DOMA & Prop 8 Topic

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2013 11:01:00 AM (view original):
Laws are part of the discrimination.  

Let's just point out a simple one.   I can walk around without a shirt in public pretty much anywhere.   Women cannot.   Wouldn't that be discrimination?   Would we be better off if women's titties were flopping around anywhere they chose?
There's actually a push right now to change that. Several jurisdictions already allow women to be topless anywhere that it is legal for men to be topless.

I know I've said this before, but just because we have stupid, discriminatory laws related to X, doesn't mean we can't work to reverse stupid, discriminatory laws related to Y. 
6/13/2013 11:13 AM
I aware of the proposed changes.   

But I'm asking you a couple of questions.

Is it discrimination?
Would our society be better off with women's **** on full display anywhere you can flash your manboobs? 
6/13/2013 11:20 AM
I know I've said this before, but just because we have stupid, discriminatory laws related to X, doesn't mean we can't work to reverse stupid, discriminatory laws related to Y.

So the only "stupid, discriminatory laws" we should ever change are the ones where a group using propaganda will convince the government and society to go along with their bull **** agenda?

Great. I guess if MikeT23 and I want women to have equal rights to not wear a shirt, we should start a propaganda campaign, lie and tell everyone it's a necessary thing because women's titties need sunshine or something of the sort, and say it's natural and to not allow it is discrimination. If we're successful, several years from now there should be a whole big *** movement of people who agree with the bull **** we've spouted and then change will occur.

At least, that's according to the BL theory on how "stupid, discriminatory laws" are changed.
6/13/2013 1:10 PM (edited)
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2013 11:20:00 AM (view original):
I aware of the proposed changes.   

But I'm asking you a couple of questions.

Is it discrimination?
Would our society be better off with women's **** on full display anywhere you can flash your manboobs? 
Yes, it's discrimination.
6/13/2013 11:28 AM
That was one answer.   Care to field the 2nd question?
6/13/2013 11:28 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2013 11:28:00 AM (view original):
That was one answer.   Care to field the 2nd question?
Ok sure. Better off.
6/13/2013 11:33 AM
Please have a point. This is boring.
6/13/2013 11:33 AM
I'm glad to know it's boring ignoring the questions I pose to you because you don't have a good answer for them.
6/13/2013 11:39 AM
I think you and I both know that society would not be better off.    Titties are distracting to virtually every male on earth.   We would be unable to NOT look.  Our wives would be quite unhappy with us.  So we'd have a society full of males who are less productive and a society full of females who are angry with their husbands.  Perhaps, over the course of time, we'd get accustomed to seeing titties non-stop and things would change.  But the immediate effect would be bad.

Now to move on to more complicated "discriminatory laws" ex-cons have many restrictions placed on them upon their release.   We like to yammer on about "paid his debt to society", "second chances" and the like.   But, if we say "You can't do this, you can't own that, etc, etc", are we discriminating?   After all, doesn't everyone deserve a second chance after they've paid their debt to society?

Sex offenders have it even worse.   They have to register on a site for all to see.   If this guy is a risk to molest 9 year olds again, should he be on the street?   Or, if he's paid his debt to society, shouldn't he get his 2nd chance without the world knowing exactly where he lives?

The simple fact of the matter is that we have discriminatory laws for the betterment of society.   Lots of them.
6/13/2013 11:41 AM
Titties would not be distracting to the homosexuals that bad_luck is fighting for.

Maybe that's why he doesn't see bare-breasted women on every street corner as a problem in society.
6/13/2013 11:53 AM
Well, maybe ithey would be distracting to the lesbos.  I shouldn't forget about them.
6/13/2013 11:54 AM
Never forget the lesbos. 
6/13/2013 11:59 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
I think you and I both know that society would not be better off.    Titties are distracting to virtually every male on earth.   We would be unable to NOT look.  Our wives would be quite unhappy with us.  So we'd have a society full of males who are less productive and a society full of females who are angry with their husbands.  Perhaps, over the course of time, we'd get accustomed to seeing titties non-stop and things would change.  But the immediate effect would be bad.

Now to move on to more complicated "discriminatory laws" ex-cons have many restrictions placed on them upon their release.   We like to yammer on about "paid his debt to society", "second chances" and the like.   But, if we say "You can't do this, you can't own that, etc, etc", are we discriminating?   After all, doesn't everyone deserve a second chance after they've paid their debt to society?

Sex offenders have it even worse.   They have to register on a site for all to see.   If this guy is a risk to molest 9 year olds again, should he be on the street?   Or, if he's paid his debt to society, shouldn't he get his 2nd chance without the world knowing exactly where he lives?

The simple fact of the matter is that we have discriminatory laws for the betterment of society.   Lots of them.
1) Why ask if you have already decided what the answer is?

2) I disagree. I think giving women the same freedoms that men enjoy would be good for society. It really wouldn't change much because most women still wouldn't go topless and if men can't control themselves, that's their problem.

3) Ex-cons. I'm sure some laws are unfairly discriminatory (voting laws, for example). I'm sure some are discriminatory but well reasoned (gun laws, for example). We should probably work on eliminating the unfairly discriminatory laws.

4) sex offenders. Yes the laws are discriminatory, but there is supposedly a purpose (registering/tracking sex offenders is supposed to make it easy to prevent further assaults).

What's the purpose in prohibiting gay marriage? Please answer this as I've answered every single one of your inane questions.
6/13/2013 12:14 PM
1)  Because you were being dishonest.
2)  Men can't control themselves around titties.  It's just a fact.    A bunch of topless women would make it society's problem.
3)  Probably?   What if they were gay ex-cons?  Would we definitely need to work on eliminating the unfairly disciminatory laws?
4)  Why shouldn't we "probably" work on eliminating the unfairly disciminatory laws when it comes to sex offenders?

We have 180+ pages of that answer.   Pick a number and go to that page.
6/13/2013 12:19 PM
You have never answered. What is the purpose of preventing gay marriage?
6/13/2013 12:27 PM
◂ Prev 1...187|188|189|190|191...358 Next ▸
DOMA & Prop 8 Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.