Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Bakery that refused to sell wedding cake to lesbian couple found to have discriminated, its owner saying it's part of 'God's plan'. Sure, if God's plan for you is a jury trial   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 676
    More: Followup, lesbian couples, public accommodations  
•       •       •

5521 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jan 2014 at 1:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



676 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-22 01:33:45 PM  

Phinn: Thanks for letting me know that your psychological defense mechanisms have shut down all of your capacity for rational thought.


No, Phinn. I don't care to be proselytized to by the Church of Rand, or told the "truth of human nature" from someone who is (ostensibly) a white, middle classed male talking about oppression by the Government.

If we were having a rational conversation, I would be interested in it. Instead, you're taking ethical pot-shots at the idea that certain people are entitled to and need protection from the masses, because history has shown that the masses refuse to act civil on their own.

I do not share libertarian/neo-confederate philosophies, and you're not going to sway me TO share them. Unless you're talking in terms of evolutionary futurism of the human animal, your system is just as illogical and unworkable as Communism is - and ignores the same historical reasons WHY it's unworkable as the most adherent acolytes of Communism on FARK do.
 
2014-01-22 01:34:36 PM  

hardinparamedic: To put it bluntly, Phinn

, you are a tool

there, ftfy
 
2014-01-22 01:36:18 PM  

hardinparamedic: If we were having a rational conversation,



We are having a rational conversation, but you're not in it.  It's reserved for people with the capacity for reason and abstract thought, so you're out.
 
2014-01-22 01:42:29 PM  
from one of phinn's ramblings upthread:
So, let's say it's 1955, and I run a bakery, and the government has passed a law MANDATING that I can't bake a cake for gays.

I'll be JAILED for it. But I want to bake for gays. I want the gay baking trade.

And, in response to this unjust law, I say things like, "The law is unjust. The government has NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY to prohibit me from selling cakes to gays, or to anyone I want. It's between me and my customers, and (literally) none of your business!"


amusingly enough, what would have happened was that a cake got made for the two spinster ladies down the road who were celebrating their birthdays together with a bunch of their friends, and nobody further than five miles away would've given a shiat, because nobody was gay back then...
 
2014-01-22 01:45:27 PM  

Phinn: hardinparamedic: If we were having a rational conversation,

We are having a rational conversation, but you're not in it.  It's reserved for people with the capacity for reason and abstract thought, so you're out.


Not a single thing you have shat out in this entire thread has been rational by any thinking person's standards, but it's cute how you pretend.
 
2014-01-22 01:49:19 PM  

Phinn: hardinparamedic: If we were having a rational conversation,

We are having a rational conversation, but you're not in it.  It's reserved for people with the capacity for reason and abstract thought, so you're out.


Here's the thing, Phinn. Outside of your political views, I'm sure you're a nice person. If I ever met you, I'd probably buy you a beer and talk about anything BUT politics.

But don't evangelize to me about the true nature and ethics of humanity when you're so deluded by libertarian philosophy that you ignore the history of your own country, and the reason WHY we have regulation and rules in the first place.
 
2014-01-22 01:55:18 PM  

cynicalminion: from one of phinn's ramblings upthread:
So, let's say it's 1955, and I run a bakery, and the government has passed a law MANDATING that I can't bake a cake for gays.

I'll be JAILED for it. But I want to bake for gays. I want the gay baking trade.

And, in response to this unjust law, I say things like, "The law is unjust. The government has NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY to prohibit me from selling cakes to gays, or to anyone I want. It's between me and my customers, and (literally) none of your business!"

amusingly enough, what would have happened was that a cake got made for the two spinster ladies down the road who were celebrating their birthdays together with a bunch of their friends, and nobody further than five miles away would've given a shiat, because nobody was gay back then...



frepnog would have.  In his view, a rule is a rule, and anyone who breaks the rules, as they are written and in force at the time, deserves what they get.

He is the one in favor of prosecuting spinster roommate secret-gay people and their bakers, depending on which way the governmental winds are blowing.  Take it up with him.
 
2014-01-22 01:58:42 PM  

hardinparamedic: Phinn: hardinparamedic: If we were having a rational conversation,

We are having a rational conversation, but you're not in it.  It's reserved for people with the capacity for reason and abstract thought, so you're out.

Here's the thing, Phinn. Outside of your political views, I'm sure you're a nice person. If I ever met you, I'd probably buy you a beer and talk about anything BUT politics.

But don't evangelize to me about the true nature and ethics of humanity when you're so deluded by libertarian philosophy that you ignore the history of your own country, and the reason WHY we have regulation and rules in the first place.


If you search his posts, pretty much all he  everdoes is gripe at people and talk about his special brand of "Libertarian" (He isn't) "Invisible hand" economics. He's basically one of those idiots who took an Econ class his junior year in High School and decided it made him an expert. A stone's throw from the anarchists living in trailers on some college campuses but who never actually attend any classes.
 
2014-01-22 01:59:11 PM  

hardinparamedic: Phinn: hardinparamedic: If we were having a rational conversation,

We are having a rational conversation, but you're not in it.  It's reserved for people with the capacity for reason and abstract thought, so you're out.

Here's the thing, Phinn. Outside of your political views, I'm sure you're a nice person. If I ever met you, I'd probably buy you a beer and talk about anything BUT politics.

But don't evangelize to me about the true nature and ethics of humanity when you're so deluded by libertarian philosophy that you ignore the history of your own country, and the reason WHY we have regulation and rules in the first place.



I don't let people who are in favor of the violation of my fundamental human rights into my personal orbit.

They're scum, and I don't drink beer with scum.
 
2014-01-22 02:01:10 PM  

Phinn: cynicalminion: from one of phinn's ramblings upthread:
So, let's say it's 1955, and I run a bakery, and the government has passed a law MANDATING that I can't bake a cake for gays.

I'll be JAILED for it. But I want to bake for gays. I want the gay baking trade.

And, in response to this unjust law, I say things like, "The law is unjust. The government has NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY to prohibit me from selling cakes to gays, or to anyone I want. It's between me and my customers, and (literally) none of your business!"

amusingly enough, what would have happened was that a cake got made for the two spinster ladies down the road who were celebrating their birthdays together with a bunch of their friends, and nobody further than five miles away would've given a shiat, because nobody was gay back then...

frepnog would have.  In his view, a rule is a rule, and anyone who breaks the rules, as they are written and in force at the time, deserves what they get.

He is the one in favor of prosecuting spinster roommate secret-gay people and their bakers, depending on which way the governmental winds are blowing.  Take it up with him.


Oh good! You've decided to play the "I'm just going to make shiat up" game again!

Let's see.  Phinn can't stand the site of other people or healthy food, so he instead takes a dump and then licks it off of the floor every morning, after which he breaks his bottom two ribs and sucks himself while posting about his fake Libertarian ideals on Fark.

I know mine's a  bit more detailed than yours, but I wanted to get points for creativity, since we're just deciding to  make random stuff up about other users,rather than addressing the content of their posts.
 
2014-01-22 02:02:23 PM  
*sight. D'oh.
 
2014-01-22 02:05:19 PM  

Phinn: I don't let people who are in favor of the violation of my fundamental human rights into my personal orbit.

They're scum, and I don't drink beer with scum.


Oh Jesus Christ.

Telling you that your business, which engages in interstate commerce, cannot discriminate against people for inborn traits which they have no way of controlling, is not violating your fundamental human rights. In fact, it's telling you that you CANNOT violate the fundamental human rights of others.

I take that back. You're not a reasonable person if you actually believe this. You're a whiny member of the most protected, most politically and socially powerful class in the United States, who has NO Idea what violating his "fundamental human rights" actually is.
 
2014-01-22 02:07:19 PM  

MooseUpNorth: Of course, they look plenty stupid today.


darn that poe's trooper law
 
2014-01-22 02:09:30 PM  

hardinparamedic: a white, middle classed male talking about oppression by the Government.


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

Why ya gotta be hatin on the whiteys?
 
2014-01-22 02:09:33 PM  

Phinn: cynicalminion: from one of phinn's ramblings upthread:
So, let's say it's 1955, and I run a bakery, and the government has passed a law MANDATING that I can't bake a cake for gays.

I'll be JAILED for it. But I want to bake for gays. I want the gay baking trade.

And, in response to this unjust law, I say things like, "The law is unjust. The government has NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY to prohibit me from selling cakes to gays, or to anyone I want. It's between me and my customers, and (literally) none of your business!"

amusingly enough, what would have happened was that a cake got made for the two spinster ladies down the road who were celebrating their birthdays together with a bunch of their friends, and nobody further than five miles away would've given a shiat, because nobody was gay back then...

frepnog would have.  In his view, a rule is a rule, and anyone who breaks the rules, as they are written and in force at the time, deserves what they get.

He is the one in favor of prosecuting spinster roommate secret-gay people and their bakers, depending on which way the governmental winds are blowing.  Take it up with him.


i'm not taking anything up with anyone, so please don't try to use something i posted as a stand-alone comment as a means for you to argue with someone else who isn't involved in it..  thanks.
 
2014-01-22 02:09:37 PM  

hardinparamedic: discriminate against people for inborn traits


[citation needed]
 
2014-01-22 02:15:26 PM  

I drunk what: hardinparamedic: discriminate against people for inborn traits

[citation needed]


Sure thing.

Now go drink more sterno.
 
2014-01-22 02:16:32 PM  

hardinparamedic: Phinn: I don't let people who are in favor of the violation of my fundamental human rights into my personal orbit.

They're scum, and I don't drink beer with scum.

Oh Jesus Christ.

Telling you that your business, which engages in interstate commerce, cannot discriminate against people for inborn traits which they have no way of controlling, is not violating your fundamental human rights. In fact, it's telling you that you CANNOT violate the fundamental human rights of others.

I take that back. You're not a reasonable person if you actually believe this. You're a whiny member of the most protected, most politically and socially powerful class in the United States, who has NO Idea what violating his "fundamental human rights" actually is.


In Phinnland, the only people who can violate rights are the Federal and State Governments. See, if somebody else violates your rights, they're just exercising the free practice of their own, and well if you don't like it, or it hurts you, that's just Social Darwinism at work.
 
2014-01-22 02:16:58 PM  

Leishu: Oh good! You've decided to play the "I'm just going to make shiat up" game again!



You're delusional.  Go read the thread.  Frepnog said he thinks the law should be that a business can sell or not sell cakes to whomever they choose, but that the law in Colorado is the opposite, and therefore the business that broke the law deserves to be closed, if they can't bring themselves to comply.

That's when I called him a statist boot-licker.  And he used a curse word, and that's been pretty much the end of that.

See, some laws are unjust and deserve to be broken, not just amended.

And when unjust people insist on enforcing their unjust laws, it the right (some say the duty) of the victims of these unjust laws to rid themselves of their purported governors and find a new way to protect their rights.
 
2014-01-22 02:20:20 PM  

Phinn: And when unjust people insist on enforcing their unjust laws, it the right (some say the duty) of the victims of these unjust laws to rid themselves of their purported governors and find a new way to protect their rights.


You've tap danced around this question the entire thread: Why is a law that prevent you from violating the fundamental human rights of others when you engage in interstate commerce in our society unjust? Please explain your logic.

And someone calling you a bad word is justified when you decide to call anyone a "boot licker" outside of a BDSM scene. Him calling you a "f*cking moron" was completely justified.
 
2014-01-22 02:21:46 PM  
s3.amazonaws.com24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-01-22 02:22:04 PM  
"Frepnog said he thinks the law  should be that a business can sell or not sell cakes to whomever they choose, but that the law in Colorado is the opposite, and therefore the business that broke the law deserves to be closed, if they can't bring themselves to comply."

No. No he didn't. Nor did I, but you failed to accurately read  either of our posts and jumped to idiotic conclusions instead.

"See, some laws are unjust and deserve to be broken, not just amended."

Agreed, but those prepared to break them so that they can be amended need to be prepared to deal with the consequences of breaking them in the meantime.  THAT IS HOW PROTEST WORKS.

"And when unjust people insist on enforcing their unjust laws, it the right (some say the duty) of the victims of these unjust laws to rid themselves of their purported governors and find a new way to protect their rights."

I don't disagree. However, the individual does not get to do that. This is a good thing because the individual, alone, is not always a good judge of what is a just law. You're a perfect example of this.
 
2014-01-22 02:22:16 PM  

Leishu: In Phinnland, the only people who can violate rights are the Federal and State Governments.



Wrong again.  This wrong-ness is becoming a real pattern for you.

Forcing someone to bake a cake for you is wrong, regardless of whether it's done by the State or by a random guy standing there with a gun.

You are the one who thinks the inherent evil of forced cake-baking is somehow sanitized by the presence of a shiny badge.
 
2014-01-22 02:25:07 PM  

hardinparamedic: Phinn: And when unjust people insist on enforcing their unjust laws, it the right (some say the duty) of the victims of these unjust laws to rid themselves of their purported governors and find a new way to protect their rights.

You've tap danced around this question the entire thread: Why is a law that prevent you from violating the fundamental human rights of others when you engage in interstate commerce in our society unjust? Please explain your logic.



Interstate commerce is a fundamental human right?
 
2014-01-22 02:25:35 PM  

hardinparamedic: You've tap danced around this question the entire thread: Why is a law that prevent you from violating the fundamental human rights of others when you engage in interstate commerce in our society unjust? Please explain your logic.



I'll dumb it down for you as much as I can -- NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO FORCE OTHER PEOPLE TO BAKE CAKES.

If the customer has no right to obtain a cake from the baker, then when the baker's refusal to bake it, he has violated no extant right.

The legitimate, operative fundamental right here is -- the right to freely trade with anyone, or not, if and to the extent that both parties to the trade mutually agree to do so, or not, as the case may be.
 
2014-01-22 02:25:44 PM  

Phinn: Forcing someone to bake a cake for you is wrong, regardless of whether it's done by the State or by a random guy standing there with a gun.

You are the one who thinks the inherent evil of forced cake-baking is somehow sanitized by the presence of a shiny badge.


No one forced them to bake a cake. Anti-discrimination laws for businesses are written to where it is hillariously easy to sidestep them, just like the laws for firing people based on protected classes are.

This guy was just stupid enough to hand them a slam-dunk. It's not that he refused to bake a cake for them. It's that he called them sinful abominations and was openly bigoted to someone who he was engaged in commerce with.
 
2014-01-22 02:27:30 PM  
Phinn: Leishu: In Phinnland, the only people who can violate rights are the Federal and State Governments.

Wrong again.  This wrong-ness is becoming a real pattern for you.

Forcing someone to bake a cake for you is wrong, regardless of whether it's done by the State or by a random guy standing there with a gun.


Making shiat up again. This making shiat up is a pattern for you. Why don't you get that nobody forced anybody to bake a cake?People would take you more seriously if your posts had a basis in reality.

You are the one who thinks the inherent evil of forced cake-baking is somehow sanitized by the presence of a shiny badge.

And, once again, putting words in others' mouths and outright making shiat up. You are the one who thinks that Glenn Beck personally sends you letters every day telling you what a good little Libertarian you are and how proud he is of unmasking a liberal conspiracy to remove your god-given right to violate the rights of others, because it only counts as a true violation when the ebil G-men do it. Turnabout is fair play.
 
2014-01-22 02:29:56 PM  

Phinn: The legitimate, operative fundamental right here is -- the right to freely trade with anyone, or not, if and to the extent that both parties to the trade mutually agree to do so, or not, as the case may be.


Then form a private club. Do what every other bigot has done since the CRA of 1964, and limit your club to people you approve of. Or barter and trade as a private citizen.

You limit the extent of certain rights when you choose to engage in commerce in a society which establishes base rules for that commerce, and you do not live in a libertarian society - no matter how much you masturbate over the thought of it.

There is nothing unethical, or wrong about what is going on here, outside of your narrow opinion of it. There is no slippery slope. No evil. No violation of your human rights.
 
2014-01-22 02:32:00 PM  

hardinparamedic: Sure thing.


Epigenetics May Be a Critical Factor Contributing to Homosexuality, Study Suggests ~ Science!!!!1!!


well, i'm convinced, your site even has the word science in it :D what more proof do you need?!

The study solves the evolutionary riddle of homosexuality

Evolutiondidit! and creationistards deny evolution therefore they don't know science. QED

i nominate hardinparamedic for a nobel prize for finding the gay gene!

so now that we've scientifically proven that teh ghey is a race, next on the docket we consider the research for the bestial gene and the pedophile gene

they have feelings too


FOR SCIENCE1111!!11111!!!!1!!

you gaiz should call up ABC and see about fitting some of those characters into their next upcoming sitcom, because money should always dictate our morality
 
2014-01-22 02:34:55 PM  
Once again, I will state as I did earlier, that the Cake baking couple could probably offer this case up to the ACLU and, if they get them to take it, might even win (IANAL, so I can't be sure, but I figure they have a fair chance). Do I think they're reprehensible? Certainly, but I think that those who say that the state should not be forcing some to do business with others, if they can stop making shiat up like little  Phinnhere, can actually make a good and legally sound argument of it, and one I would be willing to discuss in a logical fashion. The problem with your posts,  Phinn, is that you have not shown that willingness. Pretty much every post have made includes a twisting of the facts of the case (Re: Forcing people to bake a cake, which did not happen), a twisting of others' words (Re: Mentioning this is the law  in that state means I LOVE ALL LAWS), or strawmen arguments based on the former two. People are calling you out as an idiot because you have yet to make a single post remotely couched in fact, and I expect you to perform the same in reference to  thispost, because you're a troll. At least you're an entertaining one, though. I will give you that.

The irony is that this going to the Supreme Court and being overturned would be decried by Fark Libertarians, if they were cognitively consistent, which of course they are not, as an overstep of federal powers, because what most Fark Libertarians actually are is Anti-Federalists with a social conservative streak ten miles wide, however when the two clash, the latter ALWAYS wins, in my experience. I'd love to see one of them prove me wrong, though.
 
2014-01-22 02:35:14 PM  
Leishu: Why don't you get that nobody forced anybody to bake a cake?

Your argument is, ironically, exactly like the conservative argument against gay marriage -- that no one is telling gays they can't get married, or forcing them to marry a member of the opposite sex, just that they can't get married to the person of his or her choosing, if it's homosexual.  See?  No pressure. Just one little rule!

I have a hard time understanding why someone who can apparently operate a computer can't understand that the right to free association, free trade, free commerce, free cake-baking, etc., all operate like the freedom to choose your spouse -- it's up to the TWO PEOPLE involved in the deal, and no one else, to decide how to interact.

Which means that even though people may choose or decline a (trading or marrying) partner for what amounts to BAD REASONS, and that some people are NOT GOING TO GET THE PARTNER THEY WANT, that's not a good enough reason for you to stick your nose in other people's lives and tell them how they must make that choice.
 
2014-01-22 02:36:15 PM  
I really just need to post in raw HTML or stop trying to format things. :p
 
2014-01-22 02:36:57 PM  

I drunk what: i nominate hardinparamedic for a nobel prize for finding the gay gene!


There is no gay gene, you idiot. Inborn traits are far more complex than Mendelian genetics you learned in sixth grade.

If you would take five seconds to actually research the topic, research into sexual orientation and even neurological gender determination has taken the route to understanding why it is a complex, poorly understood mechanism involving sex and non-sex linked chromosomes, maternal-fetal neurological tube development and brain growth in utero, interactions between the fetus and the maternal immune system, and the presence or absence of levels of certain hormones and nutrients during intrauterine development.

We're not talking about a widows peak or being able to roll your tongue.

But then, I'm talking to a troll. So why even bother.

I think I've found what you've been drinking.

i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-22 02:38:02 PM  

hardinparamedic: You limit the extent of certain rights when you choose to engage in commerce



That makes as much sense as someone saying, "You chose to use the letter "e" in your comment, so you must now give me all of the money in your bank account."

Doing business is peaceful.  Commerce is cooperative and mutually voluntary, just like all adult relationships.

You don't have the right to control other people's lives. I know that bothers you, but you don't.
 
2014-01-22 02:39:13 PM  
Your argument is, ironically, exactly like the conservative argument against gay marriage -- that no one is telling gays they can't get married, or forcing them to marry a member of the opposite sex, just that they can't get married to the person of his or her choosing, if it's homosexual.  See?  No pressure. Just one little rule!

Do you know why they are not exactly the same, or remotely the same? I'll give you one chance to redeem yourself. Please, prove me wrong in thinking that you're a troll. I'd LOVE to be proven wrong.

I have a hard time understanding why someone who can apparently operate a computer can't understand that the right to free association, free trade, free commerce, free cake-baking, etc., all operate like the freedom to choose your spouse -- it's up to the TWO PEOPLE involved in the deal, and no one else, to decide how to interact.

If the first block of text is indicative of your actual thinking, I'd not be surprised at you having a hard time thinking pretty much anything, but you aren't in the habit of actually addressing the comment of posts. See above.
 
2014-01-22 02:41:41 PM  

hardinparamedic: There is no bestial gene, you idiot. Inborn traits are far more complex than Mendelian genetics you learned in sixth grade.

If you would take five seconds to actually research the topic, research into sexual orientation and even neurological species determination has taken the route to understanding why it is a complex, poorly understood mechanism involving sex and non-sex linked chromosomes, maternal-fetal neurological tube development and brain growth in utero, interactions between the fetus and the maternal immune system, and the presence or absence of levels of certain hormones and nutrients during intrauterine development.



hardinparamedic: There is no pedophile gene, you idiot. Inborn traits are far more complex than Mendelian genetics you learned in sixth grade.

If you would take five seconds to actually research the topic, research into sexual orientation and even neurological age determination has taken the route to understanding why it is a complex, poorly understood mechanism involving sex and non-sex linked chromosomes, maternal-fetal neurological tube development and brain growth in utero, interactions between the fetus and the maternal immune system, and the presence or absence of levels of certain hormones and nutrients during intrauterine development.


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-01-22 02:44:40 PM  

Phinn: hardinparamedic: You limit the extent of certain rights when you choose to engage in commerce

That makes as much sense as someone saying, "You chose to use the letter "e" in your comment, so you must now give me all of the money in your bank account."

Doing business is peaceful.  Commerce is cooperative and mutually voluntary, just like all adult relationships.

You don't have the right to control other people's lives. I know that bothers you, but you don't.


Phinn is pro-monopoly. Pro-collusion. Pro-indentured servitude. Pro-freedom to pollute your surrounding environment without thought to consequence. Pro-burning shirtwaist factories with workers inside.

I could go on, or you could withdraw that idiotic comment. Businesses are most definitely  limited in their rights when they become legally recognized as businesses, and for very good reason.
Am I saying ALL  limits on the rights of business owners are good and just? No. Only an idiot would think that. I am saying that  SOME  are merited.
 
2014-01-22 02:46:28 PM  

hardinparamedic: There is no gay gene, you idiot.


why do you hate SCIENCE!!!111!! and teh gheys?

is it because your racist?
 
2014-01-22 02:47:31 PM  

I drunk what: hardinparamedic: There is no gay gene, you idiot.

why do you hate SCIENCE!!!111!! and teh gheys?

is it because your racist?


I admit that made me snicker a little.
 
2014-01-22 02:51:11 PM  

Leishu: Do you know why they are not exactly the same, or remotely the same? I'll give you one chance to redeem yourself. Please, prove me wrong in thinking that you're a troll. I'd LOVE to be proven wrong.



If I drafted legislation to prohibit racial discrimination in choosing a partner to date, have sex, or get married, and severely punishing these Romance Racists for using race as a factor in choosing their partners, you'd probably vote for it.

In fact, I think I'll do just that.  And then I'm going to present it as though it's a serious proposal to the American Left -- I'll go to some self-congratulatory Prog event, and film all of the empty-headed Leftists who enthusiastically support my Anti-Romance-Racism legislation, so as to embarrass them and publicly discredit Progressivism as a whole.

Hey, thanks for being the inspiration for my new project.
 
2014-01-22 02:53:40 PM  

I drunk what: Stupidity about homosexuals and pedophiles being the same and trying to excuse pedophilia because they're born that way.

There's a good chance that pedophilia, which exists in it's own classification separate from adult sexual orientations, is inborn. You're absolutely right.

However, pedophilia is pathological in that it causes distinct life harm to their victims and society by targeting individuals who explicitly and universally cannot give consent.

The only reason you're trying to equivocate the two is because you're either a grossly ignorant bigot, or you're trying to defend your own inborn urges to molest children. Which is it?

Phinn: Doing business is peaceful.  Commerce is cooperative and mutually voluntary, just like all adult relationships.

You don't have the right to control other people's lives. I know that bothers you, but you don't.


Except in the real world, it's not. It may be voluntary, but it is subject to the limitations and restrictions imposed on it by society and the law. The fact that I cannot sell you crack cocaine and tout it as a miracle cure for tiredness is not a violation of my human rights. Nor is the fact that if I choose to run a business that engages in interstate commerce outside of the purview of a private club, I must make that business all-inclusive in the eyes of the public.

And aren't you directly trying to control my life by telling me I'm a scumbag for not believing the same as you, Phinn? Is that hypocrisy, tu quo quo, or both?
 
2014-01-22 02:55:22 PM  

Phinn: Leishu: Do you know why they are not exactly the same, or remotely the same? I'll give you one chance to redeem yourself. Please, prove me wrong in thinking that you're a troll. I'd LOVE to be proven wrong.

If I drafted legislation to prohibit racial discrimination in choosing a partner to date, have sex, or get married, and severely punishing these Romance Racists for using race as a factor in choosing their partners, you'd probably vote for it.

In fact, I think I'll do just that.  And then I'm going to present it as though it's a serious proposal to the American Left -- I'll go to some self-congratulatory Prog event, and film all of the empty-headed Leftists who enthusiastically support my Anti-Romance-Racism legislation, so as to embarrass them and publicly discredit Progressivism as a whole.

Hey, thanks for being the inspiration for my new project.


Right then. You are a troll, because only an  INCREDIBLE FARKING MORON would equate the actions of a business with the actions of the government.
 
2014-01-22 02:55:41 PM  
Whoa. IDW is back ... and off his meds again :(.
 
2014-01-22 02:56:28 PM  

Farking Canuck: Whoa. IDW is back ... and off his meds again :(.


I assumed this was him on his meds. :p
 
2014-01-22 02:58:04 PM  

Leishu: I admit that made me snicker a little.


wait a minute you gaiz, you gaiz

i think i just got trolled by hardinparamedic...

I don't think she even cares about my pedo and furry friends, she was just pretending like she cared so that I would look stupid for agreeing with her

I had parents just like her, i brought my sheep date or child date home to meet them and they were all like, i will never allow you to marry their kind

so i called them racist and ran out of the room crying, but the last laugh is on them...

4.bp.blogspot.com

people like hardinparamedic are going to look so stupid 40 years from now...

nice troll pal 6/10
 
2014-01-22 02:59:23 PM  

hardinparamedic: Phinn: Doing business is peaceful. Commerce is cooperative and mutually voluntary, just like all adult relationships.

You don't have the right to control other people's lives. I know that bothers you, but you don't.

Except in the real world, it's not. It may be voluntary, but it is subject to the limitations and restrictions imposed on it by society and the law. The fact that I cannot sell you crack cocaine and tout it as a miracle cure for tiredness is not a violation of my human rights. Nor is the fact that if I choose to run a business that engages in interstate commerce outside of the purview of a private club, I must make that business all-inclusive in the eyes of the public.

And aren't you directly trying to control my life by telling me I'm a scumbag for not believing the same as you, Phinn? Is that hypocrisy, tu quo quo, or both?



The only limitations that anyone is truly subject to are established by ethical principles.  The rest are just noise, and those who impose them deserve the resistance they get.

Drug dealing prohibitions are wrong, too.  (Although your example involved some element of fraud that I'd be open to consider remedying.)

Your rules about interstate this and private club that are nonsense.  I don't especially care if the current ruling class agrees with you or not.  I know what the current legislation and prevailing legal opinion among government employees actually is.  Most of it is wrong, however.

No, I'm not trying to control your life. I'm trying to get you to stop controlling mine.  So, the opposite.

And it's called "tu quoque."
 
2014-01-22 03:00:30 PM  

notto: the government has provided a way to meet the supposed religious beliefs. don't sell wedding cakes to anyone. you can't discriminate in your selling and claim it is a religious rite. it is a choice to be in business. they can choose to not sell wedding cakes in a business covered by state accommodation laws. they chose otherwise and agreed when they opened their business.


So, all a religious person needs to do is give up every other civil right to stay religious? Can you even smell what you're shoveling?
 
2014-01-22 03:01:59 PM  

hardinparamedic: The only reason you're trying to equivocate the two is because you're either a grossly ignorant bigot, or you're trying to defend your own inborn urges to molest children. Which is it?


so then you admit that your a racist?

that's good the first step is admitting why you are afraid of pedophiles

because you secretly are one...?
 
2014-01-22 03:04:32 PM  

Leishu: only an INCREDIBLE FARKING MORON would equate the actions of a business with the actions of the government.



What are you on about?  Businesses help people.  The act of commercial trade is peaceful cooperation, mutual respect for the other person and his rights, the increase of productivity, and the improvement of the quality of life of both parties.

I would never equate that with government, which is populated by assholes, parasites and control freaks.
 
2014-01-22 03:05:33 PM  

gerrymander: notto: the government has provided a way to meet the supposed religious beliefs. don't sell wedding cakes to anyone. you can't discriminate in your selling and claim it is a religious rite. it is a choice to be in business. they can choose to not sell wedding cakes in a business covered by state accommodation laws. they chose otherwise and agreed when they opened their business.

So, all a religious person needs to do is give up every other civil right to stay religious? Can you even smell what you're shoveling?



Gay people can get married.  They just have to get married to a member of the opposite sex.

Right?
 
Displayed 50 of 676 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report