Says the man hysterically screaming about how he's going "take up arms" against everyone who disagrees with him..
Is that what you mean by an "argument"?
Says the hysterical, homofascist apologist for the shia law of paganism. You'er a political sociopath, and, once again, I'm impervious to the your Alinsky tactics.
What I said is that I’m prepared to engage in civil disobedience or take up arms, if necessary, to uphold INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS, which is the foundation of the Republic’s rule of law. More than a decade ago I stood shoulder-to-shoulder with homosexuals against sodomy laws. Same principle.
Only a pathological liar would characterize the violation of INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS, in truth, an existential threat verging on murder, as a mere disagreement. Only a depraved monster, indeed, the reprobate mind of a seared conscious, would characterize the righteous anger of a sane human being in reaction to your mocking indifference to the violation of INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS as hysteria.
Only a rank sociopath would call Christians asserting their INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS assholes or, even more monstrously insane, allege that the real perpetrators of injustice in this instance are the victims.
I understand your Alinsky tactics. You're not fooling anyone who matters on this forum.
On another thread,
you're the hysterical ninny who opined that a T-shirt—a T-shirt, for crying out loud!—with a sentiment pertaining to self-defense constituted an inordinate threat of violence, when in fact the expression of that sentiment on T-shirts is more common in America than the common cold, you silly ass, Goyan grotesquery.
I imagine that it must have occurred to someone even as stupid and depraved as you just how silly your post was, as you didn't stick around after the laugh we all got out of that.
Notwithstanding, this classical liberal agreed with you insofar as the INALIENABLE prerogatives of free-association and private property were concerned and, therefore, recognized Six Flags of New Jersey’s right to eject the man who wore that T-shirt.
It really is that simple.
That was an instance of ideological discrimination, albeit, not an illegal or even an unjust instance of discrimination; for ideological discrimination is the very essence of liberty, you silly ass. But now, in the face of what is a breathtakingly outrageous and, until recently, historically unprecedented violation of the INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS of free-association and private property, you go all obtuse and indifferent.
But of course, we all know what the essence of your hypocrisy is, including you: you don't hold to any universal principle of justice at all. No. You're agenda is the imposition of your morality, such as it is, everywhere and on everyone regardless of the imperatives of natural and constitutional law. You're a fascist thug, and the only thing that fascist thugs like you will ever understand about the INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS of others is civil disobedience or
the business end of a loaded gun pointed at your stupid heads.
Check?
________________________________________
That's a real argument. On the other hand, your prattle, as I have shown and as Windbag has shown in every other respect, is an endless train of shoe shine: evasion, depravity, lies, rank stupidity and ignorance. You ain't foolin' anyone who matters, Mr. Moderator.
