Don't ask, don't tell, don't persueFollow

nah, I think everyone has just gotten tired of trying to explain stuff to you. /shrug.

At some point in any given thread it stops being worth it.

Edited, Oct 20th 2011 2:31pm by Xsarus

That point is typically before the ******* thread is even created.

Up to you, sparkles.

What a nice, compact example of poor reading comprehension.

Of course

Those justifications are similar. "Comfort" was another justification that was also similarly applied to both racial & sexual orientation discrimination.



What legitimate justifications? Name ONE. Brownie points if it couldn't also be applied to racial discrimination.



Perhaps it's just semantics, but I've been waiting for one logical justification to discriminate by sexual orientation from you for awhile now. "Post 206" does not answer that. A complete sentence, or one filled out madlib, would.



I did? The CLOSEST thing I've posted in this thread that could POSSIBLY be misconstrued by a moron into thinking I claimed that was when I asked you the following question:

"Besides a woman's role in combat & the physical requirement needed to join the armed forces (neither of which are the equivalent of discrimination solely based upon ones sexual orientation), how does the military blatantly & openly discriminate? Be specific. "

This question was asked so you would answer &, hopefully, be able to understand the difference between (mostly) logical justifications for discrimination (gender, religion, etc.) & illogical justifications.

No no Sexuality is a physical trait unlike skin color which is not a physical trait.

So we agree. Hatred and bigotry can be used for ANY argument. You can't use those "arguments" for the legitimate justification for the discrimination. My post did not support any bigotry or hatred. Under your logic, all discrimination is the same because we can all reduce it to "hatred" and "bigotry". The actual justification for the discrimination of homosexuality did NOT include either of those, so therefore the two reasons are NOT the same.



Post 206.



Post 206. You're trying to put an entire post into one sentence, it can not happen. You either take the whole post as a whole or stop asking for an explanation, because that's all you will get.



And you yet provided any "logical justifications" for gender, religion,etc. You responded with the same responses that you are attacking for homosexuality. For example, you say "traditional gender roles", but "traditional gender roles" do not support homosexuality. So, according to your "logical explanation" for discrimination against sex, it also supports DADT. So, do you or do you not stand by "traditional gender roles"?

You also said for religion to basically suck it up, because you should have known that before joining. I can just as easily use that same thought process against homosexuality.

Unless I overlooked it, I responded to your post refuting all of your claims and you did not reply.



And your point? That isn't a contradiction. You ask why women can't do certain things. I answered because the military discriminates. I was pointing out to you that it discriminates beyond sexuality as what you are implying. I did not say that one lead to the to other, just simply it exists.

Nice try though.

One hurdle at a time there champ, the gays got their freedom from discrimination, maybe next it will be chicky-poos on the front line. Rome wasn't built in a day.

ENOUGH ABOUT POST 206

If you truly think we missed some pearl of wisdom in it, just say it again, at least once. Or don't, but please stop dragging this fucking post out.

Read post 799.