*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Mr.Banana]

No one's asking for special treatment for them, but literally the exact same treatment as for everyone else.

If this was true, you wouldn't be mad at the Christian baker, because he is actually giving gays the same treatment he gives everyone else.

He won't make Halloween cakes because Pagan holidays are not part of his religious beliefs.

No one complained about that. Where's the march for Pagan rights? Somehow it's only the politically useful coalitions that get to be "non-privileged" and they DO get "special treatment"

[CoccoBill]

If this was true, you wouldn't be mad at the Christian baker, because he is actually giving gays the same treatment he gives everyone else.

He won't make Halloween cakes because Pagan holidays are not part of his religious beliefs.

So because on top of discriminating against gays he's also discriminating against pagans, that makes him not discriminatory at all? Want to spend a minute more thinking about that?

No one complained about that. Where's the march for Pagan rights? Somehow it's only the politically useful coalitions that get to be "non-privileged" and they DO get "special treatment"

Pagan rights should be the same as christian rights, aka none. If you feel the issue is close to your heart, go ahead and do something about it.

[Mr.Banana]

Pagan rights should be the same as christian rights, aka none.

If tthis is your position you should just stop posting. Because it's as wrong as wrong can be.

The first amendment guarantees those rights. they're inalienable. No law can be passed that infringes on that right.

So if you're argument is that the proper amount of rights for Christians is "none" then you're not even thinking intelligently about the subject.

[CoccoBill]

If tthis is your position you should just stop posting. Because it's as wrong as wrong can be.

The first amendment guarantees those rights. they're inalienable. No law can be passed that infringes on that right.

So if you're argument is that the proper amount of rights for Christians is "none" then you're not even thinking intelligently about the subject.

I could care far more about the US constitution and the amendments. We were talking about civil liberties in general, and what kind of changes people seem to want in them over there. It is as if you're purposefully trying to misconstrue everything I say, and it's starting to get old. Christians should not have rights. Pagans should not have rights. Humans should have rights.

[Mr.Banana]

Christians should not have rights.

The rules say otherwise. Arguing about what "should" be is dumb. You have to accept what is.

[Poopadoop]

It is as if you're purposefully trying to misconstrue everything I say,

I agree, except for the "as if" part.

....and it's starting to get old.

There's a reason why it's called reductio ad bananum and not reductio ad something else. It's a pattern of discourse with him, and it's present in nearly all of his "debates" with others here.

If you say "I believe x," he asks you how you can believe "y", you say 'no, i said x', and he goes on to tell you why you're wrong to believe "z".

[CoccoBill]

There's a reason why it's called reductio ad bananum and not reductio ad something else. It's a pattern of discourse with him, and it's present in nearly all of his "debates" with others here.

If you say "I believe x," he asks you how you can believe "y", you say 'no, i said x', and he goes on to tell you why you're wrong to believe "z".

Yeah I remember all too well. Decided to naively give him the benefit of the doubt, but it's right back to his old ways after he realized he's getting his ass kicked on substance. I guess this is his way of trying to regain his self esteem.

[Mr.Banana]

I could care far more about the US constitution and the amendments. We were talking about civil liberties in general, and what kind of changes people seem to want in them over there.

"seem to want"? What does that even mean? Is that just what the loudest media voices are saying? Or do you have some data here?

And frankly, "wanting" something isn't good enough. Most people WANT to live in a world where no one denies the holocaust. But we can't make that a law because the rules guarantee freedom of speech.

So it's nice that gays WANT to buy that cake. But the baker's rights are actually in the constitution.

So I'm not even getting why this is a debate. You want something that is illegal and technically not feasable under even the most rudimentary interpretation of the constitution. We're not talking about some obscure amendment here. It's the first damn sentence in teh constitution.