Which Poster Hates Freedom the Most?

[USFREEDOM911]

As long as they didn't start butt-banging I probably wouldn't have felt the need to go to that extreme.

Would you have left if a husband and wife started copulating at the next table??

 

[zappasguitar]

Actually I made the decision knowing that it would be highly unlikely that folks would be so inconsiderate, just like I made the decision knowing that it would be highly unlikely for one of the kitchen workers to sneeze into the soup.

And then there's this:

Since you failed to address it three times (your blatantly obtuse post notwithstanding), debate point scored for me.

You ASSUMED...and everyone know what happens when you assume.

 

[WinterBorn]

It's legal to spit. It's legal to deficate. It's legal to walk bare footed, it's legal for a man to go with out a shirt. By you're reasoning then I can do any of these in a restaurant?

Not sure about spitting. Its legal to defecate, just not legal to do so where others can see your nudity. I have defecated in restaurants before. As long as I am in their Men's room, no one seems to mind.

Walking barefoot in a restaurant is not illegal. It is usually against the rules of the establishment. But a privately owned business setting its own rules is not the same as what we are discussing here.

Going shirtless? See: Walking barefoot

 

[WinterBorn]

Would you have left if a husband and wife started copulating at the next table??

He would have done the same thing if a man & woman started copulating as he would have done if 2 men started banging. He would have walked out.

Of course, in both situations, he would have walked veeeerrrry slowly, watching the whole show.

 

[/MSG/]

STY, you and I are going to have to work on this dual pwnership of SM.

 

[WinterBorn]

STY, you and I are going to have to work on this dual pwnership of SM.

SM has had more leashes on him than a rental sex slave.

I am thinking he likes it.

 

[DamnYankee]

ok taichi.

Thank you for finally conceding that I am correct.

 

[DamnYankee]

Would you have left if a husband and wife started copulating at the next table??

Yes.

 

[DamnYankee]

more leashes on him than a rental sex slave.

Sounds like you are familiar with rentboy.com

 

[/MSG/]

Sounds like you are familiar with rentboy.com

Odd that you would know of such a web site....

 

[DamnYankee]

Odd that you would know of such a web site....

It was discussed recently on another forum. Apparently the founder of a "cure gays" organization was traveling with one of the whores.

 

[zappasguitar]

Actually I made the decision knowing that it would be highly unlikely that folks would be so inconsiderate, just like I made the decision knowing that it would be highly unlikely for one of the kitchen workers to sneeze into the soup.

And then there's this:

Since you failed to address it three times (your blatantly obtuse post notwithstanding), debate point scored for me.

You ASSUMED...and everyone know what happens when you assume.

Too gutless to answer, eh?

Why doesn't that surprise me?

 

[Southern Woman]

Opposition to The Southern Man is now listed as one of the symptoms of mental retardation.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.28]

Just curious, what kind of "business" does DTS want to operate, and what produces the smoke he's so anxious to protect?

 

[DamnYankee]

Too gutless to answer, eh?

Why doesn't that surprise me?

You're being childish and incoherent, Dick.

 

[/MSG/]

You're being childish and incoherent, Dick.

Failure to address an issue AND Ad hom

2 points to zappy.

 

[Southern Woman]

You don't make the rules here, Caboose.

 

[DamnYankee]

Failure to address an issue AND Ad hom

2 points to zappy.

Dick is a man's name. Its not an ad-hom. When Zippy learns how to ask a coherent question that hasn't already been addressed it will be answered.

And before you go there, I choose to ignore Solitary at will . That pitiful creep got himself fired from posting at work, then turned into a stalker and continues to lie about who he is. I choose not to entertain his addiction unless it pleases me.

 

[Timshel]

Actually before the ban went into effect this exact situation occurred right up the street from us. Most of the restaurants has "smoking sections" but this one did not. We found this out before being seated but, since the air was fine at that time and the restaurant had been highly recommended to us by some trusted friends who have the same dislike for cigarette smoke that we do, we figured that the patrons there would be considerate. This table of four next to us was not. I was slightly offended but my dear wife, being of less hardy constitution, became physically ill. She still refuses to dine there.

So the scenario is real; hardly "stupid" as you have summarily dismissed.

Okay, then you are stupid. You made an unreasonable assumption that no one would smoke in a restaurant that permitted smoking simply because no on was smoking at the time you were seated.

You made a choice and the conditions of the choice did not change, as you claimed. You did not demand that no smokers be seated near you as a condition of your order. Any reasonable person would have assumed, under the conditions, that it was a very real possibility that someone nearby would smoke.

 

[DamnYankee]

Okay, then you are stupid. You made an unreasonable assumption that no one would smoke in a restaurant that permitted smoking simply because no on was smoking at the time you were seated.

You made a choice and the conditions of the choice did not change, as you claimed. You did not demand that no smokers be seated near you as a condition of your order. Any reasonable person would have assumed, under the conditions, that it was a very real possibility that someone nearby would smoke.

If I am stupid then that makes you severely mentally retarded. Any reasonable person would assume that fellow restaurant patrons wouldn't light up when others are eating. These type of people don't give a shit about the health of themselves or folks around them and I am happy that their disgusting habit is banned in public places.