171 replies to this topic

[forumreader]

Despite the ruling this thread is mostly filled with snoody(sp?) hioty toity replies....It seems that a lot of you on here have a holier than thou attitude.

...The attitudes that a lot of you display are closed minded and downright misinformed when it comes to Ms. Teaz...

...You guys get so riled up over a little shop its funny.

Hmmm....Let's talk about attitudes for a minute. In this thread, many who are in support of Ms. Teaz on Sutter St. have been very free with the insults and name-calling directed at those who'd prefer to not see the shop in the Historic District.

The following phrases have been directed at those opposed to the shop on Sutter St.:

"up-tight, prissy attitudes," "bedroom watchers," "uptight citizen's brigade," "snooty, hoity toity," "holier than thou attitudes," "closed minded."

Who is really getting "riled-up" here and jumping to conclusions? Many who support Ms. Teaz on Sutter have quickly concluded that those who don't agree are morally indignant. You've introduced other topics to deflect attention from the issue at hand, while suggesting that an "upright citizen's brigade" and a shifty City Council are motivated to destroy an innocent business.

There should be moral indignation. It should be directed at those who refuse to obey a law because they don't like it.

[Chad Vander Veen]

Who cares about this stupid shop anyway? If you want a d*ldo so bad, buy one on the internet.

[jimfolsomca]

So... what again is the point of your lawsuit? --You want to be able to sell stuff that is more x-rated than the ordinance allows? You hope to use a First Amendment argument to trample over the will of the community?

Great. What a charming neighbor.

Well if we left it up to all u backward religious zealots, we'd all still be driving horse and buggies. Just go back to your breeding chamber and leave those of us who want to progress alone. And we wonder why the middle east is in such turmoil... it's called RELIGION !!!!!!!!!!

[Al Waysrite]

Well if we left it up to all u backward religious zealots, we'd all still be driving horse and buggies. Just go back to your breeding chamber and leave those of us who want to progress alone. And we wonder why the middle east is in such turmoil... it's called RELIGION !!!!!!!!!!

another fine intelligent response (done without studying the issue whatsoever). You'll fit in well with a number of folks here.

[jimfolsomca]

another fine intelligent response (done without studying the issue whatsoever). You'll fit in well with a number of folks here.

Well THANK GOD that there are a "number of folks" that don't just go along with the crowd that doesn't know to engage their brains.

It took all of 2 seconds to see the subject of the thread, and that there were a bunch of dogooders in here, which is all I needed to set me off.

And as for disobeying the "laws"... I wish I had a nickel for everytime I gave the finger to some zealot that went speeding by me at 20 miles over the speed limit with a fish on his trunklid.

[mylo]

Hmmm....Let's talk about attitudes for a minute. In this thread, many who are in support of Ms. Teaz on Sutter St. have been very free with the insults and name-calling directed at those who'd prefer to not see the shop in the Historic District.

Hey now forumreader, don't clump everyone in with a few vocal propponents. I think there's 3 classes in this argument. Those that are against the degredation of Sutter Street, Those that are strictly opposed to oppression (the verbal supporters you are admonishing), and what I consider the majority "Who cares?" group, that don't strictly oppose the store, and feel just staying silent is the best option.

In the above, you could say the #3 group is "okay" or even "for" the store. Since they're not actively campaigning against it. They may even be in support of it, but not reaching out to enforce their support since the store is already there.

Just be carefull when generaliznig "those who are in support" as name-calling.

I'm all for public process. If you oppose the store, lobby city council. If you don't care, don't. City council's job is to weed out the few complainers and vote for the majority of the city, even if they don't speak up for themselves.

[Chad Vander Veen]

Well THANK GOD that there are a "number of folks" that don't just go along with the crowd that doesn't know to engage their brains.

It took all of 2 seconds to see the subject of the thread, and that there were a bunch of dogooders in here, which is all I needed to set me off.

And as for disobeying the "laws"... I wish I had a nickel for everytime I gave the finger to some zealot that went speeding by me at 20 miles over the speed limit with a fish on his trunklid.

Wow, you're off to an impressive start. Hyperbole, ignorance and hatred all rolled into once offensive package.

[jimfolsomca]

Wow, you're off to an impressive start. Hyperbole, ignorance and hatred all rolled into once offensive package.

Well I'm an old retired dude... spent my whole life having to endure the procreationists... and as we can see in Iraq, it doesn't matter what I say or think, religion dominates the world and the way everyone is forced to live.

I've found the only way to enact change is with a 2X4. Kinda like dubya's philosophy. So I totally understand Ms Teaz's approach.

[mylo]

"procreationists" ... Is that the worship of procreation? Because if that's a religion, count me in!

[forumreader]

Hey now forumreader, don't clump everyone in with a few vocal propponents. I think there's 3 classes in this argument. Those that are against the degredation of Sutter Street, Those that are strictly opposed to oppression (the verbal supporters you are admonishing), and what I consider the majority "Who cares?" group, that don't strictly oppose the store, and feel just staying silent is the best option.

You are right, mylo. I did not intend to lump all Ms. Teaz supporters into the same group. In fact, in the first draft of this post, I had written "many supporters," but that was not what ended up being posted. I'll go back and edit it.

I simply wanted to point out who was doing most of the name calling. And it looks like we have a new member adding more venom.

Actually, I lean more towards the "who cares" crowd regarding Ms. Teaz.....What is upsetting is the owner's blatant disregard for the ordinance, and the immature arguments that justify breaking the law. I can't believe what I am reading. Because some people break speed laws on the streets, the rest of us are justified in breaking laws that we don't like?!.....People actually believe this!!!

[Chad Vander Veen]

Well I'm an old retired dude... spent my whole life having to endure the procreationists... and as we can see in Iraq, it doesn't matter what I say or think, religion dominates the world and the way everyone is forced to live.

I've found the only way to enact change is with a 2X4. Kinda like dubya's philosophy. So I totally understand Ms Teaz's approach.

In this statement you are against religion forcing you to act a certain way, yet you then go on the claim that the best way to resolve a situation in your favor is with a 2x4, i.e. with force.

Add hypocritical and violent to the list.

[jimfolsomca]

In this statement you are against religion forcing you to act a certain way, yet you then go on the claim that the best way to resolve a situation in your favor is with a 2x4, i.e. with force.

Add hypocritical and violent to the list.

Got your attention, didn't I

[mylo]

Got your attention, didn't I

You're my new messiah in the church of procreation and violence!

[bishmasterb]

Actually, I lean more towards the "who cares" crowd regarding Ms. Teaz.....What is upsetting is the owner's blatant disregard for the ordinance, and the immature arguments that justify breaking the law.

I don't know how others felt, but I don't think I said it was "okay to break the law." I've simply said that people have no obligation to obey the law, and do so out of fear of consequences or an alignment of morality, but not out of obligation.

Breaking the law can be serious, and can carry significant consequences. One should only break the law if the benefit of doing so outweighs the penalties.

[Dave Burrell]

You're my new messiah in the church of procreation and violence!

I like this new guy - he's feisty