Marijuana regulations will "weed" us out of growing as we choose

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
thanks for admitting that you can not name one time when you expressed concern for the victims of racial discrimination and their ability to choose how they use their own bodies rather than the racist store owners.

your concerns are entirely for letting racists be racist, you have no concern for the victims of racial discrimination who are no longer able to choose how they use their bodies.

that's all because you are a bigoted racial separatist, no better than any run of the mill KKK member.

Harriet Tubman is a woman that has very much impressed me with her courage.


 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
oh, well, in that case your opposition to civil rights which you share with the KKK is totally not racist then.

Do black people have the right to chose how they will use their own bodies and human interactions? I think they do.

You do not. Are you a racist for thinking they don't?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Do black people have the right to chose how they will use their own bodies and human interactions? I think they do.

You do not.
every black person and white person has the option and choice to open a public store or private store.

you share an opposition to civil rights with the KKK. i do not.

but the opposition to civil rights that you share with the KKK is probably totally not racist.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
every black person and white person has the option and choice to open a public store or private store, shit for brains.

you share an opposition to civil rights with the KKK. i do not.

but the opposition to civil rights that you share with the KKK is probably totally not racist.
Yet, we both share an opposition to the KKK themselves. It's safe to say we both think they are assholes.

Does that make you a racist ?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Yet, we both share an opposition to the KKK themselves. It's safe to say we both think they are assholes.

Does that make you a racist ?
no, the KKK would think that you are their ally because your beliefs are the same as theirs.

you can't say you oppose the KKK while sharing their anti-civil rights views with them.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
i'm not judging your thoughts, i am comparing your stated positions on civil rights to the KKK's position on civil rights and noticing how you and the KKK have the exact same views on civil rights.

Okay, let's play that game.

The KKK went to peoples property uninvited and threatened or harmed people didn't they, created unwanted interactions?

You advocate the same thing, when you say it is okay for one person to go to another persons property uninvited and use threats or actual harm to create an unwanted interaction.


Grand Master Buck, your assertion has been refuted, again.

 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
So back to the original subject...

I think regulations are slowly loosening so people can grow their own more easily.

Those states, like Washington, that legalized but did NOT allow for home grows have taken a lot of heat for it.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
The KKK went to peoples property uninvited and threatened or harmed people didn't they, created unwanted interactions?

You advocate the same thing
how is a black person offering money to a store owner in exchange for goods and services even remotely like the KKK lynching blacks?
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
how is a black person offering money to a store owner in exchange for goods and services even remotely like the KKK lynching blacks?
In both circumstances one of the parties may wish the interaction was not taking place.

In both instances there is either a threat of the use of force or actual use of force for failure to submit to the interaction.

In both circumstances the consent of both interacting parties isn't present.


Which parts of my 3 statements above are false? None.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
every black person and white person has the option and choice to open a public store or private store, shit for brains.

you share an opposition to civil rights with the KKK. i do not.

but the opposition to civil rights that you share with the KKK is probably totally not racist.
You bring up this "option" of redefining what is ostensibly private property as if it were a real choice, it isn't.

Being forced to choose between only two things when there are other possibilities is a a false choice.


You share the mode of operation that the KKK uses when they go to others property, forced interactions, I do not.

Your lust for some people to force human interactions is a little sad.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
In both circumstances one of the parties may wish the interaction was not taking place.

In both instances there is either a threat of the use of force or actual use of force for failure to submit to the interaction.

In both circumstances the consent of both interacting parties isn't present.


Which parts of my 3 statements above are false? None.
so you honestly think that a black person offering money to a store owner in exchange for goods and services is totally just like the KKK lynching a black person to death because of his skin color?

wanna know how i know you are a racist piece of shit?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
You share the mode of operation that the KKK uses when they go to others property, forced interactions, I do not.
no i don't because no one is forced to open a public store.

can you name one person who was forced to open a public store instead of a private store?



Your lust for some people to force human interactions is a little sad.
your false premises, racial separatism, and partnership with the KKK is more than a little sad.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
so you honestly think that a black person offering money to a store owner in exchange for goods and services is totally just like the KKK lynching a black person to death because of his skin color?

wanna know how i know you are a racist piece of shit?
No I don't think it is just like it. I think there is a significant difference.


Yet, the basis of the interaction in both cases could be one that arises from a threat of force or actual force if one party refuses the interaction. You haven't refuted that, instead you do all your usual contortion bullshit.


I am not a racist or a piece of shit, but you are a poor debater with low respect for other peoples property.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
the basis of the interaction in both cases could be one that arises from a threat of force or actual force if one party refuses the interaction. You haven't refuted that
yes i have. no one is forced to open a public store instead of a private one.

you're the one who has not refuted that by showing me even a single example of someone forced to open a public store.

all your usual contortion bullshit.
ya mean, like trying to compare a black person peacefully offering money in exchange for goods and services to a KKK lynch mob?

I am not a racist
then why do you share an opposition to civil rights with the KKK?
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
yes i have. no one is forced to open a public store instead of a private one.

you're the one who has not refuted that by showing me even a single example of someone forced to open a public store.



ya mean, like trying to compare a black person peacefully offering money in exchange for goods and services to a KKK lynch mob?



then why do you share an opposition to civil rights with the KKK?

Your fountain of knowledge is overflowing again.


 
Top