@pumpkin-eater said:

OMG. I didn't know that. Just googled it..... that is sickening in the worst way.

When libs make no sense at all, but never stop emotionally hawking an issue,

to me, you have to look for what affect they collectively want to effect... lol

It seems like they don't really care about mmgw, or trans/gay issues, or

putting women/girls in danger/losing all privacy... forcing gay "marriage" on

our country, and the redefinition of an institution....

their emotional arguments are shallow, and usually make no sense at all.

So, why? Maybe it's the fighting of the battle that gives them specialness/eliteness,

and it make them stand out in a crowd. All of a sudden, they are freaking on top

of the world important.

Just a guess, I don't understand it still.

@oldbrownsfan said:

It's interesting, some of these costas type people - what is it about them that they

bring politics into the places they shouldn't? Because they have a stage to be famous

to the acitivist left?

In all my career years, I didn't talk politics at work. When I was the only pc-based programmer/business analyst

for a whole company... nobody knew I was a conservative. Liberals are hardcore angry reactionaries,

I've seen it happen. We just did out jobs. One time, a few hard core libs had algore campaign

stuff on their desks, and a friend went and put up a few Bush things on his wall.

Every conservative on this board can figure out what happened. The couple of liberal idiots sent in

a complaint that my friend was creating discord with them, and they were offended.

I swear one of those two jerk women - they didn't shower very often, looked like masculine gay

ugly fairies.... woodypeckerhead could have been one of them...

It's liberals than get so adamant about going out of their way to make a splash politically when

it is the wrong place, wrong time, wrong way....

always? seems to be the left. "look at me, in your face" bs.

just inspires longterm belligerence.

I wish you few libs would put me on ignore for real. Right now, it's a fake ignore, to get

me and others to not disagree with you, while you still smart ass your way through

any thread you don't like.

Say, why don't you and the other main idiot and his highness all get together email-wise,

and conspire to put me on ignore ! Wait, that's been done at least once back in the day.

They started trouble endlessly, trying to get a conservative poster to get all huffy,

and make some mistake in replying to all their garbage, and then feign offense

at being attacked like they attack, to try to make it a liberal comment only board.

but sheply and a few others never STFU. So, until you STFU, you don't have me

or anybody else on ignore, really. Too bad, if you couple of dumbfooks ignored me,

I would never have to respond, would I?

S.........T..............F.............U and leave people you don't agree with alone, birdpoop brain woodpecker.

And again, I don't think the NFL is worried about the "consequences" you think will happen. If the governor wants to explain to his state how he drive away the super bowl though, he's more than welcome to.

@westside-steve said:

That's actually an excellent question but remember it works from both sides.

WSS

I never said it doesn't. But one side is bringing up majority rule, and I'm wondering if they realize how that will affect other social issues if we go off of the same rule.

@mld-woody said:

What if the majority doesn't want the law?

WSS

@mld-woody said:

All you have to do is read the titles of the links to see I have a point - the NFL can try to intimidate with consequences, but

right back at the NFL. That's all. There are consequences against the NFL, too. I just listed a couple.

Consequences is your defense of the NFL. My counter is that that is a double-edged sword. The NFL has been

losing for various reasons. But consequences of what they are doing is causing it. That most

certainly is part of the topic at hand.

The NFL is possibly getting involved in liberal politics do try to fix that? Bad, really dishonest idea.

The NFL got it's ass kicked when it left it's friend fArt Schmodell take our Browns. And we made

the NFL give us our team back. But teams moving, halftime shows that alienate a lot of viewers,

or at least disinterest viewers, leftwing politics getting onto the field, gay football player controversy,

it's ruining the NFL. Patriot cheating controversies, poor officiating controversies,

player drugs/crimes controversies, steeler violent cheapshot controversies, teams moving...

doesn't paint a pretty picture. Everybody knows there are a lot of reasons why the NFL

is starting to see disinterest. We had friends over, and turned the tv to pause and had

dinner, etc, and ignored the hafltime show. The commercials aren't often funny anymore.

But getting into political crap is one of them - take it to the bank, and this garbage with

the NFL getting really stupid with Texas is most definately another straw to NFL fans.

The NFL has fallen for a lot of reasons, not because you think they're super liberal.

This is also not on topic. The NFL can refuse to play SBs in Texas and Southern states are more than welcome to keep the NFL out.

Which, the NFL is already doing. The niners are an example, Woody. The consequences

are a double-edged sword. Cuts both ways.

And the southern governors are more than welcome to say they don't want to host to biggest sporting event in our country...

https://govt.westlaw.com/wciji/Document/I2cd3bf7be10d11dab058a118868d70a9?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

for the thousandth time, nobody doesn't know that. But like I mentioned,

a lot of Rep governors in the south could tell the NFL to shove their superbowls.

and the NFL would end up not hardly having any good state to have it in.

Of course consequences can bounce either direction.

the left only wants consequences going towards the right.

I'd have to ask Gipper on the law, but deciding to pull the superbowl, fine,

but threatening to pull it if the state gov doesn't violate it's own law...

I wonder if that is possibly racketeering. ....where's Gipper......

And again, for the thousandth time, you don't get freedom of consequence.

@oldbrownsfan said:

True. I wonder that how many of them let their children go into "unisex" bathrooms.

I doubt hardly any. It seems to be more taking down of American society/structure/culture

to effect a new utopian kind of existence in gov. Star Trek happyland equality, especially

everybody gets to win the lottery and be rich....

Something not mentally healthy or normal.

Sometimes I wonder about people who go off the deep end over all this, and wonder

if it's like John Lennon's song "imagine there's no country, it's easy if you try..." etc etc.

Dreaming of utopia, and hate reality and everything in it accordingly.

Mental disorders.

the NFL to go shove their superbowls. Let the NFL have the superbowl in the middle

of a blizzard in Green Bay. and have a nice day, NFL liberal sombeitches.

Getting into political coercion is the worst idea the NFL could have. Letting kaeperclusterfooknick

alienate half of the NFL audience was an indicator.

@calfoxwc said:

We have elevated a mental disorder to a civil right. One may delude themselves into thinking they are the wrong sex but their DNA and physical bodies say differently.

Not to mention the rights of the majority being trampled on to cater to a few. Women and girls should have the right to go to a public restroom without any men present. Seems like common sense but common sense is getting harder to find these days.

political run those states. Sure, they can pull their superbowls from Texas.

but they can't try to be the Texas gov with threats of economic intimidation, that's

a bit different. Pull em, don't pull em... but using the ability to pull them as coercion..

not the same thing.