Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill

[Edward64]

Are we moving goal posts again? I'm okay if you want to take back the original statement and say you want to finetune it. No problem.

Your original statement was

I’ve already described how people will die

When a teacher goes to court and is attacked by a loon

Per my link above, teachers were involved in the lawsuit.

[sterlingice]

Don't forget, it has to be a 3rd grade teacher.

That's the only way this bill is a failure, has unintended consequences, or is a bad idea in any way and never should have been passed by a state intentionally trying to weaken their public school system.

SI

[Edward64]

Nah, he didn't say that (or at least not what I recapped). I don't want to be accused of moving goal posts.

Just making that clear as I know some non-involved people jump into threads without bothering to read prior posts before making accusations.

[Flasch186]

Yes yes

I’ve been really accused around fofc of moving goal posts

That’s my MO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Nah, no need for a mea culpa. Just stop accusing others of doing it (esp. if you aren't willing to back it up).

See my recap question #3

Just in case our discussion comes up again, and for ease of reference, I'll post the outstanding questions I'm waiting from you on.
:
3) I can extrapolate what you mean by gaslighting. But still waiting on goal post moving

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Nah, he didn't say that (or at least not what I recapped). I don't want to be accused of moving goal posts.

Just making that clear as I know some non-involved people jump into threads without bothering to read prior posts before making accusations.

Oh, I see the problem. Let me be more clear and explicit. I wouldn't want to cause any confusion.

/insert Cartman with megaphone gif from South Park movie/

What I'm trying to say is that each time this absurd defense is posted, this extremely silo'd way of pretending that's the only yardstick for someone, there's a chance I might respond with illustrating just how absurd it is. Not that he posted numerous paragraphs here, but that the one sentence is taken out of context as some be-all-end-all litmus test.

That's all I was trying to say. My post had little to do with Flasch. It has everything to do with, again, I have to keep using this word because it's the best way I can to describe it, using this "absurd" defense of any and all critiques or situations surrounding this bill.

I believe that each time this has been cowardly done in the past, each time there has been a need to passive/aggressively insult Flasch as a random defense and get called out, the next post has always been to play the victim. In the past it has been to pretend that's not what was meant and/or talk about how the aggressor is getting picked on after picking the fight. Or maybe it will be to point back to whatever specific absurd point is most notable, never mind that we're over 150 posts in this thread - but one point in one post - yeah, that's the only one that matters. It will be a protest of pretending what was said was not actually said or ignoring everything else that has been said.

But, again, I'm just cataloguing what has happened in the past. Maybe that won't happen this time. Sarcastically, maybe it's just one of the rules of this thread that supposedly this thread has that the rest of the board doesn't. Then again, that sounds a bit absurd, as well.

SI

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Oh, I see the problem. Let me be more clear and explicit. I wouldn't want to cause any confusion.

/insert Cartman with megaphone gif from South Park movie/

What I'm trying to say is that each time this absurd defense is posted, this extremely silo'd way of pretending that's the only yardstick for someone, there's a chance I might respond with illustrating just how absurd it is. Not that he posted numerous paragraphs here, but that the one sentence is taken out of context as some be-all-end-all litmus test.

I think you are saying my "absurd" defense is me saying he is moving the goal posts? That my defense is taking what he said (and I provided quote) out of context?

The quote is certainly not out of context, that is one of his main arguments. And no, it's not the only litmus test. As you stated, out of 150+ posts, if you think that is my be-all-end-all litmus test, then yeah, you are this person

Just making that clear as I know some non-involved people jump into threads without bothering to read prior posts before making accusations.

That's all I was trying to say. My post had little to do with Flasch. It has everything to do with, again, I have to keep using this word because it's the best way I can to describe it, using this "absurd" defense of any and all critiques or situations surrounding this bill.

Easy to criticize without specifics. Be clear with me, what is my absurd defense specifically?

I believe that each time this has been cowardly done in the past, each time there has been a need to passive/aggressively insult Flasch as a random defense and get called out, the next post has always been to play the victim.

In the past it has been to pretend that's not what was meant and/or talk about how the aggressor is getting picked on after picking the fight.

I've stated before, there has only been one time I remember that I initiated a sarcasm/insult. All the other times, I've responded in kind. Nothing cowardly about that. Nothing passive/aggressive about it when it's done in response to same.

Go ahead, start on pg 1 and let me know if you think I initiated the "cowardly" insults. Please quote me specifically where I initiated the insult to him? I'll be waiting

Or maybe it will be to point back to whatever specific absurd point is most notable, never mind that we're over 150 posts in this thread - but one point in one post - yeah, that's the only one that matters. It will be a protest of pretending what was said was not actually said or ignoring everything else that has been said.

See above. Don't be this guy.

Just making that clear as I know some non-involved people jump into threads without bothering to read prior posts before making accusations.

But, again, I'm just cataloguing what has happened in the past. Maybe that won't happen this time. Sarcastically, maybe it's just one of the rules of this thread that supposedly this thread has that the rest of the board doesn't. Then again, that sounds a bit absurd, as well.

SI

Cataloguing what has happened in the past? I don't really know what you are referring to but okay.

[sterlingice]

I though the absurd defense was clear: Despite all the posts Flasch has made or miami_fan has made on the first page and going forward, you keep going back to this singular one, like it's the only thing anyone has argued as a potential pitfall when we all know damn well it's not true. I mean, there have been long posts about suicides, driving away qualified teachers, the chilling effect of free speech. But, nope, dead third grade teacher. That's the one that you have repeatedly used as a defense about how absurd other criticisms of the bill are.

At least 4 times now:
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill

Here's been a decent chunk* of the thread for the last couple of pages
Someone: Here's a story about a totally predictable outcome from this bill or one in another state
Edward: But it's not a third grade teacher killed so it's just moving the goalposts

*There have also been a lot of speculation and dismissal of other consequences, too. The third grade teacher defense isn't the only tool in the tool box, it's just the most absurd.

For example:

And, just so we are clear and there is no accusations of me moving the goal posts, the orig point of contention was 3rd grade teachers being killed (e.g. die, not hurt) because they instructed on "sexual orientation or gender identity" (see post #50).

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Oh my bad. You've also allowed that a Holocaust is also potentially bad. However, if we merely go down the fascism road but stop short of a full on Holocaust or it takes more than 4 years, you said you're owed a mea culpa. I guess if DeSantis doesn't get moving on it, your pizza will be free.

I don't care if you don't like that each person on the internet hasn't been responding to every inane point you've laid out in this thread. When I click on the response box, it doesn't give me a 10 Super-Pedantic-Captcha (TM, patent pending) where I have to go rebut someone else's stupid responses from 3 months ago before I can post what I want. Yet it posts all the same. "Why, no one seems to be convinced by my brilliantly argued points where I picked apart every single word well beyond what was being said? Am I so out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."

Originally Posted by Edward64

Go ahead, start on pg 1 and let me know if you think I initiated the "cowardly" insults. Please quote me specifically where I initiated the insult to him? I'll be waiting

Lol, no, I don't know where you felt you had some perceived insult - they're your receipts, not mine. If you want to go track them down to make your point, then make it. I'm not doing your sea lioning for you. I'll be waiting /s

SI

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Lol, no, I don't know where you felt you had some perceived insult - they're your receipts, not mine. If you want to go track them down to make your point, then make it. I'm not doing your sea lioning for you. I'll be waiting /s
SI

I'll respond to this one first as it's low hanging fruit. You accused me of

I believe that each time this has been cowardly done in the past, each time there has been a need to passive/aggressively insult Flasch as a random defense and get called out, the next post has always been to play the victim.

And I responded with

I've stated before, there has only been one time I remember that I initiated a sarcasm/insult. All the other times, I've responded in kind. Nothing cowardly about that. Nothing passive/aggressive about it when it's done in response to same.

Go ahead, start on pg 1 and let me know if you think I initiated the "cowardly" insults. Please quote me specifically where I initiated the insult to him? I'll be waiting

And you are not willing to back up your claim even though there's 4 pages (and I gave you a hint it started on pg 1).

Let me help you answer the question, see #8 for when the "cowardly" passive/aggressive insults began.

You know all of this and are just Swartzing us. We see it. We know it. But you’re going to 🥨 and that’s ok.

I guess the "cowardly" passive/aggressive insults only are applicable to people that are not part of your bros. Yes, cowardly indeed.

[sterlingice]

As I said, it's an awful defense and listed 4 of the times you used it.

You want to go make the point that every time you did it, you were just doing it because you were insulted and were just responding in kind, that's on you. I'm not the one making that point, you are. So if you're waiting for me to make your points, you're going to be waiting a long time.

SI

[sterlingice]

And, of course, you can bullet point every perceived slight but if it stacks up unfavorably against "well, this bill isn't bad until a 3rd grade teacher dies", it still will sound like an absurd defense. And you may still get called out on it.

SI

[Edward64]

Let me recap what I believe SI's point is. He believes that my key defense argument in support of the bill and counters to Flasch & Miami_Fan is:

What I'm trying to say is that each time this absurd defense is posted, this extremely silo'd way of pretending that's the only yardstick for someone, there's a chance I might respond with illustrating just how absurd it is. Not that he posted numerous paragraphs here, but that the one sentence is taken out of context as some be-all-end-all litmus test.

This is because I bring this up all the time. I do bring it up all the time but the simpleton be-all-end-all is demonstrably false (par for the course) and will rebut below.

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I though the absurd defense was clear: Despite all the posts Flasch has made or miami_fan has made on the first page and going forward, you keep going back to this singular one, like it's the only thing anyone has argued as a potential pitfall when we all know damn well it's not true. I mean, there have been long posts about suicides, driving away qualified teachers, the chilling effect of free speech. But, nope, dead third grade teacher. That's the one that you have repeatedly used as a defense about how absurd other criticisms of the bill are.

At least 4 times now:
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill

Here's been a decent chunk* of the thread for the last couple of pages
Someone: Here's a story about a totally predictable outcome from this bill or one in another state
Edward: But it's not a third grade teacher killed so it's just moving the goalposts

First one, yes I did list it. It was a statement in the second paragraph. First paragraph said below and more evidence the killing of a teacher is not the be-all-end-all litmus test (e.g. I've often mention it will go to the courts).

Did a check and saw below recent article on lawsuit progressing through the system. Good to see the challenges. It's how our system works and we'll see if it stands the test of time and/or law needs finetuning.

Second one was in specific response to your statement where you brought it up. I like to try answer questions specifically and did so. Did you want me to ignore what you brought up?

Third one was specific in response to his quote. He brought it up. I like to try answer questions specifically and did so. Did you want me to ignore what he brought up?

Fourth one. Listed as #4 out of 5 items. Further evidence that your quote below of "be-all-end-all" litmus test is erroneous.

So what is the real list of litmus tests in defense of the law? See below on themes that I have brought up multiple times. Caveat there are likely some more I can quote but did a quick look through.

I certainly think jobs have the right (and is normal) to restrict what a person can say while on the job. You believe this is discriminatory based on sexual preference, but it's not based on how the law is written ... and hence my constant acknowledgement there will be (and should be) legal challenges as situations come up.

The FL law, as written is neutral. In theory, the gay and straight teachers will be allowed to say the same things and restricted in saying the same things.

In practice, we know there will be lawsuits on how the law will be inconsistently applied. I earlier said below and believe ...

As I stated to Lathum in an earlier post, if you do believe "instruct" = "mention", that is the crux of our disagreement and why you believe it is a "don't say gay" bill and I don't. Hopefully it will be resolved soon through school administration (? but probably unlikely) or by the FL courts.

1) There are certain topics, discussions, instructions etc. that should be deferred to parents vs teachers especially to 3rd graders and younger
2) Teachers, as a whole, are no better able/prepared to teach some of these topics, discussions, instructions than parents to their own 3rd graders
:
Question - what qualifications do teachers have to "instruct" outside of the provided curriculum on those topics. Most additional instructions that I've seen my wife get are the 1 day continuing ed (?) classes where most (she says) don't pay attention anyway. Now if the 3rd grade teacher has a specific degree/qualification to teach these subjects, then sure. But suspect they are few and far between.

[quote]

Yes, I'm sure that was brought up over and over again. Just like constant reiteration of:

*There have also been a lot of speculation and dismissal of other consequences, too. The third grade teacher defense isn't the only tool in the tool box, it's just the most absurd.

For example:

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Discussion on FL "Don't Say Gay" bill
Oh my bad. You've also allowed that a Holocaust is also potentially bad. However, if we merely go down the fascism road but stop short of a full on Holocaust or it takes more than 4 years, you said you're owed a mea culpa. I guess if DeSantis doesn't get moving on it, your pizza will be free.

Rounding up Jews is a lot different from the actual Holocaust. The point of distinction is the rounding up of Japanese during WW2. Really bad but not near as bad as the actual Holocaust. I'll let miami_fan chime in if he was really thinking about holocaust but I'm thinking no.

But I get your point. Yes, I do think the fear is alarmist (and yes, Miami_Fan thinks I'm naive). I'll add you to the alarmist category. Let's revisit on Aug 15, 2030 to conclude this part of the discussion.

I don't care if you don't like that each person on the internet hasn't been responding to every inane point you've laid out in this thread. When I click on the response box, it doesn't give me a 10 Super-Pedantic-Captcha (TM, patent pending) where I have to go rebut someone else's stupid responses from 3 months ago before I can post what I want. Yet it posts all the same. "Why, no one seems to be convinced by my brilliantly argued points where I picked apart every single word well beyond what was being said? Am I so out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."

I guess this is where we differ. In a discussion, we go back and forth on our POVs, provide evidence, do point-counterpoint. If all we have is unsupported accusations, innuendos, and refusal to answer questions, then it's not a discussion.

If you don't want to attempt a discussion, feel free to ignore me and spend more time with your bros.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

You want to go make the point that every time you did it, you were just doing it because you were insulted and were just responding in kind, that's on you. I'm not the one making that point, you are. So if you're waiting for me to make your points, you're going to be waiting a long time.

SI

You did call me cowardly (or did I misread that)?

You're right, you did not make the point that I was responding in kind to insults. I was making the point you are calling me cowardly in my sarcasm but give a pass to your bros when they do the same.

Oblivious hypocrisy.

I believe that each time this has been cowardly done in the past, each time there has been a need to passive/aggressively insult Flasch as a random defense and get called out, the next post has always been to play the victim.

[Flasch186]

I just want to add to the moderators I’m not advocating Edward be suspended for a month for calling it like he sees it. I know that I was in the past and it turned out that I was right (no apology needed) but Edward doesn’t need to be. I’m good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Ditto. I'm not calling for SI to be suspended either for being that person:

Just making that clear as I know some non-involved people jump into threads without bothering to read prior posts before making accusations.

Good kumbaya, group hug moment.

[sterlingice]

I'm glad no one is for anyone getting suspended, even if things like fake thread rules or our own opinions are as relevant to FOFC boxings as "I don't think anyone should be suspended for wanting to see Bigfoot fight Nessie".

I mean, I can't think it'd be much of a fight - if it's on land, Bigfoot wins. If it's in the water, look out for Nessie.

SI

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Ditto. I'm not calling for SI to be suspended either for being that person:

Good kumbaya, group hug moment.

BTW, I'm not the big butt, blowhard Teletubbie.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

BTW, I'm not the big butt, blowhard Teletubbie.

Not familiar with that one. Fortunately, I missed Teletubbies. My kid was born long after Jerry Falwell was raining down condemnation on them for their godless ways

SI

[Flasch186]

No way. Someone thinks these extremists will go so far as to attack someone over this stuff? Naw…




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

It's ok. It doesn't matter that he almost died, there were other names on a list, the third ranking official in our government was targeted, or that the right wing ecosystem has warped this as grossly as possible even by their standards.

The courts will work it all out.

[miami_fan]

In their own words.

In Andrew Warren suspension trial, Gov. DeSantis officials answer: What does ‘woke’ mean?

What does “woke” mean?

It’s a question liberals and progressives often would like to ask Republicans, whose ubiquitous use of the term “woke” — a phrase originally used by progressives to signify an awareness of racial and economic injustices endemic to U.S. society — has turned the word into a four-letter pejorative.

During the three-day trial this week challenging Gov. Ron DeSantis’ suspension of Hillsborough County State Attorney Andrew Warren, attorneys for Warren were able to put that question to aides for DeSantis, who called Florida the place where “woke goes to die” in his victory speech after being reelected last month.

Jean-Jacques Cabou, Warren’s attorney, noted DeSantis referred to Warren in his announcement of the suspension as a “woke ideologue” who “masqueraded” as a prosecutor. Then he asked some DeSantis officials what “woke” means to them.

Taryn Fenske, DeSantis’ Communications Director said “woke” was a “slang term for activism … progressive activism” and a general belief in systemic injustices in the country.

Ryan Newman, DeSantis’ General Counsel, echoed the part about systemic injustices, specifically regarding the criminal justice system.

“To me it means someone who believes that there are systemic injustices in the criminal justice system and on that basis they can decline to fully enforce and uphold the law,” Newman said.

Asked what “woke” means more generally, Newman said “it would be the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.”

Newman added that DeSantis doesn’t believe there are systemic injustices in the U.S. He also emphasized he believed Warren’s “wokeism” led him to sign the pledge not to prosecute abortion crimes, the primary factor that led to his suspension.

Using “prosecutorial discretion” to not prosecute an entire class of crimes is a “fundamental misunderstanding” of how a prosecutor’s discretion can be used, Newman said. And that pledge meant that DeSantis had to suspend Warren because DeSantis must ensure the law is enforced.

The trial over Warren’s suspension ended Thursday, and U.S. Judge Robert Hinkle said he will likely take at least two weeks to render a decision in the case. Warren has asked the court to reinstate him because the suspension violated his First Amendment rights.

[JPhillips]

Moore County, NC is without power and likely will be most of the week after substations were shot up in what looks like an attempt to stop a drag story time at a local library.

[RainMaker]

It was a terrorist attack it seems.

[Edward64]

It may be true but prob speculation for now.

During the Sunday news conference, Fields addressed rumors circulating on social media that the attack was an attempt to thwart a local drag show.

Fields said law enforcement is working every angle, but “have not been able to tie anything back to the drag show,” which was scheduled for Saturday night in the nearby town of Southern Pines.

[RainMaker]

The Sheriff is friends with the person who claimed responsibility for the attack. He says he went out and "prayed" with the woman. He's also just calling it vandalism.

I wouldn't look at them for any sort of investigation. It'll be FBI or bust.

[Flasch186]

I’m sure a court can figure out what the negatives are for anything but





We’re only a short time away from an attack on a teacher… maybe not a third grade one though so there’s that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[albionmoonlight]

I know people who literally call themselves communists who do not want as much government interference in our lives as mainstream Republicans do in 2022.

[cuervo72]

Benefits for whom?

[Flasch186]

You know

I mean we’re not going to explicitly say it because if we don’t then you cannot presume anything. We have to go by the absolute written word and cannot view historical intent, connect any dots to past statements etc… we can only go by the exact words above and nothing else (although in other threads and themes we can… just not this one piece of legislation). So we’ll have to wait for a court to sort it out… hopefully before someone dies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

You know

I mean we’re not going to explicitly say it because if we don’t then you cannot presume anything. We have to go by the absolute written word and cannot view historical intent, connect any dots to past statements etc… we can only go by the exact words above and nothing else (although in other threads and themes we can… just not this one piece of legislation). So we’ll have to wait for a court to sort it out… hopefully before someone dies.

I'll assume this is directed to me. If not, just ignore.

I never said we "cannot presume (assume) anything". Please make me eat my words and specifically quote me where I said this. Otherwise, I'll just consider another one of your hyperbolic, over emotional statements.

I did say (paraphrase) regardless of (DeSantis) original intentions, what matters is what was passed in the law. And if not applied consistently, there should be lawsuits to resolve them.

[flere-imsaho]

A bad law, for instance one that favors one class of people over another, should have lawsuits against it, at the very least.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

A bad law, for instance one that favors one class of people over another, should have lawsuits against it, at the very least.

I don't disagree. That is the point of contention here in this thread on Don't Say Gay bill. I contend how it was written does not discriminate based on sexual preference/identity (I've asked for quotes in the law that says otherwise). However, because of lack of clarity/guidance, it is likely to be applied unequally ... hence the lawsuits which will ultimately result in better clarity/guidance.

I'll add to your original point. Even good laws (e.g. depending on your perspective) will likely have lawsuits/legal challenges against it. Affirmative action laws "favors one class of people over another". I'm good with legal challenges that will test and/or fine-tune laws.

[Ksyrup]

The bill sponsor was indicted on PPP loan fraud today.

[Flasch186]

Shocked

Imagine that their word belies their intentions

But

We’re not allowed to base things off of intent. Only the words in writing on something official.

Man what a crazy world we live in where intentions can’t be gauged and used when judging. Extrapolate that out and there’s so much that should be vanilla going forward and in the rear view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flasch186]

Also I can see why the law needed to be passed… I edited the mistake in the news site




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Moore County, NC is without power and likely will be most of the week after substations were shot up in what looks like an attempt to stop a drag story time at a local library.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shootin...o-station/#app

An individual opened fire near a Duke Energy facility at Wateree Hydro Station in Ridgeway, South Carolina, on Wednesday, CBS News has learned.

According to multiple sources, the individual pulled up in a truck outside the facility around 5:30 p.m. ET before opening fire, using what appeared to be a long gun, and then speeding away. Several Duke Energy employees witnessed the event. No one was injured. It was not immediately clear how many people were in the truck.

A law enforcement official confirmed to CBS News that shots were apparently fired. In a statement to CBS News, Duke Energy said it is working "closely" with the FBI to investigate the issue.

[miami_fan]

We can't say we have not been warned.

Neo-Nazis Say Attack Leaving 40,000 Americans in Dark Is Only the Beginning

[Flasch186]

But did they attack a teacher?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I never said we "cannot presume (assume) anything". Please make me eat my words and specifically quote me where I said this. Otherwise, I'll just consider another one of your hyperbolic, over emotional statements.

No answer.

No problem, I'll just add it to the list of unanswered questions. I think there was at least one more in another thread, I'll see if I can dig that up.

Just in case our discussion comes up again, and for ease of reference, I'll post the outstanding questions I'm waiting from you on.

1) Do you believe that "instruct" = "mention". An example is a gay teacher introduces his gay spouse as his husband and you believe can get reprimanded/fired. I'm pretty sure from your posts above the answer is yes, but want to establish a clear baseline now. - Ans: Yes

2) The bill deals with 3rd graders and below. Why do you believe teachers are better than parents in discussing "sexual orientation or gender identity" topics with their 3rd grader?

3) I can extrapolate what you mean by gaslighting. But still waiting on goal post moving

4) Can you provide a similar example in recent times (let's since 2000's) of a gay 3rd grade teacher who was murdered because of teaching/instructing a child? Ans - unsure, below is prob hedging bets and moving the goal posts from the orig statement

5) Please provide your quote where you have previously told me this? I honestly don't see it in prior posts re: "I’ve already described how people will die"

6) What does E have to do a mea culpa on re: https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/13/polit...nda/index.html - Ans: Not expecting E to do a mea culpa right now

New!

7) I never said we "cannot presume (assume) anything". Please make me eat my words and specifically quote me where I said this.

[Flasch186]

Because it’s a waste of energy

Don’t take this the wrong way and I don’t mean to offend but you are a vampire of energy and I just won’t give it to you any more. That’s all. You might be a nice guy in real life. I don’t know but I think you are but most of these threads over the last year have been dominated by Edward updates that remind me of someone that just likes to hear themselves talk. Sometimes I appreciate them and sometimes they seem self aggrandizing. Either way it’s cool. I’m just not going to get sucked into the back and forth chase of the smoke watching the goal posts move around all of the time. perhaps someone else will. I just reclaimed my time that you had taken from things far more important to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Okay. I'll just take that as a "no answers forthcoming".

I'll keep on adding to the list when the next time happens for audit purposes.

[Flasch186]

Such self restraint the attacker had in not going after the ‘local professor’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e_iOSApp_Other

It’s inevitable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Will wait.

4) Can you provide a similar example in recent times (let's since 2000's) of a gay 3rd grade teacher who was murdered because of teaching/instructing a child? Ans - unsure, below is prob hedging bets and moving the goal posts from the orig statement and (recent unilateral update) to "local professor" (college?) vs elementary school teacher.

[miami_fan]

AG Ken Paxton’s office sought state data on transgender Texans | The Texas Tribune

I guess I am supposed to give the governor the benefit of the doubt in this request.

[sterlingice]

I'm sure they were just going to contact them to give them cool looking pink and blue stars

SI

[Flasch186]

Ridiculous to feel terrified, no one’s showed up at their door and it’s not like they’re a teacher



Silly people worried that they might be attacked by a zealot following a leader’s fire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flasch186]

Ohhhhhhh just read up on Pelosi’s attack

My bad


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Radii]

We need to get more comfortable using the term genocide here.

[Flasch186]

Unbelievable that these journalists would link all of these separate pieces of legislation under some umbrella agenda when we know that each one is separate, not linked at all, and unique while certainly not reflective of anything other than what’s written on the four corners of the page.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e_iOSApp_Other


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[miami_fan]

I know, I know. Don't compare anything to the Holocaust. But damn, if you just replace the references to Jews and Judaism with um... those people who are supposed to be eradicated? Yeah if you subbed in those people, we are getting there right?

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/conte...wish-neighbors

BTW, the people described at the bottom. Those are that day's version of "woke", correct?