- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:24 pm to NoHoTiger
quote:
It probably does if you read the opinion or are an attorney, but the general public reading the title, "Supreme Court Narrowly Rules" is going to assume that the VOTE was narrow not the scope.
The wording of the title is disingenuous.
People are fricking morons.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:25 pm to FT
quote:
What are you talking about? You’re arguing against a point I didn’t make,
False
This post was edited on 6/4/18 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:25 pm to FT
quote:
Dress codes and some reasonable age limits for high scale restaurants is fine. You’d probably need a law to enforce it, and reasonable judges to see it through
Oh boy. More government!!!!!!
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:26 pm to ShortyRob
At what point did I say that businesses open to the public should have an option regarding who they serve?
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:26 pm to FT
quote:
At what point did I say that businesses open to the public should have an option regarding who they serve?
You didn't
Read better
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:29 pm to brian_wilson
quote:
People are fricking morons.
People are absolutely morons which is why it's easy to manipulate them with titles of articles knowing they either aren't going to read the article or understand the implications or nuances discussed within.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:29 pm to ShortyRob
You’re assuming future bad faith without any evidence of it.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:30 pm to FT
quote:
’re assuming future bad faith without any evidence of it.
Do you not currently support a party....... and recently support a candidate 100% dedicated to continuing that bad faith?
That's what i thought
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:31 pm to crazycubes
quote:
SCOTUS Says You Don't Have To Bake That Gay Cake
Gays BTFD! How will Toddy ever recover?
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:33 pm to FT
quote:
Dress codes and some reasonable age limits for high scale restaurants is fine. You’d probably need a law to enforce it, and reasonable judges to see it through.
What new laws should be implemented and why would any judges need to get involved
Restaurant is 21 and up. Don't meet the criteria you get turned away at the door.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:35 pm to FT
quote:He tends to do that.
What are you talking about? You’re arguing against a point I didn’t make, and you’re very angry about it.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:36 pm to NoHoTiger
quote:
People are absolutely morons which is why it's easy to manipulate them with titles of articles knowing they either aren't going to read the article or understand the implications or nuances discussed within.
So article titles should be worded for morons?
Btw, even the president didn't understand what narrowly meant.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:37 pm to ShortyRob
What in the world does that have to do with this conversation?
Defend libertarianism or don’t. I’m not going to keep replying to sidetracking.
Defend libertarianism or don’t. I’m not going to keep replying to sidetracking.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:41 pm to FT
quote:
What in the world does that have to do with this conversation?
Defend libertarianism or don’t. I’m not going to keep replying to sidetracking.
I don't think it's really that productive to have discussions defending or attacking a particular ideology.
Why not address each issue as individually as you can?
If you can't do that, then are you really even thinking for yourself at all or just pimping for a party?
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:45 pm to crazycubes
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:45 pm to brian_wilson
quote:
So article titles should be worded for morons?
No. Just don't make them disingenuous.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:45 pm to Powerman
Libertarianism is an ideology far more than being a Democrat or Republican is.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:49 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
It's wishful thinking when the interpretation differs from yours?
No, I’ve been involved (as an attorney) in too many court cases to pretend that things are often black and white.
What I am saying is that this board is generally no intersted in arguing the actual details and issues surrounding a case. They want to read it to mean what they wish for and that’s it.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:50 pm to FT
quote:
Libertarianism is an ideology far more than being a Democrat or Republican is.
Right. And as such some people might gravitate more toward some ideals of the libertarian platform.
Pretending that someone has to be 100% lock step in favor of all libertarian policy philosophy to identify as libertarian leaning is a bit silly.
You're asking people to defend something that they don't necessarily even like. I'm "libertarian" on issues involving personal freedom and I think the libertarian party is stupid.
Page 13 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News