User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 289101112
Results 111 to 119 of 119

Thread: Piggy Pork and Gay Wedding Cakes

  1. #111
    Points: 86,365, Level: 71
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 885
    Overall activity: 32.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    Safety's Avatar Nationalist
    Karma
    2610659
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    GA/FL
    Posts
    37,470
    Points
    86,365
    Level
    71
    Thanks Given
    17,777
    Thanked 17,139x in 11,510 Posts
    Mentioned
    823 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by NapRover View Post
    The “using religion to hide bigotry” argument is bogus. You shouldn’t be able to demand someone else caves to your way of thinking-and if they don’t, label them a bigot.
    Nah, it isn't bogus, when an establishment who wants to cite religion as the reason for them to not serve gays, shows me their reluctance to not serve adulterers, shellfish consumers, people who work on Sunday, etc., then I will buy the whole "it goes against my religion" meme.
    Nobody is holding a gun to your head. If you don't like what I post, ignore me. I'll post what I want, when I want, and where I want, regardless of how you or anyone else feels about it.

    - GA

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Safety For This Useful Post:

    Dr. Who (12-07-2017)

  3. #112
    Points: 390,557, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    387762
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    131,776
    Points
    390,557
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,239
    Thanked 35,330x in 26,326 Posts
    Mentioned
    1565 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Safety View Post
    What interests me is Chris's appeal to authority, when I'm simply showing how a douchebag who didn't want to sell a cake to a couple of gay guys has him all wound up like the Gestapo raided his business and had his way with his wife. Your appeal to history also doesn't apply here.
    I'm pointing out you two's appeal to authority and how it parallels the thinking of socialists. Indeed, I'm appealing to history. You appeal to name calling.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  4. #113
    Points: 390,557, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    387762
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    131,776
    Points
    390,557
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,239
    Thanked 35,330x in 26,326 Posts
    Mentioned
    1565 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    You know what Chris, you don't actually argue about what I post either. Anarchy is the source of your posts. I can't help but mention it because you don't believe in the state at all, so without mentioning anarchy your posts don't even make any reasonable sense. It's like arguing with someone from another planet. You just say the law is wrong or shouldn't exist and start name dropping economists and theory. That ignores the reality of states and the reality of economics. Perhaps I should fall back on my perfect utopia - the world of Star Trek, where people don't need money at all and capitalism or even the free market is a distant amusing memory.
    Oh, but I do, Who, I address what you post.

    If anarchy is the source of my posts why do I argue the purpose of the government is to protect rights and property and contract? I've argued that repeatedly.

    This reminds me of my thread asking is atheism rational and all the aethists attacked theism as if that rationally made their case for atheism. --Attacking anarchy doesn't justify your socialist approach here. Dream on.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  5. #114
    Points: 390,557, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    387762
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    131,776
    Points
    390,557
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,239
    Thanked 35,330x in 26,326 Posts
    Mentioned
    1565 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    Why does every argument about the state result in comments about collectivism, socialism and ultimately communism with you? You have somehow equated human rights protections with violent political regimes. Should I follow your way of thinking, I should suggest that your views are repeats of Southern Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond, Russell Long, Harry Byrd and George Wallace.
    Because that is the framework within which you argue. The following post of yours demonstrates that:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    First of all, I disagree with you, thus my argument reflects my disagreement. Laws are justified by public acceptance.
    Since America is a nation of laws, I suspect that contextually, my argument, which is founded in reality rather than in purist ideology that lacks any contemporary application other than in minuscule populations in the last thousand years, and where it did exist, has long since been replaced with variations on the current theme, is actually more valid. Corruption of laws by corrupt people does not invalidate the need for laws or taint all laws by association. Just as inasmuch as some people are bad drivers, we don't abolish cars and driving. Corrupt laws are eventually identified by the people and vacated accordingly.

    The state has repeatedly been chosen by humankind because it removes the bumps from the road. People do not prefer anarchy. They like predictability and laws, so that they can make plans. Just as where businesses that merge, consolidate administration for greater efficiency, states consolidate the administration of territories, so that people don't have to spend inordinate amounts of time, money and effort performing tasks that they can sub out to government. (in a nutshell). The notion of government is not wrong. The notion of the state is not wrong. The only thing that is wrong is the behavior of individuals and regardless of whether there is a state or anarchy, corrupt individuals will connive to usurp fairness.
    That is what Rousseau and Hegel argued, hell, it goes back to Plato.


    Should I follow your way of thinking, I should suggest that your views are repeats of Southern Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond, Russell Long, Harry Byrd and George Wallace.
    \

    That's a nice claim. What do you offer to substantiate it? ...Nothing. It's just a vacuous accusation. Basically it shows your angry so you lash out.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  6. #115
    Points: 86,365, Level: 71
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 885
    Overall activity: 32.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    Safety's Avatar Nationalist
    Karma
    2610659
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    GA/FL
    Posts
    37,470
    Points
    86,365
    Level
    71
    Thanks Given
    17,777
    Thanked 17,139x in 11,510 Posts
    Mentioned
    823 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    I'm pointing out you two's appeal to authority and how it parallels the thinking of socialists. Indeed, I'm appealing to history. You appeal to name calling.
    I can name call as I please, as long as it isn't directed towards any member. What's the problem now?

  7. #116
    Points: 390,557, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    387762
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    131,776
    Points
    390,557
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,239
    Thanked 35,330x in 26,326 Posts
    Mentioned
    1565 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    Just like no one in the south really took away black rights when they didn't allow them in restaurants, hotels (except as workers), on buses except in the back or allowed them to drink from the same water fountains, swim in the same swimming pools or attend the same schools as whites. Rights of association truly reigned supreme in the south. Such a tribute to freedom, unless of course you were black.

    I keep asking, what rights? The right to force one to serve another?

    The right of association doesn't mean you get to unilaterally choose whom you associate with, it has to be mutual.


    What's interesting is the violations of rights of black of slavery and segregation you mention were commited by the government and its laws, the government you say is morally right in doing that, it's the law after all..
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  8. #117
    Points: 390,557, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    387762
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    131,776
    Points
    390,557
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,239
    Thanked 35,330x in 26,326 Posts
    Mentioned
    1565 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Safety View Post
    I can name call as I please, as long as it isn't directed towards any member. What's the problem now?
    Yes, you can. It's your reputation.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  9. #118
    Points: 86,365, Level: 71
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 885
    Overall activity: 32.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    Safety's Avatar Nationalist
    Karma
    2610659
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    GA/FL
    Posts
    37,470
    Points
    86,365
    Level
    71
    Thanks Given
    17,777
    Thanked 17,139x in 11,510 Posts
    Mentioned
    823 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Yes, you can. It's your reputation.
    LoL, on that schtick again?
    Nobody is holding a gun to your head. If you don't like what I post, ignore me. I'll post what I want, when I want, and where I want, regardless of how you or anyone else feels about it.

    - GA

  10. #119
    Points: 99,781, Level: 76
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 53.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteranTagger First Class
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    856631
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    41,276
    Points
    99,781
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    22,641
    Thanked 19,887x in 13,584 Posts
    Mentioned
    1143 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post

    That's a nice claim. What do you offer to substantiate it? ...Nothing. It's just a vacuous accusation. Basically it shows your angry so you lash out.
    I'm not angry. I'm just suggesting that if I were to follow your lead I would attribute your views to the gentlemen I listed who sought to justify their beliefs in rights of association (presumably along with those of their constituents). That this resulted in bad law only reinforces the problem with such attitudes. The laws were passed to avoid the open conflicts that resulted from people objecting to being treated as unequal citizens through denial of services and accommodations. The law didn't come first. It was reactive but in favor of the majority. It was also totally unconstitutional and self-serving. It spared the Courts from having to rule against white people in favor of blacks based on the existing impartial laws.
    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Dr. Who For This Useful Post:

    Safety (12-08-2017)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Critical Acclaim
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO