Chic-Fil-A

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

When you tried to compare your wish for restrictions on gays with restrictions on other classes, you sidetracked, pure and simple.

Again you say I discussed my desire to use government to restrict gays was a sidetrack... yet when I challenged you to show me WHERE I said such a thing, you answer with this:

Your opinions on the subject are well known. You don't have to say it in one specific place for it to color all of your dealings. Your reputation preceeds you.

So in other words - your understanding of my opinions for past threads means I sidetracked this thread without me saying anything about those supposed opinions.... So what your telling me Steve - is that I can't post on any thread regarding anything that has the slightest connection to homosexual marriage without "sidetracking" it - even if my post has nothing to do with the question of governement's role.... Really???? 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.

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. 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.

Where does that last come from? I didn't bring up his official status, and I can't see why you would, unless it's from some personal animosity.

I brought it up because it speaks DIRECTLY to the original intent of my post. Takeda - as a moderator - uses that "office" judiciously and insures that no one confuses a statement by him regarding his personal views as somehow connected to his "official" capacity. This is what I was saying the mayors and the speaker of the city council were doing WRONG - they were using their OFFICE to speak against private enterprise - when they should do so ONLY as individuals under their own right of free speech. I was drawing the contrast between PROPER use of an "official" role - as demonstrated by Takeda - to the abuses of an official role as shown by the mayors and speaker. You know - trying to steer this back to the original subject????

Your views are your own and you're perfectly free to argue them.

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.....

I didn't even enter this because of that. I joined in because it drives me crazy when people use bad tactics to cheat at an argument.
My original post was aimed at showing that your comparison was invalid. You did indeed change the subject so as to never actually answer what I said.

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.

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

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.