Search results

No spam no links You're welcome

sheesh what a muddled load of emotional ranting clap trap. Which is a beside the point irrelevant question to which I already gave a corresponding answer . What you can't do is deal with the main point because you've said you don't care about it. For fucks sake!! To summarize then. You...

To be clear then, what you're saying is, you said I used the word illegal when I didn't. Thanks but that was already clear enough. I keep telling you what the point is because YOUR fucking point is irrelevant to the point. Objecting to religiously based institutionalized prejudice, getting...

So because you FEEL that way, you falsly inserted the word 'illegal' though I never mentioned it and continued to FEEL I have a position, which has been explained I don't. Brilliant. Apparently your FEELINGS are very slow to adjust according to the facts. sheesh at last!! THAT is the issue...

I know you haven't, that's why you're misdirecting the argument for christ sakes and is exactly why you have been completely missing the point, talking about free speech all the time. WTF!? Just because you have been saying 'Freedom of Speech' from the start, doesn't mean it is not a...

The answer then is no, you don't get it. When, if you can ever, grasp that this was never about your misdirect freedom of speech, let me know. Then maybe you can make some progress.

For goodness sake. It is NOT about the right to mandate meetings, NOR is it about the right to say what they want in any obligatory assemblies they hold, though as an aside, let me answer your beside the point question with another beside the point question. You think if a church school or any...

Dear me! Seriously, how many times? I understand you keep tying to insist the point is not about what the catholic school said, but their right to say it. You apparently still can't appreciate they are two distinct things and focusing only on the latter as you are, does not remove...

That's ridiculous. I've done nothing but address you. Pupils/children/ teenagers, why are you now trying to wiggle around with semantics? There were personal attacks. They were explained in many articles and recounted by one of the pupils who objected and was supported by her father...

I've already covered all those points. You're not making sense. You might as well be defending the ignorant crass objectionable comment Akin made because it's only a few other people's opinion that it was an ignorant crass objectionable comment and anyway, Akin has free speech! You're...

made What you mean is, it doesn't matter that I didn't actually say illegal. It's that you've decided I said illegal when I didn't, and I implied something I do not. The school is an entity. It is controlled by its owners/executive. School governor's, making decisions on how the school will...

summed yourself up rather neatly right there

AS a presumably rational adult you really shouldn't be struggling this hard. Irrespective of free speech, the catholic school's sermonizing was intolerant. It's that simple. By the reaction it got it was also unexpected. To avoid admitting it, you first said I said things I haven't...

Nobody is saying they weren't within their rights to hold mandatory meetings. How many strawmen are you going to build in order to dodge around the fact that above all, that catholic school made intolerant discriminatory abusive speech to children. You religious apologists make me laugh...

You are completely missing the point. The argument is not about the right of free speech or freedom of, or freedom from religion. Hence my response to illustrate that. Obviously it wasn't clear enough. The issue is a catholic school was intolerant and discriminating against its pupils...

Yes I disagree with you, and I might just as well say freedom from religious belief is protected under the 1st as much as you say religious belief is protected. First, the catholic school was being intolerant, THEN it might well be argued whether they should be allowed (why did you mention...

Look, what is it you can't get about intolerance? Whether it's a catholic school or some other bigoted institution or person voicing an opinion which discriminates against ethnicity/race, sex or age, it is still intolerance. The fact that in that case it was a religious private school does...

Oh sure, "I disagree" is never intolerant, but should "I disgree" be followed by the word religion in any shape or form, then suddenly all of a sudden, there's intolerance.

Do you really think objecting to catholic schools subjecting children to bigoted and hateful opinion by way of mandatory assembly is itself being intolerant? You think intolerance is ok when it's in the name of religious belief !?

It doesn't matter what you equate. Discrimination because of a prejudice or bigotry against color/race, sex or age is discrimination, whether or not you personally consider any of them to be perverted or not.