is this the middle ages?

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
actually the female was saying NO !!!!! Don't !!!!! STOP !!!!!!
That sir is called rape. So now you are a rapist as well ?
It was a hypothetical story, embellish as you wish, but please don't masturbate furiously to images in your mind of me, I'd feel a little dirty if you did that again.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
It was a hypothetical story, embellish as you wish, but please don't masturbate furiously to images in your mind of me, I'd feel a little dirty if you did that again.
I remember you once told a “hypothetical” story about paying children for sex except you called that exchange consensual
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
It was a hypothetical story, embellish as you wish, but please don't masturbate furiously to images in your mind of me, I'd feel a little dirty if you did that again.
Well please keep your hypothetical rape stories to yourself. Bad enough we have to deal with you being molested as a child, now you think it is normal
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
OMG
House is not open to the public
Store is open to public.
You can't be this stupid


So you're not rebutting that in both cases the property is owned by one party ?

You're not rebutting that a characteristic of property is the owner decides what to do with it ?



No, I'm not that stupid. You're barking up the wrong tree again and straw manning the argument. Try to stay with it. I know it's hard, well in your case maybe it's soft, but you know what I mean.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
So you're not rebutting that in both cases the property is owned by one party ?

You're not rebutting that a characteristic of property is the owner decides what to do with it ?
No one


No, I'm not that stupid. You're barking up the wrong tree again and straw manning the argument. Try to stay with it. I know it's hard, well in your case maybe it's soft, but you know what I mean.
and one property is open to the public.
the other is not.
I have a home.
I have a cleaners and laundromats.
No customer washes or drops clothes off at my home.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Do you honestly think the same rules apply to a house as they do to a store you stupid racist bitch?
When you say rules, what do you mean? Do you mean the things that people who don't own your property have decided you'll do with your own property as if they owned it ?

Are you saying you'd be fine if I came to your property and started making rules about how you'd use it ?

Okay let's play that game.

Rob Roy - Hey Uncle Buck !!!

Uncle Buck - What you @#$%&!!! racist pedo !!???

Rob Roy - New rule, you gotta clean your bathroom better, c'mon man.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
So you're not rebutting that in both cases the property is owned by one party ?

You're not rebutting that a characteristic of property is the owner decides what to do with it ?



No, I'm not that stupid. You're barking up the wrong tree again and straw manning the argument. Try to stay with it. I know it's hard, well in your case maybe it's soft, but you know what I mean.
A store and a house are both property but in one case the owner wants people to come in and buy stuff

Unless of course the owner is you and the shopper is black
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
A store and a house are both property but in one case the owner wants people to come in and buy stuff

Unless of course the owner is you and the shopper is black
Your last sentence is inaccurate and your first sentence leaves out relevant information.

In the store scenario, if a person wants to discriminate, they want SOME people to come in, but not others. Sometimes I pity your painful attempts to make an argument.
 
Last edited:

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Your last sentence is inaccurate and your first sentence leave out relevant information.

In the store scenario, if a person wants to discriminate, they want SOME people to come in, but not others.
You left out that you want to discriminate and kick people out because they’re black
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
what is your point
My point is you can't force an unwilling neutral person to use his property as you wish and against his wishes and be having a serious conversation about applying "equal rights",

Violating a persons property right is in opposition to respect for another persons rights.

Therefore, what you are arguing isn't respect for another persons rights, you are arguing for ways you find acceptable to violate them.
 
Last edited:

londonfog

Well-Known Member
My point is you can't force an unwilling neutral person to use his property as you wish and against his wishes and be having a serious conversation about applying "equal rights",

Violating a persons property right is in opposition to respect for another persons rights.

Therefore, what you are arguing isn't respect for another persons rights, you are arguing for ways you find acceptable to violate them.
how are you being violated Rob Roy. Who is abusing you.
 
Top