My "special friend"...?Vrede wrote:"If you want to read your "special" friend homerfobe's posts be my guest, it's not for me to like or dislike."

Yep, he's got your number...for real.
My "special friend"...?Vrede wrote:"If you want to read your "special" friend homerfobe's posts be my guest, it's not for me to like or dislike."
I'm prejudiced against rednecks. And I disapprove of their lifestyle as well as their very existence. Why is it so hard for you to admit your own prejudice? Next you'll be saying "I've got nothing against homosexuals - some of my best friends are homosexuals." C'mon, man, you think what you think, and you believe what you believe. Nobody else has a vote on that but you. But you can't have it both ways. It's an irrational prejudice, just like mine.Mr.B wrote:<sigh>......
[
O Really, I am not prejudiced against homosexuals, or rednecks. Again, I disapprove of their lifestyle; and I suppose some of that could be applied to "redneckinesss"...you know, that beer-gut, mullet hair thingy.
O Really wrote: Why is it so hard for you to admit your own prejudice?
Because I don't have a prejudice against them as a person.
Next you'll be saying "I've got nothing against homosexuals - some of my best friends are homosexuals."
I have some acquaintances that are homosexuals; they know I disapprove of their lifestyle; but they didn't ask for my approval to begin with.
C'mon, man, you think what you think, and you believe what you believe. Nobody else has a vote on that but you. But you can't have it both ways. It's an irrational prejudice, just like mine.
All I can say is "we all know what they say about opinions".
Since you were so busy bastardizing (© Boatrocker, rstrong) every one of my posts, it's no surprise that you are so blinded by your obsession to "gays", that you couldn't/wouldn't see I've said that already; but not in your "cherry-picked" wording.Vrede wrote: "You can fix it all if you want. Just post, without your usual weaseling, "While I still disapprove of homosexuality, I support their full equality in all law and policy." Do that and all our arguments end, no one cares about your obsessive feelings. I won't hold my breath.
No it's not. People with odious views can't be denied the rights to vote, bear arms, or practice their religion of choice. Fortunately, that free speech thingie means we, and those whose odiousness offends us, are legally free to express our opinions.Vrede wrote: it's perfectly legal and constitutional to discriminate against people for expressing odious views, and it's not irrational to think that those views are odious.
I've seen this before, but had forgotten about it; it's good "taunt the Dems" material!homerfobe wrote: "How to be a good Democrat"
What would you say... you do here?Mr.B wrote:
Mr.B wrote:
JTA wrote:What would you say... you do here?Mr.B wrote:
k9nanny wrote:[........]
Vrede wrote:WELCOME BACK!!! Missed you....
The absolute inanity of working in an office for corporate America will destroy your soul if you're not careful.bannination wrote:JTA wrote:What would you say... you do here?Mr.B wrote:
Yes.JTA wrote:The absolute inanity of working in an office for corporate America will destroy your soul if you're not careful.bannination wrote:JTA wrote:What would you say... you do here?Mr.B wrote:
k9nanny wrote:[........]
That wasn't nice Banni....Vrede wrote:WELCOME BACK!!! Missed you....
wut?Mr.B wrote:k9nanny wrote:[........]That wasn't nice Banni....Vrede wrote:WELCOME BACK!!! Missed you....
Yes, I know it's a joke intended to "taunt the Dems." But associating two totally unrelated issues as if they were mutually exclusive doesn't even make as much sense as the average lawyer or "priest, rabbi, and minister in the bar" joke. Just so I know you understand your own humour, could you explain the relationship between taxes and ATM fees? Or explain where anybody thinks that manger scenes, etc. should be "illegal" except on government property? As you know, I'm a long-time ACLU member, been on case selection committees, etc., and I couldn't come up with anywhere anybody tried to make it illegal for you to have a manger, a cross, in your yard or at your business, or a plastic Jesus on the dashboard of your car.Mr.B wrote:I've seen this before, but had forgotten about it; it's good "taunt the Dems" material!homerfobe wrote: "How to be a good Democrat"![]()
There's more:
"How to be a good Democrat" (pt.2)
You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinmen are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson,
General Robert E. Lee or Thomas Edison.
You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides aren't.
You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because the right people haven't been in charge.
You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and sex-offender have the right to be in the White House.
You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected and manger scenes at Christmas and displays of the Cross should be illegal.
You have to believe that illegal Democratic party funding by the Chinese is somehow in the best interest of the United States.