Mr.B wrote:
If I went into a place of business and was told my business wasn't wanted; I would have the good sense to shop elsewhere.
So much for good sense.
That was easy.
.
No doubt. Fortunately these guys didn't have the same "good sense."
If Mr.B went into a place of business and was told that Christian business wasn't wanted, for example, he would either just shop elsewhere like a lazy coward or he would righteously raise hell with the Constitution backing him up.
Mr.B wrote:
If I went into a place of business and was told my business wasn't wanted; I would have the good sense to shop elsewhere.
So much for good sense.
That was easy.
.
"No doubt. Fortunately these guys didn't have the same "good sense."
Fail. Equating race with immorality is rather far-fetched; wouldn't you say? Oh wait, silly me; I forgot for a moment who/what I was replying to.
Anyway, perhaps you failed to notice the waiter? I wonder if he told the four at the counter "We don't serve your kind"...?
Vrede too wrote:"If Mr.B went into a place of business and was told that Christian business wasn't wanted, for example, he would either just shop elsewhere like a lazy coward or he would righteously raise hell with the Constitution backing him up."
No; firstly, I wouldn't have went in with my Bible as a chip on my shoulder, nor would I have been carrying a soapbox.
There's quite a difference in being a "lazy coward" and someone simply looking to pick a fight.
It's too bad someone can't slap some sense into you, your head is protected by your butt-cheeks.
Mr.B wrote:
Fail. Equating race with immorality is rather far-fetched; wouldn't you say?
Morality applies in all situations. The issue here isn't about morality at all, it's discrimination. These guys in Greensboro could certainly have found somewhere else to eat. They could have found themselves "unwelcome" and just gone somewhere else. So could the guys wanting flowers for their wedding. And they probably would have, if the flower shop owner had just said, I'm sorry, but I'm overbooked," which he could have done. But fortunately for our society as a whole, some people are willing to do things, take actions, and take risks to help others as well as themselves in overcoming injustice. "No Colored at Counter" and "No Gay Wedding Flower" signs can be an incentive to action and not something you just walk past.
As to what the guy behind the counter may have said - probably might have been "be careful, man - they gonna hurt you" but the heroes persisted and sat anyway.
Funny how Mr.KKKB wants the government to dictate who a private business will allow to use its washrooms. And yet he declares that blacks should simply "have the good sense to shop elsewhere" when told that their race won't be served, and declares that disagreement is "carrying a soapbox."
Not at all "far-fetched", moron. In some states like WA the innate characteristic of sexual orientation has the same protection from your ilk's hateful discrimination that the innate characteristic of race and the non-innate lifestyle choice of religion does. In his desperate, wussy and utterly failed attempt to run from the fact that he is exactly, exactly as immoral as the Jim Crow bigots, Mr.B fails civics, current events, law and logic, again.
rstrong wrote:"Funny how Mr.B wants the government to dictate who a private business will allow to use its washrooms. " Were you born this stupid or did you take lessons? Who said anything about washrooms or even mentioned the government?
"And yet he declares that blacks should simply "have the good sense to shop elsewhere" when told that their race won't be served, and declares that disagreement is "carrying a soapbox." I said nothing about Blacks, or Blacks shopping elsewhere either, ignorant idiot. The comment was made in reference to the two "gays" who wanted the flowers, cake, or whatever.
Agreeing with O Really, the shop owner could have handled the situation differently; but since neither of us was there, and the story was most likely sensationalized, we don't know what words were exchanged to initiate a lawsuit.
Now, take your silly, condescending ass back to my post and re-read it. I re-typed it much slower so you could MIGHT understand it.
Mr.B wrote:
So you're saying immorality and race goes hand in hand? Now who's the moron, moron?
Race, and homosexuality, are specific physical conditions, resulting from genetics. Morality is a culture-based set of principles and values. Nobody but maybe you is saying they're the same. Often, though, one can infer from behaviour what a person's moral standards might be. For example, whether a person steals, lies, cheats, or has a sense of justice.
No, moron, your immoral, Jim Crow-like bigotry, for example, is not the same as race and it's not protected from discrimination. However, in an increasing number of states your ilk's pathetic and hateful attempts to openly impose your bigotry upon gays is treated the same under the law as if you were one of the racists you so fondly emulate or as if you were trying to discriminate against people that have made the lifestyle choice to be religious. Grow up and deal with it. If you weren't obsessing about gay sex so much you might be a little less stupid.
Often times you can determine someone's sexuality by their comments as well. You are so homo! In denial though, but still homo. Anyone that thinks it's a "choice" can definitely cross over at any moment.
bannination wrote:"Often times you can determine someone's sexuality by their comments as well." Wow.... ! According to that statement, the whole lot of you libs are homosexuals ... all you do is defend it..!
Thanks for pointing that out!
bannination wrote:Often times you can determine someone's sexuality by their comments as well. You are so homo! In denial though, but still homo. Anyone that thinks it's a "choice" can definitely cross over at any moment.
Nttawwt.
More evidence at hand:
The years long obsession with gay sex.
Surfing gay websites for gay pics and proudly sharing them.
Scientific proof that the most homophobic are most likely to have repressed gay tendencies.
The strident denial.
bannination wrote: "I'm sure Mr. B applauds the thought of them killing themselves."
Why would I do that? Are you having repressed thoughts?
AM,NA*(too) wrote:
More evidence at hand:
The years long obsession with gay sex. replying only to yours et al pro "gay" posts.
Surfing gay websites for gay pics and proudly sharing them. Wrong. Google has images from websites you follow; I go where you've already been.
Scientific proof that the most homophobic are most likely to have repressed gay tendencies. That might be true if I were "homophobic". Strange that your "Scientific proof" comes from pro-homosexual researchers.
The strident denial. Nope.