Should Bridget stay on the Shrine?

Yes

82 (57.3%)

No

61 (42.7%)

Total Members Voted: 37

[TN_FSP]

Go Bridget.

BTW, I saw Corpse Bride last night.

Why would you want to go up there when people are dying to get down here? A classic line

[Soundwave]

The music was terrible.

[TN_FSP]

The music was terrible.

Yo Mama!

[Bill Brasky]

ugh. just let this thing die.

but allow me to sum this up (for all the newbies, such as yourself)

the point isn't whether it's violating someone's rights (we both agree no rights are being denied either way).  It's ironic b/c your koom-by-ya/include everyone-no-matter-what take sounds very non-libertarian in nature, (however maybe you don't claim to be a libertarian either) and more along the lines of the PC trash that socialists try and push. Ah, but I digress. Take no offense.

the point is to create a special area, for certain individuals, and it's a priviledge to be classed under based on their physical gender (and it doesnt' matter if they have a mental delusion which results in them thinking so).

Why not just make another special shrine for transgenders, witches, pixies or people who think they're the re-incarnation of Elvis?  Leave the Female shrine to actual Females, not people w/ delusions.

Well, lets see here...  The socially conservative Mr. Grey is going to tell me a few things about how life should work.  Step one, open the comments with a jab at the length of time I've spent here.  Listen here skippy, just because you have a year under your belt doesn't take my breath away.  In fact, it makes me laugh at you, because in your little unformed mind, a year on a BBS means something?  It means you have time on your hands, and you use it here.  That is all.  It's not like I was born under the porch a few months ago, the 34 years I've spent on Earth are what count.  Three thousand posts arent worth shit if all they contain is limp wristed comments and imaginary conspiracies.  So, get your head out of your ass, you are suffocating.  

Next, the topic of individuals.  It seems to me, you have drawn this black and white picture of socialism versus individualism.  Your question of my political opinions is valid, and a pretty interesting coincidence actually, because I dont really follow one specific political pattern, but the best pieces out of all of them.  I will probably never accurately lable it, nor do I need to.  However, I do happen to be an individualist, which is the core of my political and social beliefs.  You, sir, are an egotist.  I can see your confusion.  I can see it in your thoughts and comments.  You ooze it.  An individualist can take his mind and place it into the situation of other individuals, thereby accepting all individuals as human and deserving of equal treatment.  Not RIGHTS, treatment.  It does NOT mean you have to "koom-bay-ya"  as you so eloquently put it.  This is why people like yourself say "that wouldnt happen to me!"  about unusual situations, because those situations probably wouldnt happen to a 29 year old white male living above poverty in Canada. (or whatever you happen to be)

So, the question really seems to be, in your opinion about creating  a "special place" for "different people".  You don't own the board, Ian does.  And you don't own Bridget's body, Bridget does.  Therefore, the matter is between them, and their agreement, or conflict.  Not you, not me.  I think that sounds extremely Libertarian, but I didn't manufacture it for that purpose.  I also happen to think saying "lets create a special place for people who are different by my standards" sounds very un-libertarian, and also very un-individualistic.  My vote for allowing her to stay is based on individualism, and also on the rules set forth by FTL.

[Grey]

Well hey there Bill - some interesting comments.

Well, lets see here...  The socially conservative Mr. Grey is going to tell me a few things about how life should work.  Step one, open the comments with a jab at the length of time I've spent here.  Listen here skippy, just because you have a year under your belt doesn't take my breath away.  In fact, it makes me laugh at you, because in your little unformed mind, a year on a BBS means something?  It means you have time on your hands, and you use it here.  That is all.  It's not like I was born under the porch a few months ago, the 34 years I've spent on Earth are what count.  Three thousand posts arent worth shit if all they contain is limp wristed comments and imaginary conspiracies.  So, get your head out of your ass, you are suffocating. 

Actually, if you'll notice by the lapse in my reply, I really have no time anymore.  I try and come on here at least once every couple weeks, and I enjoy replying to msg's like this...
"head out of my ass"? ohhh touchy touchy there Billy-boy - I just think it's silly that anyone feels that just b/c they think they belong to any given group they therefore are entitled to be so - that is foolish. But hey, who cares, right? if anyone want to allow anyone into their group for any reason, so be it.  The point of this thread is to put in your 2 cents. (like what I'm doing now).

Next, the topic of individuals.  It seems to me, you have drawn this black and white picture of socialism versus individualism.  Your question of my political opinions is valid, and a pretty interesting coincidence actually, because I dont really follow one specific political pattern, but the best pieces out of all of them.  I will probably never accurately lable it, nor do I need to.  However, I do happen to be an individualist, which is the core of my political and social beliefs.  You, sir, are an egotist.  I can see your confusion.  I can see it in your thoughts and comments.  You ooze it.  An individualist can take his mind and place it into the situation of other individuals, thereby accepting all individuals as human and deserving of equal treatment.  Not RIGHTS, treatment.  It does NOT mean you have to "koom-bay-ya"  as you so eloquently put it.  This is why people like yourself say "that wouldnt happen to me!"  about unusual situations, because those situations probably wouldnt happen to a 29 year old white male living above poverty in Canada. (or whatever you happen to be)

*yawn*, yes... and? oh, I'm an ego-ist?  What? b/c I don't automatically think anyone should automatically be recognized b/c they think so?  Well, yeah, I'm not PC, no kidding.
What?? Now you're making rash generalizations - "that wouldn't happen to me" what're you talking about??? um yes, I think I'm invincible and more important than anyone else. Please.    Dude, the point is, it's up to whoever created this "special group" as to who gains membership.

So, the question really seems to be, in your opinion about creating  a "special place" for "different people".  You don't own the board, Ian does.  And you don't own Bridget's body, Bridget does.  Therefore, the matter is between them, and their agreement, or conflict.  Not you, not me.  I think that sounds extremely Libertarian, but I didn't manufacture it for that purpose.  I also happen to think saying "lets create a special place for people who are different by my standards" sounds very un-libertarian, and also very un-individualistic.  My vote for allowing her to stay is based on individualism, and also on the rules set forth by FTL.

You seem to be suggesting that I want to brush all different people away, under the doormat.  ugh. again, please... this is what I'm talking about this, koom-bye-yah, PC attitude.  Everyone thinks they have a right to be accepted into every group they deem worthy of their membership. Sorry, that's not the case. I'm a white male, yes, I have no right being a member of, let's say, the transgender society of north america (or whatever). (well, any group, really).  Yeah, I know, people want to be accepted, and hey, I know personally rejection sucks.  But that's life. 

But no, you're absolutely wrong - having the freedom to create a group and having the freedom to decide who is allowed in for WHATEVER reason is absolutely, 100%, freedom-based, and very pro-libertarian.   So you don't identify yourself as a Lib either, but in this manner, I don't think I'm taking anything but that kind of position.  Who said I'm trying to actually force Ian or Bridget to do anything? What a silly waste of time. If Ian wants to start posting pics of Jem and The Holograms in their, so what.  It's his property.  Likewise if he wants to post racist jew gay pornography, again, it's his right - but those too would be dumb ideas too, given it goes against the very purpose of the room. (which, I remind you, is to post pics of females).