Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (76754)	10/7/2003 1:58:34 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"...why should it matter if massage is freed of all potential sexual charge?" Gasp ... our society might crumble under the weight of such an awful transformation. <sarcasm>

To: Neocon who wrote (76754)	10/8/2003 12:25:17 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"The effect, however, is discriminatory, and therefore requires active exemption" Not only the effect, but the intent! "in any case, why should it matter if massage is freed of all potential sexual charge?" That is a weird and transparently biased comment! It also makes you look ridiculous! Firstly, MOHO cannot prevent "sexual charge"--LOL!! MOHO has no possibility of keeping more than a tiny percentage of homosexuals from his service. Eventually, one of them would have a sexual charge! And it is likely that many of his clients will have a sexual nature! So your comment about avoiding "ALL" sexual charge simply exposes your intentional attempt to fool any less involved people who may be on the thread. Other than that....it is none of MOHO's business to over-ride the freedom of conscience of his clients. They have a right to feel and to believe as they choose. MOHO can take a hike! And you are starting to act PHONEY again! Such a shame. You were doing so well...