Phx-Suns.Net

Indy wrote:You know what sucks about Tapatalk? Almost nothing. But it doesn't recognize that it should hide posts from blocked posters in the "unread" thread. Damn, things were so nice for a while. SDC, why does that not surprise me.

Dan H wrote:http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/01/st ... f-nothing/

Be tolerant or burn.

I find your insistence that this whole issue (which is just as much about the Constitution as your constant crusade for gun rights) is a distraction from real issues and nothing more than "hysteria" to be highly at odds with your continued posting of right-wing articles covering the topic. And mostly pure fluff, too...there is a little bit of merit in this article about the pizza joint, but really that story is about journalistic integrity in small town news, and I think it is more of a distraction from the actual Indiana law and issue of LGBT equality than the issue of LGBT equality is distracting from "real issues."

SDC wrote:this is one issue where i side with the muslims.

Considering you usually seem to equate "the Muslims" with the terrorists, and knowing what the terrorists do to gay people, you are a particularly disgusting person to me today.

Ghost wrote:

Dan H wrote:http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/01/st ... f-nothing/

Be tolerant or burn.

I find your insistence that this whole issue (which is just as much about the Constitution as your constant crusade for gun rights) is a distraction from real issues and nothing more than "hysteria" to be highly at odds with your continued posting of right-wing articles covering the topic. And mostly pure fluff, too...there is a little bit of merit in this article about the pizza joint, but really that story is about journalistic integrity in small town news, and I think it is more of a distraction from the actual Indiana law and issue of LGBT equality than the issue of LGBT equality is distracting from "real issues."

Just a little bit of merit, huh?

So a member of the press comes into your place of work, asks you your opinion on a controversial topic, you provide it. They report it in an inflammatory way, and suddenly you're the target of death and arson threats? What is that, if not hysteria?

Death threats and stalking by a group of gamers is worthy of painting an entire group of fandom with GamerGate, but the same toward a pizzeria that took no action and merely offered their opinion is just slightly concerning? Wow. Wow.

People are rightly up in arms about this bill, but the actions of a vocal few are making you guys look very, very bad. Do we really want to play the mob-rule game?

BTW, I don't have to crusade for gun rights. The trends of the last decade and recent court decisions are on my side, much like gay marriage. The funny thing is I suspect I'm probably more okay with gay marriage than some of y'all are with gun rights. Interesting, that.

this is one issue where i side with the muslims.

Yeah, I got nothing for this. That adds nothing to the conversation.

That adds nothing to the conversation.

Except hatred and disgust.

Dan H wrote: Just a little bit of merit, huh?

So a member of the press comes into your place of work, asks you your opinion on a controversial topic, you provide it. They report it in an inflammatory way, and suddenly you're the target of death and arson threats? What is that, if not hysteria?

Death threats and stalking by a group of gamers is worthy of painting an entire group of fandom with GamerGate, but the same toward a pizzeria that took no action and merely offered their opinion is just slightly concerning? Wow. Wow.

Your comment about hysteria was in reference to the proposed change to the law itself, strongly implying that you were using "hysteria" to refer to the actual debate about the law. That is where I take issue. You said that well before posting the other article.

I think the reaction by the Internet dwellers to the pizzeria issue is disgusting, of course. In all cases, responding to something you disagree with by harassing people online and threatening them is completely, 100% wrong. But, it also happens regarding just about every issue that ever comes up in today's world. I am quite certain that any article you post about potential gun control results in just as much ugliness online from the right. Hell, I remember a lot of that happening after Gabby Giffords, who supports gun ownership and has said so many times over, mentioned something to the effect that gun control is important and we need to reconsider how we are handling it (I do not recall exactly what she said, and it's not important so I'm not looking it up).

I have watched the original report on Memories Pizza, and read the accompanying article on the news site. And while it is hardly unbiased, it is also hardly inflammatory. In fact, they seemed rather happy to have a chance to speak their minds, although they would not have been expecting the over the top reaction. It was a public opinion piece, which is pretty common and not as cheap as the article you provided suggests.

Gamergate was a VERY extreme case of this, an ongoing campaign of harassment that started as a few trolls upset (for no reason) that Zoe Quinn's game was getting "too much attention" and then developed into a full-blown assault on her and others that lasted two years (and is probably still ongoing). It's not an apples to apples comparison, but regardless, it was a big story because the Gamergater trolls made it a big story.

I don't condone either group of trolls. But if we have to talk about the trolls every time a controversial topic comes up, the conversation will not go very far, because they are around for literally every issue that comes up. In fact, I would expect that the right wing troll backlash against the reporter, Alyssa Marino, is happening somewhere. I'd guess it's the usual death and rape threats, probably with a few for arson just to balance things out...I don't plan on seeking these out, but I'll let you know when they stumble across my lefty news feed.

People are rightly up in arms about this bill, but the actions of a vocal few are making you guys look very, very bad. Do we really want to play the mob-rule game?

BTW, I don't have to crusade for gun rights. The trends of the last decade and recent court decisions are on my side, much like gay marriage. The funny thing is I suspect I'm probably more okay with gay marriage than some of y'all are with gun rights. Interesting, that.

Well, if you want to associate ME with the vocal few trolls and say that I somehow look bad because of what they are doing...OK, I guess I can't stop you. Hardly fair, since I don't do that to you, and I think we're both intelligent enough to realize the difference between disagreeing and acting like a complete shithead troll from the bowels of 4chan.

And I think you say that because you conflate gun control with infringing on gun ownership...but let's save that discussion for another thread. I have to actually get some work done today.

I say you guys as in opponents of the bill, not saying that you were personally involved in the pizzeria incident. Thanks for being a bit more clear about your personal opposition, most of what I've seen is "pizza lady was asking for it" or she deserves it because he hurt their feelings. Don't know how hurt feelings merit arson and death threats, but whatevs.

And now, after the bill has been amended, we're moving the goalposts.

http://www.indystar.com/story/money/201 ... /70824960/

Nobody here would defend violence or threats against the homophobic pizza place.

I agree with the first part, I don't know that I agree with 'homophobic' as an apt description.

Dan H wrote:I agree with the first part, I don't know that I agree with 'homophobic' as an apt description.

They openly admitted they wouldn't serve homosexuals if it was for their wedding, but would if they came to eat at their restaurant. If they aren't homophobic, they certainly are hypocritical. I would say it is a bit of both. Maybe you and I disagree on what is homophobic versus... whatever you want to call saying that gay people shouldn't be allowed the same freedoms/rights/privileges as non-gays.

I think it's time that a lot of words just need to be understood to mean more than their root terms would otherwise indicate. Homophobia may literally mean "afraid of homosexuals," but the reality is that it means "biased against homosexuals." That's just how it's used. I'm also tired of those accused of being racist for being anti-Islam having the leeway to say "how can I be racist when Islam isn't a race?" Because there is no better word for it, that's why. It's the wrong word, but "anti-Arab" isn't right either, and neither is "Islamophobe," and after that we run out of descriptions that are easy to throw into a sentence without making it unreadable.

Semantics is very important, and it makes communication possible, but it also can be a crippling tool to use when some people refuse to accept that communication is a two way street, where half of the work is on the person receiving the message trying to make at least a good-faith effort to understand what the person delivering it meant.

I say you guys as in opponents of the bill, not saying that you were personally involved in the pizzeria incident.

Having just said what I said, I freely admit that I was wrongly putting words in your mouth with the "you guys" thing. It's an easy trap to fall into, even though I know you didn't actually mean me.

Ghost wrote:

SDC wrote:this is one issue where i side with the muslims.

Considering you usually seem to equate "the Muslims" with the terrorists, and knowing what the terrorists do to gay people, you are a particularly disgusting person to me today.

you made a leap there, andy. but there are muslim terrorists out there. in my part of the world, at least...

as for disgusting, most countries in the world dont have gay marriage laws or believe in them. keep your smug liberal attitude to yourself buddy.

Indy wrote:

That adds nothing to the conversation.

Except hatred and disgust.

supporting RFRA is "hatred" and "disgust"? 20 other states have the same laws. try repealing them first in blue states.

Mori Chu wrote:Nobody here would defend violence or threats against the homophobic pizza place.

if you dont believe in gay marriage, you're homophobic? only in murica.

Indy wrote:

Dan H wrote:I agree with the first part, I don't know that I agree with 'homophobic' as an apt description.

They openly admitted they wouldn't serve homosexuals if it was for their wedding, but would if they came to eat at their restaurant. If they aren't homophobic, they certainly are hypocritical.

no, it's consistent. they'll do birthday parties for gay celebrant, but wont do gay weddings.

devout religious person, whether christians or muslims, will never accept same sex marriage.

to those conservatives and moderate americans who think cautiously approving or accepting gay marriage will ease tensions or will benefit everybody in the long run... still think it's a good thing? see how the mob use the last SC decision on gay marriage as a license to shut down pizzarias and flower shops businesses that dont toe the liberal, progressive, SJW line?

feel good story
http://soopermexican.com/2015/04/01/the ... n-4-hours/

the face of evil
http://soopermexican.com/2015/04/01/ind ... eedom-act/

stirring up more trouble

[video][/video]

SDC wrote:you made a leap there, andy. but there are muslim terrorists out there. in my part of the world, at least...

as for disgusting, most countries in the world dont have gay marriage laws or believe in them. keep your smug liberal attitude to yourself buddy.

1. Not much of a leap, having read what you have said in the past. You have not, in my recollection, made a point of differentiating between Muslims and terrorists, and I have certainly never seen you post anything I would call fair about Muslims.

2. Yeah, there sure are. So what?

3. Well, if most countries are bigoted, that means I should keep my opinions to myself? How about we compromise. Hell no. You go ahead and post your smug and worthless drivel, and I'll go ahead and point out when you're being a jerk. If that doesn't work for you, then please, let the grown ups talk. We were having a very intelligent and I think productive conversation before you chimed in with your blah blah blah.

4. You never actually disagreed with what I concluded about how it seems you feel gays should be treated. So, olive branch: here's your chance to clarify. Care to actually do that? If I am wrong, then what exactly did you mean when you vomited on your keyboard?

SDC wrote:

Indy wrote:

That adds nothing to the conversation.

Except hatred and disgust.

supporting RFRA is "hatred" and "disgust"? 20 other states have the same laws. try repealing them first in blue states.

No, what you said was hatred and disgust, and now you're trying to play innocent. But you already know that.