|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 9, 2014 15:23:15 GMT
Again, stating I'm someone else doesn't make it so. I changed my username here after Limapea2 went crazy. Just don't need that BS. But I'm still not Mrs T. Why does it matter so much? Stick to the conversation at hand and don't worry about trying to out Mrs T. Fair point, and that comment was not nice of me.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 9, 2014 15:48:39 GMT
JustKallie, I'm pretty sure I don't need you telling me which laws I should be supporting. Once again, you are being patronizing. I would think you'd want to work on that bad habit. It alienates people.
|
|
The Great Carpezio
Pearl Clutcher
Something profound goes here.
Posts: 2,973
Jun 25, 2014 21:50:33 GMT
|
Post by The Great Carpezio on Jul 9, 2014 16:13:08 GMT
Lucy, you know if you are liberal you MUST agree with blue laws. You can't make up your own mind because ALL liberals think alike and agree with everything and worship unions and Obama. So there.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 9, 2014 16:26:49 GMT
KatyCupcake is noregrets? That explains so much. They are also Mrs Tyler so that explains everything. Let's all just throw pea names into a bowl and draw one out each day to post with.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 17:18:54 GMT
JustKallie, I'm pretty sure I don't need you telling me which laws I should be supporting. Once again, you are being patronizing. I would think you'd want to work on that bad habit. It alienates people. I was pointing out your example was not relevant to the position you were espousing. I don't care if I alienate you. I just hate the proliferation of mistruths. ETA - I think you are a wee bit oversensitive when someone has a point you can't argue with. AS for patronizing, you are patronizing me for being correct. I guess you subscribe to the thought that you will "win" by being louder or meaner. Won't work with me, sorry!
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 9, 2014 17:34:35 GMT
JustKallie, I'm pretty sure I don't need you telling me which laws I should be supporting. Once again, you are being patronizing. I would think you'd want to work on that bad habit. It alienates people. I was pointing out your example was not relevant to the position you were espousing. I don't care if I alienate you. I just hate the proliferation of mistruths. ETA - I think you are a wee bit oversensitive when someone has a point you can't argue with. AS for patronizing, you are patronizing me for being correct. I guess you subscribe to the thought that you will "win" by being louder or meaner. Won't work with me, sorry! Did you just say I'm patronizing you for being correct, when all you did was express an opinion about what YOU think MY opinion SHOULD be? oh wait, yes, you also gave us another sorely-needed history lesson. There were no "mistruths" in my post. Your opinion that my example wasn't relevant is incorrect. There was no point I can't argue. So you enjoy thinking you're the smartest girl in the room. Some conservatives are lapping it up because they think you agree with them. Just wait till you post something they disagree with.
|
|
|
Post by *KatyCupcake* on Jul 9, 2014 17:38:37 GMT
Again, stating I'm someone else doesn't make it so. I changed my username here after Limapea2 went crazy. Just don't need that BS. But I'm still not Mrs T. Why does it matter so much? Stick to the conversation at hand and don't worry about trying to out Mrs T. Fair point, and that comment was not nice of me. I'm happy to let it go if you are.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 17:44:40 GMT
You know, I go to sleep at night just fine regardless of what you or others think. Although I have no idea why you get so worked up over people who disagree with you and can present their disagreements in an articulate way without hurling insults, bullying or just generally being mean.
And yes, I am a smart girl - and I don't feel bad about it one bit, regardless of your attempt to be mean about it.
ETA - This is in regards to repeated insults lucyg hurls at me not to anyone else in this thread....
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 9, 2014 18:06:18 GMT
I will repeat what I said in the other thread: I don't care if you disagree with me. I do object to your (deliberately, as far as I can tell) annoying presentation. I am not "worked up" nor am I "hurling insults" but I get that it feeds into your sense of superiority to say so, so go ahead and carry on. I'll await your response which I'm sure will not be patronizing in any way. @@
ETA ooops! Just noticed the accusation of "bullying" as well. Oh please. Just ... really?? Do you understand the meaning of the word?
No need to continue to respond, after all. I believe I am done with this conversation.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 18:29:44 GMT
I will repeat what I said in the other thread: I don't care if you disagree with me. I do object to your (deliberately, as far as I can tell) annoying presentation. I am not "worked up" nor am I "hurling insults" but I get that it feeds into your sense of superiority to say so, so go ahead and carry on. I'll await your response which I'm sure will not be patronizing in any way. @@ ETA ooops! Just noticed the accusation of "bullying" as well. Oh please. Just ... really?? Do you understand the meaning of the word? No need to continue to respond, after all. I believe I am done with this conversation. I am telling you how I perceive your comments since you are so free to tell me how you perceive mine. And just because you don't think you engage in certain behaviors doesn't mean that you don't - it just means you might not be aware that you do. You certainly use very aggressive words to indicate displeasure with people who have a differing opinion that you, and they are certainly not words people use in polite conversation. But just for the record - in your last note you accused me of being superior, of being patronizing and implying I can't define a word in a dictionary. If you think that makes it a nice post, well, what can I say?
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 9, 2014 19:42:12 GMT
JustKallie, I'm pretty sure I don't need you telling me which laws I should be supporting. Once again, you are being patronizing. I would think you'd want to work on that bad habit. It alienates people. I was pointing out your example was not relevant to the position you were espousing. I don't care if I alienate you. I just hate the proliferation of mistruths. ETA - I think you are a wee bit oversensitive when someone has a point you can't argue with. AS for patronizing, you are patronizing me for being correct. I guess you subscribe to the thought that you will "win" by being louder or meaner. Won't work with me, sorry! And I think the courts got this one wrong and my guess is that you are going to see more and more of them (blue laws) overturned. I would assume that Lucy agrees making her point entirely relevant. I'm curious what these mistruths are that you think you are shedding light on here.
|
|
|
Post by I-95 on Jul 9, 2014 20:43:34 GMT
I'm curious about that too.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 9, 2014 20:58:41 GMT
I'm curious about that too. I'm also curious about the use of Newspeak. 'Mistruth'? Interesting bellyfeel unword.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 20:59:58 GMT
I was pointing out your example was not relevant to the position you were espousing. I don't care if I alienate you. I just hate the proliferation of mistruths. ETA - I think you are a wee bit oversensitive when someone has a point you can't argue with. AS for patronizing, you are patronizing me for being correct. I guess you subscribe to the thought that you will "win" by being louder or meaner. Won't work with me, sorry! And I think the courts got this one wrong and my guess is that you are going to see more and more of them (blue laws) overturned. I would assume that Lucy agrees making her point entirely relevant. I'm curious what these mistruths are that you think you are shedding light on here. Blue laws are going away due to economics, not religion. The Supreme Court has upheld Blue Laws in court. So that is the point. She was claiming that Blue Laws were in violation of the Constitution by saying the states have instituted religious laws infringing on her right to purchase adult beverages on Sunday. The Supreme Court has disagreed with her opinion on Blue Laws and has upheld them as Constitutional, negating her argument as the Supreme Court has declared Blue Laws to have secular intent, not religious ... In reality, economics will eventually allow her to get her way and allow her to purchase said adult beverages on Sundays at some point, but that will be due to corporations lobbying politicians to change laws in order to allow said companies even more opportunity to make a buck. As I said, where I live, Blue Laws are in force for a half day on Saturday and all day Sunday. Across the pond, in the lucky countries that have them, the retail sector has the opportunity for some real quality of life by having the same time off as their family. I was merely stating that most center-left nations love Blue Laws over here and fight tooth and nail to keep them... Her right to religious freedom is not infringed by Blue Laws - I merely pointed that out.
|
|
|
Post by I-95 on Jul 9, 2014 21:05:57 GMT
Let me get this straight.....when Lucy accuses you of being superior, patronizing etc, you think that's not a nice thing to post, but when you say....
Although I have no idea why you get so worked up over people who disagree with you and can present their disagreements in an articulate way without hurling insults, bullying or just generally being mean. You think that's OK to post?
I've read all three pages of this thread and I can't say as I know where Lucy was 'hurling insults', or 'being mean', or even bullying you. But if she was.....Pot meet Kettle. You don't seem to have any problem hurling insults back again, and you have no idea why she gets 'so worked up'? Didn't you just say in a post that you were a smart girl? Because that <blink,blink> 'I do declare, I have no idea why you would get all worked up', Scarlett O'Hara act just doesn't fly. The rest of the smart girls here see right through that.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 9, 2014 21:07:55 GMT
And yet some lower courts have invalidated them because the laws don't have secular standing, which brings us back to a difference of opinion.
eta - you edited so I didn't have a chance to address this:Again, what you have pointed out is your opinion. And People v. Yafee wasn't decided based on economics.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 21:34:18 GMT
And yet some lower courts have invalidated them because the laws don't have secular standing, which brings us back to a difference of opinion. eta - you edited so I didn't have a chance to address this:Again, what you have pointed out is your opinion. And People v. Yafee wasn't decided based on economics. Well, until Blue Laws are declared unconstitutional, which they have not been after Supreme Court review, they are not infringing on her religious freedoms. So, why don't we say that it is the opinion of the Supreme Court and they disagree with her. I could care less of the religious implication of Blue Laws and I am actually fiercely in favor of them for the protection of the retail work force and I am in favor of expanding them rather than repealing them. But, as I said, it will be a moot point because greedy corporations with expensive lobbyists will get their way and repeal all Blue Laws at some point, so it won't be too long that you need to worry about stocking up on Saturdays!
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 9, 2014 21:43:02 GMT
Cool, so not a 'mistruth' after all. FTR, I disagree with blue laws because, well, I also disagree with SCOTUS' interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by Regina Phalange on Jul 9, 2014 21:49:12 GMT
KatyCupcake is noregrets? That explains so much. They are also Mrs Tyler so that explains everything. Nope. I saw Katycupcake actually apologize for misunderstanding someone on another thread. She actually said "sorry" not "I'm sorry you were offended by what I said." Mrs. Tyler never apologized directly. At least not that I ever saw.
|
|
|
Post by rebelyelle on Jul 9, 2014 21:54:46 GMT
Cool, so not a 'mistruth' after all. FTR, I disagree with blue laws because, well, I also disagree with SCOTUS' interpretation. Agreed. Especially because, here in the states, blue laws STARTED to stop people from buying alcohol on Sundays, when "they should have been at Church". (Or, restricted work hours on Sundays, because, again - they should have been in church). I have no problem with a company, large or small, choosing to be open or not on Saturdays or Sundays for any reason whatsoever. I do have a problem with the government (local, state or federal) dictating Sunday store hours to for religious reasons (how blue laws historically began). I'd rather see them abolished and let businesses make their own decisions. We have labor laws in the US that afford reasonable protections to employees (some that need to be revisited), but I don't think restricting weekend hours will do anyone any good. I'm not in retail, but I work a lot of nights and weekends, as does my husband. We manage, as do my friends and family who work in healthcare, restaurants, construction, creative fields, and a limitless number of other professions. The world does not operate on a Monday-Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM timetable. It just is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 22:14:43 GMT
Just a different perspective - while the US does not operate on a M-F 9am to 5pm, there are nations around the world who are fighting to preserve that way of life to ensure the health and happiness of their citizens. To them, a world of things open 24 hours is unnecessary, and they will state how horrible that must be for the people who need to work and raise a family in a world like that. Not passing judgement per se, but the idea is so alien to them that they cannot fathom it. But then again, people get paid money to have kids here, but that is another topic for another day...
My little village grocery store closes at 4pm on Saturday and does not open until Monday at 8am. After a few weekends of running out of things, you just adjust. I will say that the workers who hole down retail jobs here are competent and enjoy their jobs, and you certainly don't get the turnover that you would in US in the retail sector.
So, while I agree Blue Laws were founded in a religious place, I actually feel that in most of the nations who have adopted them, they have done so for what the US would consider a very secular and slightly liberal reason - workers rights, union rights and quality of life - and I am okay with that.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 9, 2014 22:27:43 GMT
Well, then I'm sure we'll see you on our annual 'How dare people go to restaurants on Thanksgiving!' thread.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 22:34:51 GMT
Well, then I'm sure we'll see you on our annual 'How dare people go to restaurants on Thanksgiving!' thread. The funny thing is that restaurants are exempt. Sure they close on random days during the week that you can never remember, but they are there to sop up the business on nights, weekends and holidays when there is literally nothing better to do than go out to eat because everything else is closed!!! But to be fair, servers get paid a living wage here. And Thanksgiving is a moot point. But Christmas and Easter? You are on your own. No chance of service! ETA - It is almost like the governments are trying to make sure everyone gets apiece of your spending money! But it works and I will tell you that few people complain!
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jul 9, 2014 22:39:02 GMT
Where is 'here' Kallie? I missed it if you've already said it.
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 22:40:11 GMT
Where is 'here' Kallie? I missed it if you've already said it. Mainland!
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jul 9, 2014 22:44:12 GMT
Mainland??
|
|
|
Post by justkallie on Jul 9, 2014 22:46:11 GMT
Due to some some people tracking people's movements and calling employers and such, I don't divulge much more than that...
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jul 9, 2014 22:48:48 GMT
Due to some some people tracking people's movements and calling employers and such, I don't divulge much more than that... Fair enough Didn't you say you were new here and hadn't been a Pea..... Sorry, not meaning to be on your case.....still trying to get my head around the new avatars and names.
|
|
scrappammie
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Jun 25, 2014 21:31:40 GMT
|
Post by scrappammie on Jul 9, 2014 22:57:09 GMT
FWIW, I don't think I've ever read so many threads where it is so important for a poster to point out what "a smart girl" she is, how "comfortable in my own skin" or, my personal favorite, 'I'm a girl and daddy thinks I'm the best-est ever' (I'm paraphrasing there - sue me.)
At the risk of being condescending: Justkallie, I'm sure you have interesting things to say but constantly asserting how special you are does not, indeed, make it so.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say it is the constant inclusion of this mindset in your manner of posting that foments the antagonism.
"Proliferation of mistruths" -- really?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 12:14:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 23:30:40 GMT
And yet some lower courts have invalidated them because the laws don't have secular standing, which brings us back to a difference of opinion. eta - you edited so I didn't have a chance to address this:Again, what you have pointed out is your opinion. And People v. Yafee wasn't decided based on economics. Well, until Blue Laws are declared unconstitutional, which they have not been after Supreme Court review, they are not infringing on her religious freedoms. So, why don't we say that it is the opinion of the Supreme Court and they disagree with her. I could care less of the religious implication of Blue Laws and I am actually fiercely in favor of them for the protection of the retail work force and I am in favor of expanding them rather than repealing them.
But, as I said, it will be a moot point because greedy corporations with expensive lobbyists will get their way and repeal all Blue Laws at some point, so it won't be too long that you need to worry about stocking up on Saturdays! I'll look forward to your polarizing posts come Black Friday and the holiday shopping season.
|
|