That is the law.

The left wants selective laws to stifle their opponents while keeping themselves free to do as they please.

False, conservative bar owners can throw people wearing liberal t-shirts out if they so choose. But liberal bar owners can't throw a patron out for being Christian. The difference is religious discrimination vs political discrimination not conservative vs liberal.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Yes, I was accounting for that. My point was that the default is that businesses can refuse anyone and then those laws add specific exemptions or conditions on top of that. I was responding to the question of why it was legal to throw out people wearing MAGA hats when the question needs to be why would it be illegal. It's legal unless a specific act of illegal discrimination can be demonstrated (which hasn't been in that example).

And then it still stands that a store owner/clerk does not have absolute legal right to serve who they please. In other words the legal default is that you can only legally tell customers to leave for legal reasons without ending up in a lawsuit. Those signs that read: "We reserve the right to refuse service" have no actual legal standing.

The MAGA hat is offensive to some people. You would be hard pressed to find a civil rights law that would cover wearing articles of clothing where the language id subjectively offense to certain people. And FFS wearing a MAGA isnt illegal. You are using the word legal wrong in your response. The legalness of the hat was never in question. The question was if a store owner could ban the hat. I would hope so since stores should be able to ban subjectively offensive language from their premises if they so please.

Here read this: https://blogs.findlaw.com/free_ente...ou-reserved-your-right-to-refuse-service.html