User Profile: zapparules


Member Since: September 24, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • September 30, 2014 at 1:55pm

    Once again you offer a disingenuous / failed argument.
    There are indeed ‘trade-offs’ associated with everything we do.
    Simply highlighting POSSIBLE shortcomings of such a program does not make the (your?) alternative any better / Does not make the bag ban the wrong move.

    With proper forest management, the generation of paper products CAN be an effective and ‘green’ alternative.

    “forced to buy”
    Please clarify. Are you saying shoppers MUST purchase bags if they don’t have their own? (I guess since folks can be forced to buy health insurance they can be forced to buy anything else.)

    And so because a product is made in another country – another country which apparently you are admitting uses very pollutive coal and causing a huge carbon footprint – does not necessarily mean the production and use of those reusable bags is worse than the production and use of plastic bags.

    Really it is rather interesting to see that not only do you not justify with specifics why you contend that the production and use of reusable bags is worse than for plastic bags BUT… You TRY and use the green argument of dirty coal and carbon footprint – two ‘green elements’ that you would otherwise dismiss.
    So are you truly concerned about the use of dirty coal and are you truly concerned about carbon footprints OR… Are you just trying to USE the terms to TRY and dismiss another green issue you disagree with?

    SOME Republicans are against plastic bags too – you know???

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] September 30, 2014 at 1:22pm

    Then again…
    Maybe he can do what he did.
    Near end of this story… “Invocations aren’t specifically mentioned in the rules, though Mike Pereira, former vice-president of officiating in the National Football League, tweeted last year that players are “not penalized for going to the ground to give praise after a [touchdown].”

    My apologies for ‘jumping on’ you IronPatriot1993.

    Just to offer my take on this…
    As long as the display isn’t “excessive” and that “excessive” is well defined… I am fine with VERY brief displays of faith or ‘self congratulations’.

    And then just to also give my two cents worth on IronPatriot1993′s contention that: “Tim Tebow knelt before the real God after a good game and he gets drummed out of the NFL? Really???”
    NO. NOT really.
    Tebow was NOT drummed out of the NFL because of his religious beliefs or displays. He couldn’t play the game. THAT’S why he is gone from the NFL.

    Also IronPatriot1993…
    So do you believe this player Husain Abdullah wants to kill non-Muslims? That’s certainly what you seemed to imply.
    Maybe you would have the nerve to ask this player himself about his religious beliefs.
    I’d like to see that – and THAT is the truth.

  • [-1] September 30, 2014 at 12:54pm

    “I’m not trying to force someone to buy into a philosophy and worldview they don’t agree with and find contrary to their religious conscience.”
    YES – that is EXACTLY what you are doing.

    Let me please TRY and clarify.
    IF you think others – gays and those who support them – are trying to do this to you then you are in turn doing the very same to them.
    How so?
    Because you are wrong to think this is about trying to force someone to buy into a philosophy.
    Well then again…
    Maybe EQUALITY is a philosophy – ???

    (More to come – I hope – Gotta RUN…)

  • [-1] September 30, 2014 at 12:49pm

    I wonder after how many ‘refusal of services’ you would finally get fed up with being treated unequally. My guess is it wouldn’t take long at all.
    You’re refused a loan – or refused a loan at a rate any other individual or business would get – because of your ‘orientation’ / faith beliefs…
    You brush it off.
    Your family finds a dream home but is refused entry because of the (religious) ‘standards’ of a certain home association…
    Maybe the frustration starts to build.
    A loved one is in the hospital and, while perhaps the hospital treates your loved one… Because you are of a certain orientation or religious faith… You aren’t allowed visitation rights.
    Me thinks the fury would begin to boil over.
    You think NOW that such actions are “perfectly within their power and rights to make”.
    Try living your entire life – every day of your life – having to deal with such and then tell me how you wouldn’t sue (or take other action) for change.

    Some of you folks have NO CLUE what it is like to be treated like a second-class citizen your entire life.
    You THINK its about a cake – or about putting a single intolerant business out of business…
    So clueless.
    “I’m not trying to force someone to buy into a philosophy and worldview they don’t agree with and find contrary to their religious conscience.”
    YES – that is EXACTLY what you are doing.

    “I have more tolerance of those different from me than some do, I suppose”
    Keep telling yourself that if you feel better.

  • [-2] September 30, 2014 at 12:37pm

    So you know the true intentions of the gay couple in this case? Your comment suggests that you do.

    I will not even attempt to speak for them but… In NO WAY did I want to see this bakery shut down. Also, I am curious as to just how this gay couple or a legal ruling actually – directly – caused the bakery to shut.
    Was it because of legal expenses? (Were not some of you folks financially supporting them?)
    I don’t know the intricate details / specifics but… I would hardly think a legal ruling would have caused this bakery to close. Now if the owners FELT they could not – in ‘good conscience’ continue to operate their business if they were forced to serve gays – well…. That’s a decision by the business owners. that’s not being forced to close by the gay couple in the case, the people that supported the gay couple, or the legal system. Besides. This story said they are now operating out of their home so… Just HOW and WHY did this woman lose her shop?

    No cosette. I will not apologize to you. You made generalizations and/or baseless assumptions and have failed to either support or retract them so…

    God didn’t write our Constitution. Man did. Man is fallible.
    I do NOT hold the constitution in contempt – I simply understand that it is a less-than-perfect document – and those who (are required to) interpret it – into law – are also less-than-perfect.

    I also don’t need ANY document to tell me inequality is wrong.

  • [-1] September 30, 2014 at 12:25pm

    Are you still here?

  • [-1] September 30, 2014 at 12:23pm

    So foo’s argument FOR inequality is that… Hey. They are but a tiny minority. In no way should such a small (law-abiding) minority be able to demand equal treatment by a business operating in the public marketplace.

  • [-3] September 30, 2014 at 11:29am

    Unable to dispute or counter or respond to what I offer… and so you try all that is left – eh?

  • [-2] September 30, 2014 at 11:27am

    Please explain intimidation through the legal system.
    Was / is / are cases like this being tossed out – by ANY judges? (So it appears they aren’t being considered ‘frivolous’ by any judges.)

    What other recourse – against a perceived wrong – would you suggest – in this or other similar cases?

    “Would I be justified in seeking legal action against a Muslim owned restaurant for not cooking me pork?”
    If they refused to serve YOU such because of their / your religious beliefs then… YES!!!!
    If the Muslim owned restaurant did not server port to ANY AND ALL of its customers – just as a Jewish deli may serve just Kosher food to ANY AND ALL customers then… No. That is fine because ALL customers are being treated equally.

    Are any of you FINALLY getting this???

  • [-6] September 30, 2014 at 11:23am

    You obviously know NOTHING about me.
    I had / have my own small businesses – have worked in other small businesses – have worked in large corporations.
    What’s your point about that?

    With your showing of utter (childish) ignorance and intolerance towards gays I care not to carry on any discussion with someone like you.
    You may be repulsed but… You yourself are repulsive as well.
    I feel sorry for anyone who has to come in contact / deal with you in any way.
    Good day.

  • [-4] September 30, 2014 at 11:17am

    So you seek a respectful dialogue now – after you started with: “Because lib-progs are all about vindictiveness.”
    No. liberals / progressives are NOT all about vindictiveness.
    If you care to reconsider such an erroneous generalization…

    You offer nothing of substance to support your initial contentions that… “lib-progs are all about vindictiveness.”
    That… “These people couldn’t care less about acquiring a service”
    First. Just who are “these people”?
    Secondly. Most all – that I know – who are against the unequal treatment of gays as shown by this bakery are NOT concerned JUST about acquiring a product / service – that could be gotten elsewhere. THAT is not the issue. What IS the issue is that they would have to even think about having to go elsewhere. It’s about a FULL EXPECTATION of FULL EQUALITY when you walk into ANY place of public business.

    You impugn your own lack of integrity. I did nothing but point it out.

  • [-4] September 30, 2014 at 11:08am

    No. I do not believe the Constitution to be THE “supreme document”.
    Do YOU think the Constitution is infallible?
    Do you think interpretation of it is infallible? You do realize it must be interpreted by someone / some group? So how do you judge if those interpretations are ‘accurate’ or erroneous? (By if you agree with them?)

  • [-2] September 30, 2014 at 11:05am

    So you think a same-sex owned business should be able to refuse business to any heterosexual based solely on that issue of sexual orientation?

    That’s really pretty amazing to hear.
    And then add that such (in your case / the bakery case) is founded on religious belief. So… You’d be fine with say a Muslim cab driver refusing to pickup any Christians? Or… A Jewish deli refusing Christians service – ALL based solely on religious belief – ???

    So where does that end?

    Are you trying to equate Sunday operations to inequality? When you are closed Sunday you are closed to ALL customers.

    “If you don’t like what I have to offer in my business then you should find another place to go.”
    It’s not a matter of what you have to offer – its WHO you offer it to.
    Again, should a Jewish deli be able to refuse Christians service – ALL based solely on religious belief – ???

    As a public business… the law-abiding public customer gets to come into your store and expect service – NOT ‘segmented’ refusal of service because of religious beliefs. If one operates in the public market then ALL customers are to be treated equally. (Otherwise. go operate a private, segregated gold club or something similar.)

    Please explain: “We (all people – even small business owners) should have equal rights, but this shows that we do not.”
    How does this show we do not have equal rights?

    Would you like to see signs in store windows: ‘Gays not served here’
    Christians not served here – ???

  • [-7] September 30, 2014 at 10:15am

    Religious rights do NOT give one the legal authority to discriminate in their public business operations.

    Shall we allow Muslim cab drivers to refuse Christians a ride – based on religious beliefs?

  • [-4] September 30, 2014 at 10:11am

    I did not say there was not fear.
    I did not say SOME do not hold the positions this woman has said.
    What I did say was I do not believe the two points she offered are HUGE cultural lies.
    From my personal experiences… MOST people do NOT believe that “if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them,”
    And MOST people that I have encountered do NOT believe “that to love someone means that you must agree with everything they believe or do.”
    Most all people I know DO believe that if one thinks that way… Such is nonsense.

    From an entire segment of the society?
    An ENTIRE segment?
    Which segment?
    And you base that on what?

    And then PLEASE DO TELL how I approve – in any way – “the vengeful and illegal response from [SOME of] the LGBT community”
    I STRONGLY CONDEMN vengeful and illegal responses to this woman’s decision to treat some people unequally because of their sexual orientation.

    THIS particular baker – like any and ALL bakers – HAD TO / has to offer and provide its product / service to any / all customers in the same manner. Legally, she can not discriminate based on sexual orientation. (Or at least such has been ruled on in some states.)

  • [1] September 30, 2014 at 9:57am

    Any ruling on such could be very simple.
    Define “excessive celebration”

  • [-4] September 30, 2014 at 9:56am

    Sounds like you are really bitter against this league.
    Care to share the details of why?

    Responses (2) +
  • [1] September 30, 2014 at 9:45am

    Did you actually read the story?
    His actions resulted in a flag – so NO – he cannot ‘pray’ in such a manner.

    Good golly.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-5] September 30, 2014 at 9:42am

    You make me laugh foo.
    I’ll be sure to share that one with my wife and son.

  • September 30, 2014 at 9:40am

    Do they provide product / service to any/all ‘other’ religious ceremonies?

    Like if a Jewish store just carries Kosher foods… That is fine. They are offering those foods to ALL their customers. But if they were to refuse to sell their product to but a certain customer base…

123 To page: Go