Gay bars: Discriminatory?

[Premislyd]

Your position is really all over the place. Is it that hard to be consistent?

No it isn't. My position is entirely consistent. The fact that you can't see that speaks more of your lack of perception than anything.

Or the fact that you're flip-flopping more than Romney during his campaign.

[Olthar]

Then I'm wondering why you seem incapable of understanding what my position actually entails.

Your position lacks not only consistency but a stable logic base. It's bigoted and quite, ironically, discriminatory.

Then you don't understand my position and should go back to school to pick up a few courses on reading comprehension.

[Sailsia]

Your position is really all over the place. Is it that hard to be consistent?

No it isn't. My position is entirely consistent. The fact that you can't see that speaks more of your lack of perception than anything.

I think we're all very clear on what your position actually entails. Are you?

Oh, wow. You're actually claiming that you know me better than I know myself? And you expect people to take you seriously? The audacity!

I'm just a little concerned you're writing responses, but you aren't aware of what you're writing? You might need to be a doctor because you're claiming that your arguments are coherent and reasonable when quite a few people have given testimony to refute that conception.

[Ifreann]

I have no problems whatsoever with gay bars. Considering how uncommon homosexuality is, it's completely understandable that gay people want a place where they can interact more easily with other gay people.

That being said, discrimination is still discrimination. It doesn't matter who is discriminating and against whom, it is never justifiable.

As has been said and explained already, discrimination is not always bad. It is sometimes very good and completely necessary.

[Olthar]

No it isn't. My position is entirely consistent. The fact that you can't see that speaks more of your lack of perception than anything.

Or the fact that you're flip-flopping more than Romney during his campaign.

Considering this entire thread I have been making the same arguments so repeatedly that I have frequently just quoted or linked to previous posts, I'd say that you're full of shit.

[-Deus-]

Your position lacks not only consistency but a stable logic base. It's bigoted and quite, ironically, discriminatory.

Then you don't understand my position and should go back to school to pick up a few courses on reading comprehension.

Alright, then attempt to explain it more clearly for my idiotic self, if you please. I'm very interested, actually for legitimate reasons. I'm sure we can keep this quite tame.

[Sailsia]

Your position lacks not only consistency but a stable logic base. It's bigoted and quite, ironically, discriminatory.

Then you don't understand my position and should go back to school to pick up a few courses on reading comprehension.

OR you should try to explain yourself better. In a debate, if you think your opponent isn't understanding your argument, it means you have to explain it better.

[Ifreann]

Or the fact that you're flip-flopping more than Romney during his campaign.

Considering this entire thread I have been making the same arguments so repeatedly that I have frequently just quoted or linked to previous posts, I'd say that you're full of shit.

That's just what Romney would say!

[Premislyd]

Or the fact that you're flip-flopping more than Romney during his campaign.

Considering this entire thread I have been making the same arguments so repeatedly that I have frequently just quoted or linked to previous posts, I'd say that you're full of shit.

So in other words: "I'm just going to keep yelling at him instead of trying to make a coherent argument and refute his claims"

[Olthar]

No it isn't. My position is entirely consistent. The fact that you can't see that speaks more of your lack of perception than anything.


Oh, wow. You're actually claiming that you know me better than I know myself? And you expect people to take you seriously? The audacity!

I'm just a little concerned you're writing responses, but you aren't aware of what you're writing? You might need to be a doctor because you're claiming that your arguments are coherent and reasonable when quite a few people have given testimony to refute that conception.

Or people have given up actually trying to debate me and have side tracked the entire discussion to an ad homenim to try and discredit me.

[Olthar]

Then you don't understand my position and should go back to school to pick up a few courses on reading comprehension.

Alright, then attempt to explain it more clearly for my idiotic self, if you please. I'm very interested, actually for legitimate reasons. I'm sure we can keep this quite tame.

Sure. Go back and read the previous 50 pages of the thread.

Then you don't understand my position and should go back to school to pick up a few courses on reading comprehension.

OR you should try to explain yourself better. In a debate, if you think your opponent isn't understanding your argument, it means you have to explain it better.

I've explained it so simply that an elementary school child could understand. If you need it to be simpler than that, then there's no point if further discussion with you.

[Ascelonia]

No it isn't. My position is entirely consistent. The fact that you can't see that speaks more of your lack of perception than anything.

Or the fact that you're flip-flopping more than Romney during his campaign.

Seriously though, homosexuality is no laughing matter. I'm okay with gay bars so long as they continue to self-segregate themselves from the normal population.

[Olthar]

Considering this entire thread I have been making the same arguments so repeatedly that I have frequently just quoted or linked to previous posts, I'd say that you're full of shit.

So in other words: "I'm just going to keep yelling at him instead of trying to make a coherent argument and refute his claims"

You mean the claims rooted in a pointless ad homenim that in no way is relates to the debate at hand? Yes, it's such a tragedy that I am refusing to write up detailed refutations to that.

[Sailsia]

Alright, then attempt to explain it more clearly for my idiotic self, if you please. I'm very interested, actually for legitimate reasons. I'm sure we can keep this quite tame.

Sure. Go back and read the previous 50 pages of the thread.

OR you should try to explain yourself better. In a debate, if you think your opponent isn't understanding your argument, it means you have to explain it better.

I've explained it so simply that an elementary school child could understand. If you need it to be simpler than that, then there's no point if further discussion with you.

Oh, I didn't know you were qualified in elementary school education.

[Ifreann]

I'm just a little concerned you're writing responses, but you aren't aware of what you're writing? You might need to be a doctor because you're claiming that your arguments are coherent and reasonable when quite a few people have given testimony to refute that conception.

Or people have given up actually trying to debate me and have side tracked the entire discussion to an ad homenim to try and discredit me.

Don't be silly. People have given testimony on an internet forum saying that you're incoherent, Olthar. Therefore, you must be suffering some kind of brain injury or mental disability that require immediate medical attention.

[Olthar]

Sure. Go back and read the previous 50 pages of the thread.


I've explained it so simply that an elementary school child could understand. If you need it to be simpler than that, then there's no point if further discussion with you.

Oh, I didn't know you were qualified in elementary school education.

...

I'm speechless. I am utterly shocked at the sheer ineptitude of this post. It is truly one of a kind. Congratulations.

[Premislyd]

So in other words: "I'm just going to keep yelling at him instead of trying to make a coherent argument and refute his claims"

You mean the claims rooted in a pointless ad homenim that in no way is relates to the debate at hand? Yes, it's such a tragedy that I am refusing to write up detailed refutations to that.

Or you could prove me wrong and point out the consistency in your posts.

Your choice, really.

[Olthar]

Or people have given up actually trying to debate me and have side tracked the entire discussion to an ad homenim to try and discredit me.

Don't be silly. People have given testimony on an internet forum saying that you're incoherent, Olthar. Therefore, you must be suffering some kind of brain injury or mental disability that require immediate medical attention.

Clearly.

[Orcoa]

The point is that I'm talking about ideals, I'm slightly uncomfortable with the whole direction of your rhetoric 'straight people rule the world'. We should work towards mutual acceptance and justice rather than creating spaces for different groups enforced by rules prohibiting people from expressing who they are. Surely you can agree to the ideals.

I used to agree with those ideals. Then I grew up and stopped being childishly naive. Despite what children's cartoons imply, the world won't become a better place just through the power of positive thinking and friendship. Gays are, to this day, horribly oppressed and persecuted. That's not going to just go away no matter how much you try to ignore it, and your flowery speech about being kind to everyone isn't going to sway any minds. It's sad, but it's true.

So believing in equality for all and working for that is childish?

Also, I find the bar's policy understandable in what they are trying to do which is create a safe place for gays to be at and have some fun

[Olthar]

You mean the claims rooted in a pointless ad homenim that in no way is relates to the debate at hand? Yes, it's such a tragedy that I am refusing to write up detailed refutations to that.

Or you could prove me wrong and point out the consistency in your posts.

Your choice, really.

No. I have better things to do with my time. Like counting the dots on my wall.

[Sailsia]

Oh, I didn't know you were qualified in elementary school education.

...

I'm speechless. I am utterly shocked at the sheer ineptitude of this post. It is truly one of a kind. Congratulations.

Could you please define the word ineptitude? Us elementary schoolers don't know 'dem fancy big words.

[-Deus-]

Alright, then attempt to explain it more clearly for my idiotic self, if you please. I'm very interested, actually for legitimate reasons. I'm sure we can keep this quite tame.

Sure. Go back and read the previous 50 pages of the thread.

OR you should try to explain yourself better. In a debate, if you think your opponent isn't understanding your argument, it means you have to explain it better.

I've explained it so simply that an elementary school child could understand. If you need it to be simpler than that, then there's no point if further discussion with you.

I suppose it was too much to ask for then. Insulting school children's intelligence is another matter entirely though, as well as insulting mine. All I'm trying to do is understand your position, and if possible amend it, because as I said it's logically flawed and easily snatched from under you. For all intents and purposes, people who insist on making every little social problem and event a big deal for or against their opinions only make the problem worse. By failing being unwilling to properly explain yourself and instead insist that you are in the right, you only make yourself seem bad. You mentioned that people are trying to discredit you? You're doing that to yourself, most people are just making statements or asking questions.

But like I said, arguing like this is ridiculous. No one benefits, no one learns anything and some people even come out of this hating/disliking homosexual even more because of the poor conduct of one. So there you have it, I suppose. It's worthless at this point.

[Ifreann]

You mean the claims rooted in a pointless ad homenim that in no way is relates to the debate at hand? Yes, it's such a tragedy that I am refusing to write up detailed refutations to that.

Or you could prove me wrong and point out the consistency in your posts.

Your choice, really.

"You're being incoherent"
"Um...no"
"Well prove you're not being incoherent, then!"

Top drawer, just top drawer.

[Premislyd]

Or you could prove me wrong and point out the consistency in your posts.

Your choice, really.

No. I have better things to do with my time. Like counting the dots on my wall.

So, rather than write an easy-to-read sentence (us elementary schoolers don't have that reading comp as you do, clearly), you're just going to do something pointless and count the dots on your wall?

It's really sad that you speak up for homosexuals like this but choose to spend your time like that.

[Frisivisia]

Or you could prove me wrong and point out the consistency in your posts.

Your choice, really.

"You're being incoherent"
"Um...no"
"Well prove you're not being incoherent, then!"

Top drawer, just top drawer.

These guys are the equivalent of top drawer alcohol.