Quote:
Originally posted by tisonlyi
Well, there we go. Defeated on your arguement, you move on to pastures new.
|
??
I seem to be on the same subject, namely, state sponsored discrimination, specially, housing.
Quote:
|
I'm not defending legalized segregation, I'm defending the right of people to live in a segment of the community that they can feel comfortable in and be catered for _on their own terms_.
|
Maybe
you need to go read that article again.
The housing is TAX-PAYER SUBSIDIZED.
If people want to segregate themselves, I support their right to do so, but not on the taxpayer dime.
Quote:
|
Not as a burden, not as a single item 'menu option' but wholly and completely catered for.
|
I have no clue what this sentence means.
Quote:
There is a difference between segregation via dogs, guns and "WHITES ONLY" signs and voluntary retreat into sanctuaries of shared belief, culture and lifestyle - which, as pointed out, are not complete monocultures.
|
As I stated above, this "sanctuary" is being built on the tax-payer's dime, which is the source of my complaint.
Quote:
|
And the pork thing.... *sniffs bait, turns away*
|
How can you turn away when you brought up pork?
Quote:
Originally posted by tisonlyi
*though i'd have no troubles in allowing moncultures in specific circumstances for tiny minorities with cultures very different to that which surrounds them every day. (Why should a muslim live in a home where he or she watches others eating pork, wondering if his food is being polluted?)
|
I would suggest if you don't like getting called on things, don't bring them into an argument.