(08-26-2015 06:36 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 05:30 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Gays got nothing to whine about either. They had the same as everyone else, now they have some extra above and beyond the rest of us. They be special.

What can gays do that you can't? Other than snappy dressing...

Special treatment under the law.

Bakers can turn me away.

(08-26-2015 07:16 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Bakers can turn me away.

Ummm...no. If one turned you away because you were straight...or a Christian...or white, you'd have a case against them.

And you do realize that it is still quite legal in several states to fire someone just for being gay don't you?

(08-27-2015 09:03 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 07:16 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Bakers can turn me away.

Ummm...no. If one turned you away because you were straight...or a Christian...or white, you'd have a case against them.

And you do realize that it is still quite legal in several states to fire someone just for being gay don't you?

It's easier to live life thinking that your personal experiences extend to everyone else.

Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

(08-27-2015 07:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

Schilling is a scum bag.

(08-28-2015 09:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 07:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

(08-28-2015 09:51 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 07:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

Yes they were. They made wedding cakes, and they refused to make one for a gay couple. Hence, they weren't served because they were gay.

(08-25-2015 08:22 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 09:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Or...not.

Curt Schilling believes he didn’t make the Hall of Fame because he’s a Republican

The best part is that he uses the standard conservative tactic for refusing to own up to being wrong by claiming he was joking.

Now I wonder if he will actually become one next year when the votes are cast.

Yea. and there have been 100,000 major league baseball players. Exactly zero have felt comfortable being openly gay. MLB is very conservative.

You got a link for that? You're not exactly known around these parts as rational when it comes to gays and their perceived slights.

(08-29-2015 01:02 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:51 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 07:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

Yes they were. They made wedding cakes, and they refused to make one for a gay couple. Hence, they weren't served because they were gay.

No they weren't. They would serve the gay a cake. Just would draw the line at a wedding cake. Same as they can discriminate against requests I might make.

Get a straight person to go in and ask on a gay couples behalf. The straight would get the same rejection.

(08-29-2015 03:26 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 01:02 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:51 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 07:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure they can. Said not a word about any particular reason.

If I want a big ol' heterosexual titty cake, they can say no.

Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

Yes they were. They made wedding cakes, and they refused to make one for a gay couple. Hence, they weren't served because they were gay.

No they weren't. They would serve the gay a cake. Just would draw the line at a wedding cake. Same as they can discriminate against requests I might make.

Get a straight person to go in and ask on a gay couples behalf. The straight would get the same rejection.

So the cake itself was gay then? Is that your argument?

(08-29-2015 08:52 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 03:26 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 01:02 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:51 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Of course Paul...but not just because you're white, Christian or heterosexual. Get it?

And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

Yes they were. They made wedding cakes, and they refused to make one for a gay couple. Hence, they weren't served because they were gay.

No they weren't. They would serve the gay a cake. Just would draw the line at a wedding cake. Same as they can discriminate against requests I might make.

Get a straight person to go in and ask on a gay couples behalf. The straight would get the same rejection.

So the cake itself was gay then? Is that your argument?

Is this deliberate? or just natural?

(08-29-2015 08:54 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 08:52 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 03:26 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 01:02 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:51 PM)Paul M Wrote:  And bakers were not saying no to gay union cakes just because the people were gay. Get it.

Yes they were. They made wedding cakes, and they refused to make one for a gay couple. Hence, they weren't served because they were gay.

No they weren't. They would serve the gay a cake. Just would draw the line at a wedding cake. Same as they can discriminate against requests I might make.

Get a straight person to go in and ask on a gay couples behalf. The straight would get the same rejection.

So the cake itself was gay then? Is that your argument?

Is this deliberate? or just natural?

I know, right? That Paul is arguing this nonsense is just beyond belief. As if the argument that they weren't denied because they were gay, but that they were denied because their marriage was gay makes any sense whatsoever. Might as well say that you don't deny service to blacks, you just deny service to black organizations or weddings or whatever other nonsense he comes up with.

Glad to have you come to the side of rationality though, must feel good.

Comprehension just never enters your reasoning. Guess it would just throw a wrench into your whole shtick.

(08-30-2015 12:09 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Comprehension just never enters your reasoning. Guess it would just throw a wrench into your whole shtick.

What am I not comprehending? If you don't understand that my most previous post in response to CONN was tongue in cheek, and that I was absolutely aware he was responding to me then that's on you, but if not, how about instead of just posting how I'm wrong you actually try to prove that? It requires more work, yes, but you might learn a few things.