Z
zeke12
Guest
Take your pills, zagoshe.
GB-Hack said:zagoshe said:spnited said:Because it's Australia, zag****, and we don't give a **** what they do in Australia.
What does Australia have to do with the "conservative Christian" lunatics in this Country?
Oh that's right - because if an Australian chain of hotels decided to ban blacks there wouldn't be calls from left-wing lunatic fringe in this country to boycott and embargo everything from Crocodile Dundee to Outback Steakhouse.
You people are a joke.
Nice, except that the Outback Steakhouse chain was founded in Florida.
Fenian_Bastard said:Now, though, instead of giving us another rendition of Teh Gay Is After Me!, I think you should organize a boycott by heterosexuals of all things Aussie -- no more Fosters, no more chasing Sheilahs at Bondi Beach, no more Sydney Swans.
To the parapets, zag!
zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
And I'd never boycott anything because unlike you I believe businessmen should have the right to service who ever they want to and let the laws of supply and demand -- not over-reaching government regulation -- even the playing field.
Fenian_Bastard said:zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
And I'd never boycott anything because unlike you I believe businessmen should have the right to service who ever they want to and let the laws of supply and demand -- not over-reaching government regulation -- even the playing field.
An Australian hotel won a case under Australian law, none of which is relevant here, what are you babbling about?
And the "overreaching government regulation" to which you refer is something a lot of people died for so you could play with your JC Watts Starter kit. You're not ever trying hard with this one.
Fenian_Bastard said:zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
And I'd never boycott anything because unlike you I believe businessmen should have the right to service who ever they want to and let the laws of supply and demand -- not over-reaching government regulation -- even the playing field.
An Australian hotel won a case under Australian law, none of which is relevant here, what are you babbling about?
And the "overreaching government regulation" to which you refer is something a lot of people died for so you could play with your JC Watts Starter kit. You're not ever trying hard with this one.
zagoshe said:Fenian_Bastard said:zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
And I'd never boycott anything because unlike you I believe businessmen should have the right to service who ever they want to and let the laws of supply and demand -- not over-reaching government regulation -- even the playing field.
An Australian hotel won a case under Australian law, none of which is relevant here, what are you babbling about?
And the "overreaching government regulation" to which you refer is something a lot of people died for so you could play with your JC Watts Starter kit. You're not ever trying hard with this one.
Are you actually saying that none of the arguments used in one case could translate into another case in another country? I think that would depend on how similar the laws are, don't you?
Fenian_Bastard said:zagoshe said:Fenian_Bastard said:zagoshe said:Who said anything about Australian Law -- these hotels are trying to find good arguments and why not go to a lawyer who has already had success.
And I'd never boycott anything because unlike you I believe businessmen should have the right to service who ever they want to and let the laws of supply and demand -- not over-reaching government regulation -- even the playing field.
An Australian hotel won a case under Australian law, none of which is relevant here, what are you babbling about?
And the "overreaching government regulation" to which you refer is something a lot of people died for so you could play with your JC Watts Starter kit. You're not ever trying hard with this one.
Are you actually saying that none of the arguments used in one case could translate into another case in another country? I think that would depend on how similar the laws are, don't you?
Arguments can "translate" however they want.
Until someone tries it, this is just hocking loogies.
Zeke12 said:Until that happens, zag, why don't you take some prozac and relax?
It isn't that bad, really.
GB-Hack said:If you're going to be realistic about it, don't say a San Franciscan hotel will try to do it.
Aim more for for a Bible Belt State.
zagoshe said:GB-Hack said:If you're going to be realistic about it, don't say a San Franciscan hotel will try to do it.
Aim more for for a Bible Belt State.
God, do some of you even read -- A San Francisco hotel will be the one which, like the Aussie hotel, tries to ban heterosexuals from it