Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.informatik.hu-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Rod Speed" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: AM radio Qbasic Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 04:48:08 +1000 Lines: 83 Message-ID: References: <20160506181019.5e6388451096bba8b09d9411@eircom.net> <20160506181019.5e6388451096bba8b09d9411@eircom.net> <20160506181019.5e6388451096bba8b09d9411@eircom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net WFoBSAbHaDmxG4uNM9kSvwJqYCKgKxjtOFcKgIgvDnOyaP1Go= Cancel-Lock: sha1:eiRHxGDYEuWA7p/QWJPbauyGQvI= In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:163483 "jmfbahciv" wrote in message news:PM0005326873543CF2@aca40e74.ipt.aol.com... > Rod Speed wrote: >> >> >> "jmfbahciv" wrote in message >> news:PM000532541EDECE52@aca41104.ipt.aol.com... >>> JimP wrote: >>>> On Sat, 7 May 2016 18:23:58 -0500, "Osmium" >>>> wrote: >>>>>"J. Clarke" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In article , r124c4u102@comcast.net >>>>>> says... >>>>>>> If so, I would remind you that he has overturned thousands of years >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> culture and the laws of all 50 states in how they distribute the >>>>>>> inequality >>>>>>> embedded in those state laws. To wit, the ruling that marriage >>>>>>> benefits >>>>>>> must be extended to men "marrying" men and women "marrying" women. >>>>>> >>>>>> The President has no authority to issue such a "ruling". What he can >>>>>> do >>>>>> is withhold Federal assistance under certain circumstances. If the >>>>>> states tell him to take his assistance and shove it up his butt >>>>>> there's >>>>>> little he can do about it except break out the Vaseline. >>>>> >>>>>The president told his Attorney General to not defend the Defense Of >>>>>Marriage Act in the Supreme Court, even though the act was signed by >>>>>Bill >>>>>Clinton just a few years ago. With only one side showing up in court >>>>>the >>>>>prospects of sustaining the act were pretty dim. Any state law that >>>>>has >>>>>similar ends to the DOMA falls as a consequence, all of them fell like >>>>>a >>>>>house of cards. States were then in the position of nullifying a >>>>>hundred >>>>>million marriages (the whole notion of marriage is *based on* >>>>>non-equality >>>>>of people) or go along for the ride. They all chose the latter. >>>>> >>>>>I suspect that an unmarried person who tried to repeal the marriage >>>>>laws >>>>>would be met with an argument that he didn't have standing. And it >>>>>would >>>>>probably take more than one lifetime to go through all the hoops, >>>>>anyway. >>>> >>>> A number of states, and some towns, have decided to make people use >>>> the restroom according to their birth certificate gender. They claim >>>> it is for 'safety' when its obviously bigotry against transgendered >>>> people. >>>> >>> >>> I have the correct solution for that mess. The signs on the doors >>> should be changed: men-->penises and women--> no penises. >> >> That isnt going to work with the stupid trannys who haven't had their >> dicks >> cut off yet. > > The proposal is to address functionality rather than the baggage > associated with sexual identity. Waffle. Where are those stupid trannys supposed to go ? Shit in the street ? >>> I do not want penises in a restroom designated for women. >> Doesn’t matter what you want. > I'll guarantee you that no female wants to > deal with the messes penises make all the time. How odd that the absolute vast majority of them do every single day in their homes.