[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Again you say I discussed my desire to use government to restrict gays was a sidetrack...

I said you sidetracked it with your bogus comparisons. You keep avoiding that.

Well that is one way to censor or try to browbeat someone, isn't it... Just tell them - in so many words - that their opinion is unwelcome and that if they post, you will just call them names and accuse them of saying stuff that they didn't say. Classy.

Now you're jumping into "I'm being attacked" mode, another of your favorite diversions. I never said, or implied, that your opinion is unwelcome. I only commented on the cheap tactics you use, and even that is only my opinion.

I posted up front that my intent was to discuss abuse of power by politicians against private enterpirse.

I stated at the outset that I didn't want this to be about gay marriage.... I did not bring up gay marrriage, nor did I start the subject of government's role in marriage.

Fair enough. You did say that. You should have stuck with that high road and refused to be drawn in.

Yet you accuse me of "sidetracking". What is more - to be blunt - one person starts moving the subject to marriage and who gets to control it while calling me a hypocrit (even though I agreed him), then you pile on saying I said things I haven't said and claiming this whole thing is all my fault while echoing the name calling and trying to justify it with all kinds of literary contortions.

If you reread my initial post (#70) you'll see that my "sidetracking" comment was aimed directly at what I repeated here - your bogus comparison, and nothing else. In that post I only responded to what you said in this thread regarding the subject. You have yet to answer what I said there other than with prevarication and dodging.

I brought it up because it speaks DIRECTLY to the original intent of my post...You know - trying to steer this back to the original subject????

Again, fair enough, except...

See, this is what get's me. I didn't say anything ABOUT my own views on gay marriage - but others brought them up just to call me a hypocrit. So basically I am free to present my views, unless of course, my views are already "well known" because then I simply just get called names and get accused of saying stuff I have not said, right? Yeah, got it.....

Neither did I. I answered specific comments made by you, and you have yet to answer my response.

Again - you either didn't read or are intentionally misrepresenting my response. I didn't address the criminal and mentally ill because I can see your point on that - but the politician and pastor side I did specifically answer. Again - you call it "changing the subject" when if you actually READ post 73 (my response to you) I even used the politician answer to try to point back to the ORIGINAL subject of this thread while answering.

You changed the subject with your comparisons, which had nothing to do with either your original post or reality. I responded directly to what you had said.

Or are you saying that me trying to get the discussion to the original subject is somehow me trying to "sidetrack" the thread?????

No, I explained exactly what I meant several times, and you are still avoiding it.

Oh - and personal animosity? I don't have any toward you - but I wish I could say that the reverse is not the case. It seems to me there is.

I never said you did. I questioned your bringing up Tak's Moderator status when he didn't. My "animosity" comment was concerning him, not me. As for my own feelings, I've already said that I avoided entering this thread (except for my playful comment to Frau Kaleun) until you started using bad debate tactics in the form of diversion.