Posts by Viviane

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

Agree, we all want a better place where discrimination is based solely on merit. You just don't fight dogma with more dogma. Let the idiots ridicule themselves into oblivion. That's a better way to deal with religious zealots.

I have no idea what the fark you are talking about.

The best way to fight religious and other bigotry is with shameless mocking.

Don't feed their sense of persecution and therefore a divine purpose.

Feed the hell out of it. Kids are always embarrassed by their parents. When their parents are shamelessly mocked for being utterly stupid, the kids with figure it out. Homophobic bigotry will drop by magnitudes in a single generation.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

Why break the pattern now? You've been doing that very thing throughout this discussion at various times. You respond before you read. I made that very observation three days ago way back on page 3 of this discussion! You've been running in circles telling folks what they think and disregarding clear and unambiguous statements of the same folks declaring what they think. Your argument looks like this: I say so, so it must be true regardless of what you say you think.

<fartnoise.jpg>

Same as before, didn't bother with whatever dumb thing you just said.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

I have no problem whatsoever reading "BS" keyboard by your hand to mean what I've just told you in expressly stated language is rejected by you as something other than what I'm thinking. You don't even address that response coming from you for what it says in terms of YOU telling me that YOU know what I'm thinking better than I know what I'm thinking.

<fartpicture.jpg>

It's all you deserve at this point. I honestly didn't even bother reading it.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

Jeff,

edit feature is acting a little wonky, what I meant to say is "Huh? No one ever said a religion was not or not necessarily a legal entity. I said they weren't necessarily incorporated"

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

You told me my explicit answer of "No" was "BS," universally recognized as telling me I just lied, which is you telling me what I'm thinking is not what I said, which is you telling me what I think..

Exactly. You did say it was fine but for some weird reason are still denying and arguing that. I can't help it if you don't understand synonyms or bother to ask for clarification.

Anyway,

Me saying lack of law against gender discrimination means it's not illegal to discriminate based on gender is NOT me saying that legal discrimination based on gender is "fine" or "should be fine". It's me saying it's fine PURELY FROM A LEGAL perspective, not simply "fine".

Yep. Exactly. The problem is you assumed you knew what I meant by fine and OK and proceeded to argue from that false perspective rather than ask for clarification to help you out. Even now you're agreeing it's fine, which is exactly what I said.

Your problem is that you did exactly what you are attempting to accuse me of and someone want to claim your lack of asking for clarification is my problem.

Very weird.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

Name a religion in this country that is not a legal entity.

Huh? No one ever said a religion was necessarily a legal entity. I said they weren't necessarily incorporated.

In any event, do you think it is OK to discriminate against of the the organizations I described?

7

The book of daniel and the five Akkadian prophecies

by bohm in

there are two views on the book of daniel.

according to the conservative jewish/christian view the book of daniel was written in mesopotamia under the babylonian conquest ca.

according to the view of modern history the book was composed ca.

Viviane

Excellent post, Bohm, great points.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

If it's not a person what the hell is it? For the record, I'll take anybody's (anything's?) money, also under the Washington State ADA you have to allow service animals in your establishment.
If you're trying to be coy about a religion being the customer, in the United States a corporation (which an organized religion is) is a legally the same as a person

I am well aware that a corporation is indeed legally a person, as weird as that is. But, religions aren't necessarily incorporate, sole proprietorships, government entities, etc., are all things you can do business with as customers that aren't people.

Is it legal, in your opinion, to disciminate against them?

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

This whole thread is an exercise in futility. Why would anyone want to force homosexuals into a homophobic group. You guys remind me of the biblical text where Israelite raped women were given into permanent bond and submission to their rapists. What?!!!

Because institutional racism was outlawed, we see far lower instances of it and newer generations actively embarassed by how backwards and racist the previous generations were. You will never get rid of it, some people will always be backwards turds. But, you can drive the rate at which it happens way down.

Basically, to leave the world a better place is why you do it.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

Viviane

Yet you are willing to tell people what they think despite the fact they've told you in explicit terms what you say is not what they think

If you have an example me telling someone what they think, please show me where that has happened and I will, of course, apologize.

Otherwise, you're just making stuff up. Again.

You do this based on restating someone's position and then plying that restatement to mean something different than the original author said.

Oh, sorry. Paraphrasing and restating another way while preserving the same meaning of what you wrote isn't "telling you what you think".

Yep, you were making stuff up again. Or you're very confused.

You seem to be a bright person. Why do you do these things, and then complain as you do above apparently without realizing you've just described yourself?

Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of not giving a sh*t over the stuff you're making up.

Let me know if you have anything true to say. Otherwise, you're not worth any more effort (though to be fair, I can't guarantee I won't change my mind depending on how bored I am).