Lefty

For what it's worth, I agree with you. The only question is if society is ready for our brand of egalitarian policy. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I'm a bit too jaded to complain about trifles like that. You're correct, though. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Yeah, that's another thing that surprised me about quade's irony argument. How many times a day on these forums are GOP politicians called (correctly, in some cases) closet homosexuals? That gay bar probably had to tear up their rewards cards. Shrug. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Gentleman's choice. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Thank you, Wendy. Trying to get a straightforward answer on these forums and I get met with contortions that would put an earthworm to shame. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Why is it silly? The bakery owners' actions are no more or less "satirical" than the actions of the bar owner. Are you going to defend the bakery's actions and bans the same way you have done for the gay bar? If not, why not? Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

They're satirizing the gay bar in the news story I linked. Your move. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Before you get too pleased with yourself--I was actually just trying to coax that out of you but lost patience. See, what you've just done is admitted the double-standard and lack of consistency that I've been alluding to. A gay bar can ban patrons outside their demographic, even posting a sign stating such. You assume it is ironic and satirical even though the tone of the story, the source of the story, and the owner of the bar suggest it is anything but. Flip that around. The owners of a Christian bakery want to attract others like them to a place they can feel comfortable and do business based on shared values. They post a sign saying "No homosexual couples allowed" because that demographic does not comport with the beliefs of the owners and their clientele. Would you still laugh it off as satire? Would society? Will it be considered just a joke to be shared by anyone who reads the sign? I'm guessing not. How is one better than the other? Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Since you won't just come out and say it, I'll assume you're referring to the fact that the establishment is a "gay" bar. So the legislators are unlikely to visit in the first place. Is that correct? Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Aaaaand I have no idea what you're talking about now. Did the second clicky not work for you? In any case, a better example of satire or irony would involve the pizzeria or the bar offering all legislators who support the bill free jumbo sausages in fresh, hot buns or something along those lines. That would at least avoid giving the appearance of lowering themselves to the level of bigotry they're opposing. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Yes, yes. So, is that second link I provided tickling your satire bone yet? Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

It's called political satire. You might want to look into it. Funny, I don't remember there being so many finely-honed senses of humor around when discussing satire by, say, Rush Limbaugh. Read that second story I linked. The owner of the bar is gay. I don't get the impression he's joking. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I'd say that demonstrates the point I was making about inconsistency pretty well. Thanks! Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I'm sure everyone would appreciate the dry humor of a "No gays or blacks" sign with equally ironic intentions. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Do people not see that it weakens the argument against being able to ban homosexuals from businesses on moral grounds? Is popular opinion the only reason one ban is condemned while the other is celebrated? On a purely personal note, I say it serves the idiot legislators right. But on a political/philosophical level, it makes the business owners banning them just as bigoted as it would if they had banned gay people. Just looking for some consistency. Clicky 1 Clicky 2 Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin