>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker: Those are rights.

No, here again you throw things together either without thinking, or with intention to deceive. How can an organizational structure assemble? What you mean to say is that the people who use the organization have the right to assemble, or do the other things you mentioned. That does not imply any rights for the organization as an entity. It is lawful to restrain the activity of an organization, and its resources, in any way that courts or legislatures wish, this my not have been done, but it does not imply that the organization has a right.

501c entity doesn't have the right to exclude exclude membership, but you think a non-501c should be able to be exclusionary.

No, they both have a responsibility to deal fairly. Religious organizations are currently give more latitude, by legislative fiat, to exclude, but that is not particularly relevant, as the only reason we are even talking about it is that you threw them in an attempt to confuse the point.

The problem neo-libs

Do you know that neo-liberal already means something? It's not what you think, it's very much like neo-con.

As to your "point", you assert that "we" want selective application of the rules, and I, for one, do not. Anybody can stand up and answer questions however they want on a prime-time soft core porn show, and she did. She was neither jailed, nor arrested, nor beaten, nor fired. She got second place, she may have been penalized for her incoherent/disrespectful answer, but that is why they ask questions to JUDGE them.

Her only basis to claim "penalty" is that she did not win, which implies that the 48 other women who did not win are also being penalized for their answers, and they don't even get to milk it for a speaking tour/book deal.

Prejean makes the alarmingly common white/conservative/Christian assertion that nobody else has a right to speak against them because they are "exercising freedom of speech", this is absurd on its face. Having people say you are wrong or stupid is not a denial of freedom of speech, it's an exercise of freedom of speech. She is asking for a double standard, I see no indication that she is suffering from one.

Everyone knew about the pics...17 year old

More pics came out 2 hours before the trump press conference, and their is no indication that any of the pics are her at 17, that was just a ruse to try and get people to take them down because they might be technically "kiddie porn". If she misrepresented herself on the application for the pageant, which the organizers claim she did, that's grounds for termination. It's stupid for an organization built around T&A to penalize that, but they have a long history of doing it, so stop whining about selective application of the rules, letting her off is the exception.

Which ones?

Her bosses claim she was MIA for weeks, claiming to be "unable" to make appearances, while at the same time making appearances on Right wing Radio/TV to fan the flames, and doing so as Miss CA, which is a significant issue in itself.

How about you try not showing up to work for weeks, and see how "oppressed" you are as a result.

There is nothing bad about being wrong sometimes. But don't rhetorically flail around when you make a mistake.

That's the only sensible thing you have said, perhaps you should read it to yourself a few times...no offense (that makes it all okay)

>> ^MycroftHomlz:
promote
I see porn in her future...


Gay porn?

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Methinks the man-ladies doth protest too much.

Yeeeeeeep.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Be a man and answer the question.

You're steadily revealing yourself as a fuckin' moron (with a fabulous name).

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Typical cheap, lazy dodge.

1) organizations are not persons, and have no rights, but they do have an obligation to deal fairly, both with their employees, and with the public. You can't open a "no gays" restaurant, but you have the right to leave a restaurant if there are gay people there. Person vs. Business vs. Non-profit are all completely different issues.

2) Applying for 501(3)(c) makes churches and the boy scouts quasi-public entities, they give up some privileges in order to not pay taxes, this does not apply to MAP. Throwing them in shows that you aren't really thinking it through.

3) Prejean is MAPs employee, not just someone who showed up at their event, they have every right to fire her for making PSAs for NOM as Miss CA without their approval, for hiding the existence of the photos before the pageant, and for not meeting her other contractual obligations as Miss CA. MAP still can't decide not to hire black people or gay people, they still must deal fairly with the public.

4) Prejeans gross breach of contract is grounds to fire ANYBODY, the fact that she breached her contract by running around doing a political media blitz is not particularly relevant. She wants to pretend that it's her position, not her actions, which made firing her an option. She wanted to be a martyr, so she did something to get fired, while conflating her misdeeds with her political position. This is all her fault, and she still has not been punished for it, but still stands up and whines about being punished, because the media train wreck is what this is all about, and she does not have the decency, or strength of character to admit her error.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker: Do you also advocate that private organizations such as churches, the boy scouts, and various professional organizations have a "right to dissassociate themselves whenever they like" when applied to gays?

Hmmm, what's the difference? Oh yeah a little thing called 501(3)(c).

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
And make no mistake, that's all this so-called 'issue' ever was...


Yeah, equality for gays?

What's all the fuss about?

Let's be snide and chuckle to ourselves, knowing that our lives will never be affected by such things.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
I have no problem with a gay chick standing up in the MAP and saying that she thinks gay marriage is cool. Why? Because I'm not threatened by other people's opinions. By comparison, the neo-libs & gay lobbyists collapse into puddles of intolerance, fear, and hatred when someone says or does something they disagree with.


perhaps that's because a dissenting view of gay rights usually involves bigotry of some stripe or another? or perhaps that's just more gay propaganda, that equal rights means equal for everyone?

Your video, Miss California Directors Bitchslap NOM, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I'm going to spend the rest of my life on inventing a device that would enable me to stick my hand through the monitor and BITCHSLAP ppl like this guy.

Seriously... Real science here, for all you skeptics.

>> ^deathcow:
As his vids go, this one was blah..


But Fiat Bravo sounds so funny the way he says it.

I also like the annoyed bitchslap towards the Escapist

He downvoted this iphone vid cuz of "downvote coz apple sucks and so does iphone. Nokia FTW". And this was in the queue. Video clearly says what it is... I think it's a similar case. Deserves a *bitchslap, at least IMO.

Oh yeah, he deleted my comment calling his behavior jerky as well.

Sounds like there's no definitive answer, as the submitter says:

My mom decides to buy my brother an Xbox 360 for christmas. We leave that night and return the next morning to find he has sneaked a look....just as my mom thought he would, this is the result...and yes he did get the game i will try to post the second video

bitchslap the paprazzi. i agree, what a disgusting job to do

hehe. got a chuckle from 'actionpack' too, sarzy.
and as much as i'm against, any violent or unwanted physical contact?

yeah, most paparazzi (and the legion of gawking morons they serve) deserve a bitchslap.