It's Starting--> Indiana Christian Pizzeria ATTACKED by gay lobby

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

What "Victim card"?! Nope. He pulled the "Experience Card". There's a difference, but it alludes you, apparently.

Ah, doublespeak.


I said, I don't think you know that tolerance means.
He said:

I am deaf so obviously I know all about tolerance.

As if that gives him more insight than everyone else.

Then he said:

As a deaf person I should expect to get a good interpreter at the hospital in case of emergency. According to you they have the right to refuse me that.

"You meany, you don't want me to have an interpreter at the hospital"--victim card.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Wow just wow.

You said you don't think I know what tolerance means and I said that I do know since I've experienced tolerance and intolerance in my life so that means I have better understanding than you and that I am morally superior to you?

Oh god. There it is.... we have a troll in our presence.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

Wow just wow.

You said you don't think I know what tolerance means and I said that I do know since I've experienced tolerance and intolerance in my life so that means I have better understanding than you and that I am morally superior to you?

Oh god. There it is.... we have a troll in our presence.

You are the one putting forth your disabilities to make a point. Don't want it addressed, don't put it out there. You are also the one who said I didn't want a hospital to provide you with an interpreter--a rather low and crass insinuation as well as the victim card and patently untrue--but like a typical leftist, bigoted statements are fine as long as you agree with the bigotry. Don't put crap out if you don't want crap back.

And it's rather moronic to call someone a troll just because they disagree with you or call you on your nonsense.

a reply to: OpinionatedB

Explain to me, please, where Jesus said a business owner is committing a sin by treating a gay customer the same as all their other customers

Treating a human being the way a human being ought to be treated is not a sin. A human being is not a piece of pork or a bottle of gin

Is this really how you see your fellow human beings? Is this really the kind of law that makes you proud?

change never happens overnight, and we have these protections in place for very good reasons.. you never know when you may be faced with a situation where you will be that person who needs constitutional protection, and you will be grateful you have it..if you haven't thrown the constitution in the trash by then..

I know you don't see the irony in your own words here Opinionated. It's a shame. I'm pretty sure our gay citizens are counting on the constitution to stand for them as well. I know you don't care if there are all white eating establishments, or clubs that won't let in Jews - or people who won't rent to Mexicans, or people that think it's OK to pay women less than men...

I promise you - there are more of us that do. You've won your battle in Indiana - for now. I'm sure it must make you very happy. Enjoy it while you can

a reply to: NavyDoc

You are also the one who said I didn't want a hospital to provide you with an interpreter

See again you are putting words in my mouth. I never ever said that you do not want the hospital to provide me with an interpreter. What are you on?

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

You are also the one who said I didn't want a hospital to provide you with an interpreter

See again you are putting words in my mouth. I never ever said that you do not want the hospital to provide me with an interpreter. What are you on?

According to you they have the right to refuse me that.

The insinuation is pretty obvious.


Backpedal backpedal backpedal

a reply to: NavyDoc

The insinuation is pretty obvious.

Let me break this into two simple concepts for you:

You support business owners the right to discriminate anyone based on their beliefs.

You do not support discrimination.

Simple enough for you?

a reply to: NavyDoc

You are the one putting forth your disabilities to make a point.

So, answer the question. Do you think it's okay for DeafAlien to be given substandard treatment because of someone's personal prejudices about deaf people? Is it okay to discriminate?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

You are the one putting forth your disabilities to make a point.

So, answer the question. Do you think it's okay for DeafAlien to be given substandard treatment because of someone's personal prejudices about deaf people? Is it okay to discriminate?

Already answered--have you not read the full thread?

Hospitals should have interpreters--they are taxpayer funded (at least in part) essential services and the EMTLA laws already assure full access and treatment to all comers. However, that has between jack and # to do with a mom and pop pizzeria and is yet an example of the reducto ad absurdum logical fallacy.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Wow, just wow? Are you freaking kidding man? Why are you so intentionally being disingenuous? Clearly you pointed out that you are deaf as to prove some kind of point on "tolerance" as if to say you are especially privy regarding the subject. Why even argue that youre using the victim tactic, just to win an argument? Then continue by trying to make navydoc look bad, all in the name of him disputing your very leftist views?

Sigh, this place has gone way downhill lately..[

a reply to: NavyDoc

Hospitals should have interpreters--they are taxpayer funded (at least in part)

I think it's cute that you are dancing around it. In other post I changed it to private clinics. What about rehabs that you pay for? You know? The ones that aren't paid by taxpayers? If I was to admit myself into a rehab (paying in full for the service of course) I should expect to have good (not lousy or none at all) interpreters. Wait oh wait! I should be expected to be even admitted no matter who I am!

I know that you are against that yes. You are against discrimination.

However you support their right to discriminate.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I've tried to follow your bait and switch, while eagerly anticipating the answer to DeafAlien's question.

DEAFALIEN
Ok. According to you people should be able to choose to discriminate. Right?

...........

As a deaf person I should expect to get a good interpreter at the hospital in case of emergency. According to you they have the right to refuse me that.

you
Nonsense. A hospital is a taxpayer supported essential service.

Not an answer. What does that have to do with individual rights and discrimination?

Have yet to see the answer, just a lot of dancing about and a bunch of distracting insults and slurs.

HERE , go back and look for what I've missed and please cut and paste your answer for us.

a reply to: Wookiep

What? He is the one who said I do not know what tolerance means. I have never said that he or anyone do not know what it means.

Why even argue that your using the victim tactic, just to win an argument?

What victim tactic?
Win what argument?

He is the one who claimed that I do not understand tolerance!

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

You are the one putting forth your disabilities to make a point.

So, answer the question. Do you think it's okay for DeafAlien to be given substandard treatment because of someone's personal prejudices about deaf people? Is it okay to discriminate?

Already answered--have you not read the full thread?

Hospitals should have interpreters--they are taxpayer funded (at least in part) essential services and the EMTLA laws already assure full access and treatment to all comers. However, that has between jack and # to do with a mom and pop pizzeria and is yet an example of the reducto ad absurdum logical fallacy.

So now you want to invoke laws?

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

Hospitals should have interpreters--they are taxpayer funded (at least in part)

I think it's cute that you are dancing around it. In other post I changed it to private clinics. What about rehabs that you pay for? You know? The ones that aren't paid by taxpayers? If I was to admit myself into a rehab (paying in full for the service of course) I should expect to have good (not lousy or none at all) interpreters. Wait oh wait! I should be expected to be even admitted no matter who I am!

I know that you are against that yes. You are against discrimination.

However you support their right to discriminate.

A private clinic is by definition "private" is it not?

You checked yourself into a rehab and paid for it even though they did not provide the service you wanted? And you call other people irrational?

You were in rehab? That explains a heck of a lot right there.

As explained multiple times--one can support someone's right to say or do something without endorsing what they say or what they do. In a free society we know that as "tolerance." I don't support discrimination but I'm not about to use the power of the state to force what I believe on someone else unless there is a radically necessary issue like an essential service behind it--and no, cakes and flowers and pizza are not essential services.

a reply to: NavyDoc

cakes and flowers and pizza are not essential services.

So now equality is based on need?

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

You are the one putting forth your disabilities to make a point.

So, answer the question. Do you think it's okay for DeafAlien to be given substandard treatment because of someone's personal prejudices about deaf people? Is it okay to discriminate?

Already answered--have you not read the full thread?

Hospitals should have interpreters--they are taxpayer funded (at least in part) essential services and the EMTLA laws already assure full access and treatment to all comers. However, that has between jack and # to do with a mom and pop pizzeria and is yet an example of the reducto ad absurdum logical fallacy.

So now you want to invoke laws?

And you still with reducto absurdum?

What does an essential service, fully or partially funded by the taxpayer, something that is not even remotely mentioned in any of these freedom of religion laws, have to do with a private business owner having autonomy over their own decisions.

You are trying to build a strawman to tear it down but it is not working because everybody can see it's a strawman.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

cakes and flowers and pizza are not essential services.

So now equality is based on need?

How is equality based on force?

HIDDEN CAM: Gay Wedding Cakes at Muslim Bakeries?

youtu.be...

a reply to: NavyDoc

You were in rehab? That explains a heck of a lot right there.

I just went WOOOOOOW loudly. Now here comes ad hominem attacks.

You checked yourself into a rehab and paid for it even though they did not provide the service you wanted? And you call other people irrational?

Huh what? Did I say other people were irrational? You must be on something.

We get it.

You support the people's right to discriminate.
You do not support discrimination.

Talk about cognitive dissonance.