Total posts: 8,245
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
They are fighting words if you choose to be offended. But the intent of refusing to go along with it is not to cause trouble, but to hold true to one's beliefs. It not meant to be insulting, threating, or abusive. It's refusing to compromise one's beliefs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Refusing to go against your own beliefs and use someone's stupid pronoun is not fighting words nor is it disturbing any peace.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@AIRhino
How about you put me against AIRhino in the first round? We're both have bye atm and it makes more sense for an 8 man bracket.
Created:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Excellent post. You said it better than I ever could've.
The efforts to feminize boys nowadays are scary.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Your question is so it's unkind- isn't it protected speech? The answer is yes, except when there's criminal intent.Look- if the lunatic can-opener said "call me man one more time and I'll jump" and you say "man" and the lunatic jumps, you are probably going to get charged with something and we both know there's some justice in such a charge. There are circumstances when protected speech becomes crime and so forfeits protection. Willfully violating another citizen's (potentially fragile) identity in the privacy of their homes, in a time of exegesis, that rises to the level of crime. The State of California sees that as minor crime. Why can't you?
These statements right here are what I have a problem with. It's one big Appeal to the Extreme Fallacy. The thing is, we already have laws covering criminal intent; thus, there is no need for this bill.
There is one scenario, however, that the law does not cover. This scenario is "willfully violating another citizen's (potentially fragile) identity in the privacy of their homes". And there's a reason why the law doesn't cover it- refusing to go along with someone's pronouns is an expression of your own belief, it is not criminal intent nor is it violating their identity. They choose to feel that their identity is violated (as my dad would say, "You choose to be offended.")- they don't have to take them seriously- they can stand firm in their own identity. If you feel like your identity is being attacked, that's your own fault.
Another thing I noticed here was a snuck premise. Specifically, two words in particular. The words "potentially fragile" are the snuck premise. You assert that the elderly are too frail and will thus collapse at anything, or that the risk is too high. But once again, you assume it is the fault of the person refusing to go against their beliefs. While old people can be fragile, they can also tough and wise. If they are snowflakes, it is their fault.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Wow. You hit the nail right on the head.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
No one should have a first Round bye.
Debater Sign-Ups:
1. blamonkey
2. armoredcat
4. warren42
5. nmvarco
6. WisdomofAges
7. AIRhino
8. Mharman
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
stupid liberal policy
That's a little redundant there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
The location does not determine the constitutionality of the censorship. If you are forced to use a pronoun against your own will, it is a violation. The First Amendment protects your right to stand in your position, no matter what building you are in. It may feel good to force those "bigots" to use the elders' pronouns, but does it do good? No. It doesn't. At the end of the day, you're restricting their speech in a way that forces them to speak against their own opinions, which is definitely a First Amendment violation.
Created:
-->
@linate
In his defense, he did his job a vetoed a bill. I will note, however, that he encourage congressional Republicans to vote down the bill as well, but that's not going to constitute causing the shutdown, even if he claims to take responsibility for it. The same applies for the Republican members of Congress. It is on the Congressional Democrats for obstructing.
Trump is still in DC willing to negotiate. The Dems are going on vacation.
Trump is still in DC willing to negotiate. The Dems are going on vacation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Those laws only state a debt collector may not threaten, lie to, or verbally abuse a debtor. That is far different from refusing to go along with someone's pronouns.
The criteria for a First Amendment violation depends on the kind of speech being censored, it has nothing to do with how narrow an interaction may be. Threats are not lawful. Lying in business and legal interactions is scamming/perjury and therefore not lawful. Using the pronoun of the gender they were born as is perfectly lawful under the First Amendment because you are showing your beliefs that you will not bow down to the idea that there are more than two genders- that you hold your own position and will stand firm in that position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
TF? Dude that's my tournament. Please change the name.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Wow. That is actual SJW tyranny. Hopefully, it gets struck down as unconstitutional. It should be; it's a clear violation of the First Amendment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
There is no third gender. However, the California legislative branch could think otherwise, considering they already made this SJW law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
If that bill gets passed, they can add any fake gender they want to it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
As usual, you have nothing to say because I have you beat.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
So you call a woman a woman and she gets offended. She wants you to call her a hen. You think that's stupid. You continue to refer to her as a "her". You get fined.
That is clear tyranny and a violation of the First Amendment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
That doesn't prove Trump's corruption, it proves FBI corruption. There was no evidence and no warrant but they investigated him anyways.Before Trump fired Comey, the FBI had opened a counterintelligence investigation against Trump. Comey likely knew this was coming, which is why he was unwilling to tell Congress that the president was not a target of any investigation, but merely a subject. It turns out that Trump became a target even before Comey was fired.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
In other words, you're silent because I have you defeated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
How will seeds be generated? By Elo or Randomized?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
You basically connected Saudi Arabia to Trump escaping from a Mueller Report out of nowhere.
Business only (oil, specifically) co-op w/ Saudi Arabia does NOT mean any secret plot, and there is no evidence for it.
Why would you even make such a baseless claim?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
How the hell would getting rid of the Iran deal benefit the Saudis?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
lolEurotrash
Created:
-->
@disgusted
That's why we keep track of passports; who's been in our country and how long. If they exceed a certain time, deport them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
What user claimed to be who?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Kind of expected a better result given the start I had.
Created:
Posted in:
A surging Eagles beat the Bears on the road in the playoffs. RIP
Created:
Posted in:
Day 11 Results:
Northwestern def. Utah
Correct. 17-11.
Texas A&M def. North Carolina State
Correct. 18-11.
Missouri def. Oklahoma State
Incorrect. 18-12.
Cincinnati def. Virginia Tech
Correct. 19-12.
Pittsburgh def. Stanford
Incorrect. 19-13.
Oregon def. Michigan State
Correct. 20-13.
Created:
Posted in:
Here are some of my levels: https://supermariomakerbookmark.nintendo.net/profile/mattthecreeper?type=posted#type-selector
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
No, not really. That's my only reason. Personal preference.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
It's the standard size for the Beginners' Series. The Beginners' Series is to prepare players for bigger and more complex games. Therefore, 10 or more is the ideal size for a normal game.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
What facts? Do you mean the BS spewed by the leftist media and congressional Democrats?
Created: