The EU debate - Part III

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Because you can't find any groups that fit your ridiculous scenario, <doh>
Why can you never address anyone's points? It's embarrassing.

You were wrong about the B&B couple, so you've tried to go off on a tangent and have then refused to address that, either.
Don't you ever get bored of being sucked in by internet drivel and being shown that it's false and why?
It must get quite tedious.
 
It's YOUR assertion. <doh>

I'm not trying to conflate it, I'm simply pointing out a couple of facts as you wriggle away.
It's your assertion. You're saying that they refuse this business, not me.

You're clearly trying to say that they're discriminating on the grounds of sexuality or you don't have a point.
You used it as an example of a non-religious group doing it.
If you're not doing that, then you've got no reason to bring it up, as it doesn't support your point.
 
Why can you never address anyone's points? It's embarrassing.

You were wrong about the B&B couple, so you've tried to go off on a tangent and have then refused to address that, either.
Don't you ever get bored of being sucked in by internet drivel and being shown that it's false and why?
It must get quite tedious.

**** me, you burble on about imaginary religions, and then accuse others of going off on a tangent. :emoticon-0102-bigsm:emoticon-0102-bigsm

Based on your recent shuffle, I'm guessing you've seen the single sex policy on the ferries and camps.

All in all though, you even agree the lass was wrong to refuse, but STILL try to create some sort of defence. Well you did, until you saw you'd screwed up. Now you're just desperately wriggling. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
 
If ýou run a b n b surely you have the right to turn away anybody you don't feel comfortable with?
You actually do, you just can't do it because of their sex, sexuality, religion, disablities and certain other things, depending on the circumstances.
 
**** me, you burble on about imaginary religions, and then accuse others of going off on a tangent. :emoticon-0102-bigsm:emoticon-0102-bigsm

Based on your recent shuffle, I'm guessing you've seen the single sex policy on the ferries and camps.

All in all though, you even agree the lass was wrong to refuse, but STILL try to create some sort of defence. Well you did, until you saw you'd screwed up. Now you're just desperately wriggling. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
I haven't shuffled at all and I haven't looked up any policies. I asked you to support your own claims and you didn't.
As usual though, you're attempting to deflect from the actual point, as you've been proven to be utterly wrong.
No number of smilies covers that up, I'm afraid.
 
You actually do, you just can't do it because of their sex, sexuality, religion, disablities and certain other things, depending on the circumstances.


You can do it based on gender, depending on the circumstances.
 
If ýou run a b n b surely you have the right to turn away anybody you don't feel comfortable with?
The County Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court disagree with you if your grounds for turning them away are based on your disapproval of same sex relationships.
 
I haven't shuffled at all and I haven't looked up any policies. I asked you to support your own claims and you didn't.
As usual though, you're attempting to deflect from the actual point, as you've been proven to be utterly wrong.
No number of smilies covers that up, I'm afraid.

I keep bringing it back to the point, having humoured you with your ridiculous diversions that you can't support. <doh>

You agree with the basic point, so you reckon you're right when you make it, but I'm wrong when I do. Have a little laughing head. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
 
<wah>

What a pathetic, mouthy little twat you really are stumpy. I'd wager you got bullied a lot at school and was probably interfered with by a male family member or 3 :emoticon-0136-giggl

Congratulations for being runaway winner of the title 'Remoaner **** of ****s - 2016' <applause>
Talking of sacks of ****e here's another complete whopper.
 
I keep bringing it back to the point, having humoured you with your ridiculous diversions that you can't support. <doh>

You agree with the basic point, so you reckon you're right when you make it, but I'm wrong when I do. Have a little laughing head. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
Dull slips back into work mode in the last sentence.
 
I keep bringing it back to the point, having humoured you with your ridiculous diversions that you can't support. <doh>

You agree with the basic point, so you reckon you're right when you make it, but I'm wrong when I do. Have a little laughing head. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
You really struggle with this reading stuff, don't you?

I don't agree with the basic point, but you seem to think it's a completely different one to the reality of it, unfortunately.
 
You really struggle with this reading stuff, don't you?

I don't agree with the basic point, but you seem to think it's a completely different one to the reality of it, unfortunately.

I'm not struggling at all. Watching you flounder is a piece of piss. <ok>
 
They'll be similar to the ones where you said I was wrong..until you checked. You're flipflopping all over with this.
It's like you're answering completely different comments to the ones you're quoting.
You literally said the same words as me and yet you think you're disagreeing, for some reason. Weird.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.