Political & Elections

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

RE: CC Comes Out of the Closet

longprime · Guru

Do you think CC will let me back in, if I start talking up Washlet Bidets for the "closet"?

busdriver11 · Guru

hope wrote:
A couple of posters said they had friends who were in polyamorous relationships. I mean, how many people can say that? It does make you wonder how many have friends who long to deepen their bonds with Fido or Lady, hmmm
I think you're an exemplary poster, busdriver..patient and able to look at the big picture. I obviously chronically found it tough to swallow the double standard.

Well, thank you, hope. I just think that there are so many times they could shut down a thread, or discipline or ban a poster if they wanted to, and they just let it go for awhile until people get too blatant, or it gets too ugly. It does seem to me that they've backed off a bit from the overcontrolling monitoring. I have also found that sometimes I get very irritated with a particular poster (though they may not even realize it), get into it a bit with them on one thread, and on the next thread they give me great advice and support. So how can I stay irritated? I think the cc parent café is good because it hits so many different subjects. You might vehemently disagree with someone on one thread, but be their biggest supporter on another subject. And sometimes I stay away from controversial threads, because I know they are going to just piss me off!

Wait a minute, so polyamorous means animal sex? I thought when I googled it, it meant open relationships. And I'm afraid to google it again, because it might leave cookies and I could get some weird ads and solicitations. From Fido. And my girls would never accept that, they are the only dogs in my life.

hope · Guru

A couple of posters said they had friends who were in polyamorous relationships. I mean, how many people can say that? It does make you wonder how many have friends who long to deepen their bonds with Fido or Lady, hmmm

I think you're an exemplary poster, busdriver..patient and able to look at the big picture. I obviously chronically found it tough to swallow the double standard.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

After polyamory becomes a thing, maybe we can start marrying our pets.

-- Edited by SamuraiLandshark on Saturday 25th of July 2015 09:29:18 AM

busdriver11 · Guru

I had to google polyamory. I guess that means open marriage? God forbid anyone has to look at my computer and dissect what I searched for! It's all your fault, hope!

Hey, I know at cc they aren't going to allow threads that are political to just keep on going. I accept that, and act accordingly, while still trying to get my point across without being too blatant. I appreciate it when they allow it for awhile, without shutting things down, giving warnings and banning people. It's a step.

hope · Guru

I read it over a couple of times and I'm pretty sure, based on other posts by her in that thread (most especially that polyamory is a tangential issue, when most certainly it is not...read recent NYTimes opinion piece re polyamory as the "next battle") that she was trying to prevent the thread from veering off into that icky conservative mindset.

Letting them go "longer than most" is different from letting them go. Geez I'm so tired of the liberal pontificating. BoRiiiiiing.

busdriver11 · Guru

"I can't think of a bigger put-down than calling anyone who disagrees with the SCOTUS SSM decision (usually based on religious convictions) "less-enlightened."

I think we interpreted what she said differently. I thought she was being sarcastic, you thought she was being sincere.

I'm pretty sure I know who that poster is, not going to say who, but she has many posts. She is a very nice lady, and I don't think she's a liberal of any sort. Just a moderate, keep the peace sort of person. She could have shut down a number of threads that she has moderated, for politics, and has let them go longer than most. So that, I appreciate.

hope · Guru

Busdriver, there was no need to "keep the peace" in that thread. No one disagreed with the ruling. Had anyone has the audacity to do so, they would have been banished, or the thread immediately shut down. (Because then it would have been deemed "political").

All this gets a pass from Skieurope, along with all the scurrilous attacks by posters on Supreme Court judges and groups of people...because they are THOSE kinds of people.

You either "celebrate the day" or else.

Yet they really truly see themselves as loving, peaceful, and tolerant.

They never, ever, see the irony.

hope · Guru

"Fiscal" Republicans and Libertarians have always been tolerated/accepted at CC.

"Social" conservatives not at all.

Case in point: PG. :). Yourself?

I can't think of a bigger put-down than calling anyone who disagrees with the SCOTUS SSM decision (usually based on religious convictions) "less-enlightened."

I was attempting to point out the humorous arrogance of a person with the exalted position of CC moderator (!) who would do that (contrasted with those ninnies Roberts and Scalia and Alieto And Thomas).

busdriver11 · Guru

I have to disagree. Skieurope seems very moderate and just appears to want to keep the peace. You can take her posts in a number of ways, and perhaps the comment, "Can we simply just celebrate the day and not spend energy (and posts) on how less-enlightened groups will potentially react?" could have had the words "less-enlightened" in parenthesis. I don't feel put down by her at all, and she lets us keep arguing past the point that some others might have stopped it.

longprime · Guru

I now concern myself: to money issues, if we can afford moving to hi COL area, health issues, and scheming how to get a spouse for DS.

hope · Guru

#525
skieuropePosts: 9,600Super ModeratorSenior Member
Yesterday at 3:33 pm edited July 2
MODERATOR'S NOTE:
Thread is getting weird.
getting????

The discussion of incest and polygamy is not even tangential to same-sex marriage; it's just nowhere near the curve. If someone wants to open a discussion of these 2 less-than-burning issues, be my guest, but it just does not belong here.
Post edited by skieurope on July 2
Reply Share on Facebook

Ding ding ding...we have a loser again!

Sorry, genius, but Roberts in his dissent specifically stated that this ruling couldn't help but open the door to polygamy..actually, more likely "polyamory." Nowhere near the curve?

Polygamy has been around for a long long time....SSM was invented out of thin air. Was not even a gleam in anyone's eye until incredibly recently.

But I'm sure skieurope's opinion is deeper and much much more valuable.

hope · Guru

i read the John Robert's dissent. Obviously the "enlightened" over at CC have not, because it CLEARLY lays out the egregious error that is the majority decision.

Oh, but I'm sure all CC members are MUCH BRIGHTER than Roberts.

They are making fools of themselves with their page after page of ridicule of the dissenting opinions, and they don't even know it.

hope · Guru

#103
skieuropePosts: 9,503Super ModeratorSenior Member
Today at 5:33 pm
MODERATOR'S NOTE:
Can we simply just celebrate the day and not spend energy (and posts) on how less-enlightened groups will potentially react?

As biased, intolerant liberals, that is.

-- Edited by hope on Friday 26th of June 2015 08:34:56 PM

-- Edited by hope on Friday 26th of June 2015 08:35:33 PM