So, turns out Sarah and her husband returned to their room after the assault but the rest of her family proceeded to another restaurant... The manager of the Gay Hen and her LTBJ employees followed and continued to assault the family even tho Sarah wasn't there...
That's some serious hate... 😟

DrafterX wrote:

I find it amusing that Huckabee praised the Supreme Court's decision to allow the baker to refuse the gay couple their cake but is upset that a restaurant refused her service.

HuckFinn wrote:

I think I used obtuse wrong.

Somebody correct me, please.

Thank you.

tailgater wrote:

Ah yes tail.... Your famous "I know what you are thinking better than you do" technique.

As long as you are convinced that you know what a person is thinking or meaning better than they do, it is impossible to have a worthwhile discussion with you.

I meant exactly what I said. Now go play with someone who will tolerate that sort of bs.

victor809 wrote:

... I'm gonna have to ask for proof on that MACS.

Find me an equivalent to tails "when you say religion is a stupid choice you really just mean Christianity".

victor809 wrote:

Ah yes tail.... Your famous "I know what you are thinking better than you do" technique.

As long as you are convinced that you know what a person is thinking or meaning better than they do, it is impossible to have a worthwhile discussion with you.

I meant exactly what I said. Now go play with someone who will tolerate that sort of bs.

victor809 wrote:

And deliberately or non-deliberately he used the word obtuse correctly.
In the event that it was deliberate, you would say "deliberately obtuse" but not pointing that out is still acceptable.

victor809 wrote:

Depends. Do you think he's doing it deliberately, or do you think he's just slow-witted? If you think he's doing it deliberately, you used it incorrectly. If you think he's just stupid... you used it right.

MACS wrote:

When are you ever going to fully understand the truth?

The baker refused to decorate a cake the way they wanted...he didn't refuse them a cake. He offered them several. Because he was an "artist" and didn't like what they wanted to do he simply refused. The Supreme Court backed his play. Why? Because they were seeking out someone to tear down and appear like they were victimized.

Sarah went to a public restaurant and didn't order some special item...nor to have it served by some special whim. She was targeted because of her employment. Let that sink in.

The Left is in full unhinged mode and the middle is eroding out from under them. The Left will be people like you and Waters bleeting in the wind.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

Guess the irony is lost on someone like you...

Talk about being unhinged! LOL...do you hear yourself???
*dumb question*

Both businesses had the same right to refuse. "No soup for you!" Seinfeld?
No lines were crossed.

You're so freaking unhinged yours is the only voice you can hear. Why address anyone, me?

So, in the future, if you're go off on some "the left..."rant, direct it to someone who gives a ****.

HuckFinn wrote:

Ohhhh.

Victor is a lot of things, but not slow witted.
I felt he was obfuscating quite deliberately. But there's another word that I wanted to use.

It'll come to me.
Or Frank will save the day.
he's good wif words.

tailgater wrote:

If it's that easy then provide a link.

victor809 wrote:

coy? he was being coy?

frankj1 wrote: