@mld-woody said:

Typo, you're right. SJW

I knew that, just fucking with you.

WSS

@mld-woody said:

Of course you'd call that "freaking out"... He's poking fun at outdated beliefs from the past. No one is getting "outraged".

In your attempt, and others, to attack the "SWJ liberal" at every opportunity you seemed to have forgotten what actual outrage is...

No wait, that was just a typical Steve

Just for the record shouldn't that be SJW? Maybe all that rage makes it hard to think.

??

WSS

@chemist said:

What do you think the 14th amendment is?

Look up Scalia's view on it in regards to women...

@westside-steve said:

One part I had to laugh out loud at was Oliver freaking out because somebody said no matter what "even if they're homos."

What do you guys think the Q in LGBTQ stands for? I mean while we're getting all outraged and all...

WSS

Of course you'd call that "freaking out"... He's poking fun at outdated beliefs from the past. No one is getting "outraged".

In your attempt, and others, to attack the "SWJ liberal" at every opportunity you seemed to have forgotten what actual outrage is...

No wait, that was just a typical Steve

What do you guys think the Q in LGBTQ stands for? I mean while we're getting all outraged and all...

WSS

@mld-woody said:

You don't think there should be something in the Constitution guaranteeing equal protection for women and men? The majority of our states do. I see no reason not to. 

That's pretty vague Woody, so I have to say no.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

It's not? I watched, I always enjoy this guy it. It's really not about much of anything except wringing his hands about the fact that we don't have something in a constitution guaranteeing oh, and here I'm being facetious, lawyers the right to sue at the drop of a hat.

WSS

You don't think there should be something in the Constitution guaranteeing equal protection for women and men? The majority of our states do. I see no reason not to. 

@mld-woody said:

Outside of your first statement I agree. Of course that's not really what the video is about...

It's not? I watched, I always enjoy this guy it. It's really not about much of anything except wringing his hands about the fact that we don't have something in a constitution guaranteeing oh, and here I'm being facetious, lawyers the right to sue at the drop of a hat. Oh yes, and some jokes.

WSS

@tiamat63 said:

Earned Run Average?

Beat me to it!

@westside-steve said:

I don't think women should be in the front lines in the military.

I don't think any job that requires physical performance should lower the standards the slightest bit to include women.

I think women are better suited toward child-rearing. Not universally but better.

Don't care about equal pay unless it's for performance in which case better performance earns more money.

And finally it's just another way the trial lawyers can file frivolous lawsuits.

WSS

Outside of your first statement I agree. Of course that's not really what the video is about...

@westside-steve said:

I don't think women should be in the front lines in the military.

I don't think any job that requires physical performance should lower the standards the slightest bit to include women.

I think women are better suited toward child-rearing. Not universally but better.

Don't care about equal pay unless it's for performance in which case better performance earns more money.

And finally it's just another way the trial lawyers can file frivolous lawsuits.

WSS

YEP

@clevfan4life said:

I realize it's almost impossible for you to discuss anything on a rational level but go back and read my post. Do you agree or disagree with any of the points that I made? Simply that.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

I don't think women should be in the front lines in the military.

I don't think any job that requires physical performance should lower the standards the slightest bit to include women.

I think women are better suited toward child-rearing. Not universally but better.

Don't care about equal pay unless it's for performance in which case better performance earns more money.

And finally it's just another way the trial lawyers can file frivolous lawsuits.

WSS

I don't think any job that requires physical performance should lower the standards the slightest bit to include women.

I think women are better suited toward child-rearing. Not universally but better.

Don't care about equal pay unless it's for performance in which case better performance earns more money.

And finally it's just another way the trial lawyers can file frivolous lawsuits.

WSS