Madison bans discrimination against atheists, non-religious

I've have learned that it's not always best to tell everything you know.

I remember that time back in third grade, for example. All of a sudden, out of the blue, Miss Johnson, the teacher, interrupted herself and said:

"Lay-boy, is there some reason you've been sitting there with both of your hands in your pockets, wiggling around for the last five minutes?"

I said: "Yeah."

She said: "Well?"

I said: "Well, what?"

She said: "What's the reason?'

I said: "I've been looking up your skirt, that's what."

That's along about the time she commenced to slapping me silly.

pshaw

Why dont we cut to the chase and make a law that no one can ever get in anyone elses way or say anything negative about anyone? The only exception would be those who objected this law...aka objected to our state sponsored utopia, because as history teaches state sponsored utopias are the way to go. *sarcasm*-

BTW:those on both the Left and the Right should be working to shrink the massively overgrown lawbook, not adding to it.

I've invited Timur to take a pissing contest we've been having in one of Edgar's threads...to this thread.

Just wanted to mention that it is coming from somewhere else.

He said he ate brownies - not sardines.

Which, BTW, are quite good with pumpernickel bread, a good IPA, and cheese!

Read his original post...and figure it out.

Right!
That was the thread where my snart comment was met with silent but deadly disregard.
Hmph!

Don't honestly remember it...and reluctant to go over the entire thread to find it.

Make it again here...and I'll start some fireworks.

But it may not apply here:

Well.

http://able2know.org/topic/273517-19#post-5946815

Not sure what you mean, Neo.

It got a bit messy over there...and more than likely will get even messier here.

I really would like to see it stop...mostly by having Timur not start these things. Some personalities just do not mesh...and when I see that happening, I just avoid the person. But Timur was insistent.

I'll try to be on good behavior, but I will not be called a liar or **** or any of the other things that came my way...not without retaliating. We'll see how things go.

I don't think the poor boy can help himself, Frank. He aint real quick on the uptake, ya know? Nobody will ever accuse him of being the sharpest tool in the shed, or nuthin.

He seems to think he can make up for that lack with ad hominem attacks. Nice try, Timma.

You are a liar, Frank, you started it.


Not only you boast about knowing what other people think but you called me a coward.


You are a liar, Frank, you wanted to play your silly game.


You are a liar, Frank, you pretend that you would finish it.


No need to see, I'll call you upon stuff you pretended to know and do.

I have beefs with peta, but not entirely. Just mostly, last I read, which probably was a while ago.

I could try to string some links, but I'll forgo it.

Talking about PETA, Jo, here's a true tale that always gets me. Some fanatical Palestinian rode a donkey, packed with explosives, up next to a bus full of jewish children and detonated it.

PETA was irate! They wrote an official letter to Arafat asking him to refrain from using donkeys in his mass murders.

When asked what their position was on blowing up the children, the PETA representative said something like: "We take no position on that. That's not our concern."

These are the kind of people who would gladly shoot a person to feed an alligator, if they thought they could get away with it, eh?

Beware of fanatics, whatever their ideological convictions may be. They just aint right in the head.

Brat!

I may or may not agree with you on stuff; it sometimes seems that I agree, given I discern what you mean when you say stuff. I pick up that we disagree about homosexuals, which I take as a problem for you, if so.

Jesus, please don't, Frank.

I have no real problem with your run-of-the-mill fudge packer or pillow biter, per se. It's these damn ACTIVISTS who get under my skin. They're not satisfied with mere "tolerance" or "acceptance." They insist upon unqualified APPROVAL of their deviant ways. I sometimes think that the only people they can tolerate are other homosexuals. If you aint one of them, you're against them, they figure.

Unfortunately, too many average homosexuals feel that they are obligated to agree with and ratify the agenda of their activist "leaders," so that doesn't help. The boy scout case I mentioned is a case in point. They tried to compel, by force of law, acceptance in places they were unwanted. In the meantime they freely, and quite knowingly (as their internal documents showed in court), made every attempt to piss all over the rights of others. Why can't they just keep their preferences to themselves, rather than trying to force them on others?

I don't know about that one, agree on reading, horrible.

I'm an old lab tech in a pretty good medical center, way back then. We cared for our animals, who weren't submitted to torture and were very springy and well visited.
I found a too old rabbit a home.

I am of course glad that medicine has progressed since my day, but if some assholes came to destroy our space and take our animals, much would have been lost re immunology that might affect you and you and you. Not kidding, peta people.

Yep, it is the demand that we all be cheerleaders for their proclivities. Till and unless they are cheering mine **** that.

Ok, you're goofy on this one.