Maybe it's like being "sort-of" pregnant.

__________________
"Every morning in Africa, a Gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed. Every morning a Lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest Gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a Lion or a Gazelle... when the sun comes up, you'd better be running." -anonymous

Hmm... Previously you argued at length that a law school student group could be denied funding, provided by student activity fees, at a public university because they were "hostile" to gay members. You also endorsed denying a tuition-paying student her degree from a public university because her religious beliefs clashed with the gay agenda. But now you support the "right" of a gay league to use public diamonds, stringent quotas included, to discriminate based on them paying a fee. It can't be both ways, if public institutions are allowed to penalize students and campus organizations because they do not support the gay agenda then organizations like the gay softball league must likewise be penalized.

The "explain why the Boy Scouts shouldn't be banned" challenge is a straw man. You assumed I wanted the gay softball league banned from using public diamonds, I don't. I advocate equal treatment in public institutions for all, including campus groups, individual students, gay softball leagues and of course the Boy Scouts. Your the one who has some 'splaining to do.

And if the "gay softball league" got funding from "student activity fees", I would say that needs to stop.


This is an egregious misrepresentation of the actual situation.
It WAS NOT "because her religious beliefs clashed with the gay agenda", but her religious beliefs contradicted her EDUCATION's STANDARDS.


I emphasized the part that you obviously do not get...
Yes. For public institutions, there are restrictions.
And since this gay softball league is NOT a public institution, then these restrictions on public institutions DO NOT APPLY.


Already been done twice now...

__________________
"Try to become not a man of success, but try rather to become a man of value."
Albert Einstein

Ok so mandatory student activities extracted by public universities can be withheld in a discriminatory fashion but tax revenues extracted by force from the people can be used to support a discriminatory softball league? Discrimination with coerced $ is Ok as long as it supports the gay agenda.

Oh really, that's why the school claimed in court the "reeducation" program the required her to attend wasn't to change the student's mind regarding homsexuality. By your logic, if they want to continue to use public diamonds, shouldn't the gay softball leaguers have to attend hetrosexual sensitivity training because they discriminate against hetros with their quota?

The issue is not the gay softball league's discriminatory quota. They have the right as a private institution to free association. But they do not have a right to public support from the use of public facilities if for example a private law school student group can be denied support by a public university because gay students object to their membership pledge.

The only thing you have explained is your position is to play gay agenda politics with public institution support. Once again, my position is that free association rights should not be held hostage to pro-gay agenda politics.

Yeah.
Of course they can.
Are you saying public universities can't have control over how their funds are spent????

Furthermore, IT IS THE LAW that is involved in this issue.
The group in question discriminates against a protected class, so the governmental organization cannot provide funding.
If the KKK came forward and wanted to start a group, do you think the school should be forced to provide funding?
If a group that was ONLY open to Jews came forward and wanted to start a group, do you think the school should be forced to provide funding?


"coerced $"?

Is this a propagandic reference to "tax dollars"?

Look.
I shouldn't need to point this out to you, but in the
FIRST case, you have ACTUAL GOVERNMENTAL DOLLARS going to a discriminatory group, in the
SECOND case, you have ACTUAL GOVERNMENTAL DOLLARS going to a BALL DIAMOND, which the discriminatory group uses.
SEPARATE ISSUE

The REAL comparison would be to modify the first case and question whether the DISCRIMINATORY GROUP could use the university in furthering their education.
And that was never the problem. Nobody said that this discriminatory group couldn't go to a University that was funded by tax dollars.

Seriously. I realize you WANT to try to pretend that there is some inconsistency here, but you're only straining yourself in doing so...


So?
OF COURSE her beliefs in homosexuality didn't have to change.
But her EDUCATED UNDERSTANDING of the situation had to change.

A bit like if a person was taught to believe that the sun was made up of a two mile wide yellow lollipop, which was made by God.
It's their "religious belief".
Now, that person COULD NEVER expect to have a degree in an Astronomy field based on such an absurd and definitively wrong idea that the sun is made up of a two mile wide yellow lollipop.
HOWEVER, that person SHOULD NEVER be expected to change their belief on "made by God" in order to attain that degree.


That ain't "by my logic" at all.
The EDUCATION involved her ridiculous understanding on homosexuals.

There is no parallel with the "public diamond", because the ball team IS NOT asking for any type of degree from the university.


I bold-faced the bald-faced lie in your assessment.
That is not the reason.


Look.
I realize you aren't going to be honest in admitting what I am saying.
But I am not going to reply to such intellectual dishonesty anymore.

I have explained WHAT MY POSITION IS.
You can start HONESTLY ACKNOWLEDGING what my position is, ...
... or you can continue to lie about it and have people recognize that you're lying.

Your call...

__________________
"Try to become not a man of success, but try rather to become a man of value."
Albert Einstein

All I know is that homos would be screaming bloody murder if they were denied access to a league themselves. I say don't let them use state or city parks if they can't play nice with everyone.

__________________
The voice in your head that says "you can't do this" is a LIAR!!!

I'm sure some would.
Most wouldn't care about a private league ...


Can we count on the same philosophy for the Boy Scouts?
Churches who have organizations excluding those gay sinners?

Forbidding even use of state or city parks based on discrimination is an extreme measure that I don't see any precedent for.

__________________
"Try to become not a man of success, but try rather to become a man of value."
Albert Einstein

I'm confused.

I thought you were homosexual?

.

He is. That doesn't stop him from speaking the truth. We all know that's what would happen.

__________________


To tax the larger incomes at a higher percentage than the smaller, is to lay a tax on industry and economy; to impose a penalty on people for having worked harder and saved more than their neighbors. ~ John Stuart Mill

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
Success Freaks

I just thought it was interesting in his choice of phrases.

Almost as if the word "homo's" came dripping off of his tongue.

I would expect that from some people, not from those that share the same trait however.

Oh well.....live and learn.


.