1) Where has CFA been banned. Find 1 banning. CFA exists in Chicago, so dont say Chicago as there are ones here.

 

2) I have talked with SSM groups about it, and not one has ever said that CFA doesnt have the right to their opinion.

 

3) Not really, first I beat your argument soundly, then I concluded. I never insulted you, I said your statement was a joke, which it was. Nice try though with the woe is me routine.

 

Let me fix the bolded part for you. "I'm not saying you're stupid, I'm saying the things you say are stupid." Isn't this semantics?

Let me fix the bolded part for you. "I'm not saying you're stupid, I'm saying the things you say are stupid." Isn't this semantics?

But that would mean smart people cannot say stupid things...which is definitely not true.

don't bs here. The mayor Chicago, Boston, SF, ect said they would ban CFA. so these idiots did indeed attempt to ban CFA, then their lawyers likely told them they would get pwned in court. people in power were trying to ban them. fact.

 

 

 

i'm sure most SSM supporters believe in free speech and are reasonable people. my original post was not directed at them, but at these clown mayors and the like that pushed this whole thing into a new realm of stupidity.

 

 

 

no you did not good sir. your argument was deeply flawed and you likely knew this and ended with an insult. you actually remind me a little bit of Michele Bachmann.

 

1) Once again you arent seeing the equivalence. SSM is actually banned, CFA is not banned. I can say I want to do something, that doesnt mean I can actually do it. You keep saying the Mayor of Chicago did this that and the other, but the actual facts are CFA is operating today.

 

2) Mayors are clowns, there is nothing new with this.

 

3) My argument isnt flawed at all. It wasnt an insult against you, it was a conclusion about your statement. Are you that PC?

 

 

Let me fix the bolded part for you. "I'm not saying you're stupid, I'm saying the things you say are stupid." Isn't this semantics?

 

Farmteam basically covered this.

 

You can be the smartest person in the world and make a terrible argument. The hope is that if you are smart, you will see the weakness of your argument and change.

 

If I wanted to attack someone, it would be apparent.

 

1) Once again you arent seeing the equivalence. SSM is actually banned, CFA is not banned. I can say I want to do something, that doesnt mean I can actually do it. You keep saying the Mayor of Chicago did this that and the other, but the actual facts are CFA is operating today.

 

2) Mayors are clowns, there is nothing new with this.

 

3) My argument isnt flawed at all. It wasnt an insult against you, it was a conclusion about your statement. Are you that PC?

 

 

 

 

Farmteam basically covered this.

 

You can be the smartest person in the world and make a terrible argument. The hope is that if you are smart, you will see the weakness of your argument and change.

 

If I wanted to attack someone, it would be apparent.

 

They were denied a permit, right? Can't build a store where they wanted to, right? Pretty sure that's the equivalent of being banned.

They were denied a permit, right? Can't build a store where they wanted to, right? Pretty sure that's the equivalent of being banned.

 

As of now nothing has happened, the Alderman said he would deny the permit, but as of today it has not been denied.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07...e-ward-alderman

 

Moreno said he would do it, it has not been done yet. Once again, the threat of action, does not equal action.

They were denied a permit, right? Can't build a store where they wanted to, right? Pretty sure that's the equivalent of being banned.

no permit has been denied. y'all are crazy. lol

Semantics. The alderman said he'd deny the permit, then this thing blew up in his face. It'll be denied, on different grounds, but we all know CFA was effectively banned from opening a store in that spot.

Semantics. The alderman said he'd deny the permit, then this thing blew up in his face. It'll be denied, on different grounds, but we all know CFA was effectively banned from opening a store in that spot.

 

If you are so confident in the future, any chance you can pick tonight's lotto numbers?

 

If the permit is denied, then we can discuss whether it was right/wrong, illegal/legal. But as of now, I have no idea what will happen, and there is currently a CFA in Chicago, so to say CFA is banned in Chicago, is simply false (not that you said that).

Semantics. The alderman said he'd deny the permit, then this thing blew up in his face. It'll be denied, on different grounds, but we all know CFA was effectively banned from opening a store in that spot.

hahaha that's NOT semantics at all! nothing has actually BEEN DONE - and the Boston mayor already admitted there's nothing he can do legally to deny a permit! lol

hahaha that's NOT semantics at all! nothing has actually BEEN DONE - and the Boston mayor already admitted there's nothing he can do legally to deny a permit! lol

 

Right. Because that's how politics works.

 

Are you actually being serious right now? Because if you are, honestly, open your eyes. Permits can be denied for so many frivolous reasons it'd make your head spin. If they *want* to deny a permit, they not only can, they will.

 

This isn't about that, though. This is about a over the top statement made...did he ever actually intend to deny it or was it just something he said in the heat of the moment? I think it's just something he said on the spot. That's the only question. Because like I said, if they want to deny it, they can. It's actually that easy.

Edited August 14, 201213 yr by Y2HH

http://gawker.com/5935037/anti+gay-activis...os-protest-dies

 

Mitt Romney is responsible:

 

1) He's conservative and a supporter of CFA

2) CFA attempted to get a permit but was denied because they hate gay people

3) Gay activist guy protested in retaliation

4) Now he's dead.

 

When need an Obama ad to save the next victim of murderous Romney.

I read that article thinking your comments were somehow related, but they werent.

 

 

It's a joke about a prior Obama ad placing the responsibility of someone's death on him.

I dont watch ads, especially political ones, so I wouldnt know.

It's a joke about a prior Obama ad placing the responsibility of someone's death on him.

Wow, didn't get it at all until this post. Too much mental gymnastics for that joke attempt.

If you want something that's more on subject, there was a shooting at the offices of the Family Research Council hate group in DC today that appears to be motivated by their politics on the gays. The FBI is reportedly already looking into it as an act of terrorism.

If you want something that's more on subject, there was a shooting at the offices of the Family Research Council hate group in DC today that appears to be motivated by their politics on the gays. The FBI is reportedly already looking into it as an act of terrorism.

 

Really dude? You support the shooter? Wow

Really dude? You support the shooter? Wow

I never said that.

 

I referred to them by their official designation via the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a "Hate group".

 

There are unconfirmed reports that the shooter had some sort of Chick Fil-A product or something like that along with him at the time of the shooting.

I never said that.

 

I referred to them by their official designation via the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a "Hate group".

 

There are unconfirmed reports that the shooter had some sort of Chick Fil-A product or something like that along with him at the time of the shooting.

 

Southern Poverty isn't legit

I support the shooter.

I support the shooter.

Dearly hopin this is sarcasm.

It's often hard to tell on the internet.

It's often hard to tell on the internet.

We do have green text for ones like that...where it would panic the reader if it weren't sarcastic...

Here's another example of "separate-but-equal" not working:

 

A same-sex couple in Nevada is raising awareness about the inequality couples experience without marriage after Spring Valley Hospital refused to recognize their relationship. Brittney Leon and Terri-Ann Simonelli have a domestic partnership, which under Nevada state law grants couples all the same rights as married couples. When Leon checked into the hospital last month because of complications in her pregnancy, the admissions officer told Simonelli she would have to secure power of attorney to be with her partner.

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/08/22/cop...lurs-into-skin/

 

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — A former University of Nebraska women’s basketball star faked an attack in which she allegedly carved anti-gay slurs into her skin because she felt it would spark change, police said Tuesday.

BUt in liberal land, that's ok, because her intentions were good. Fake but accurate and all that.