Elliotte Friedman: Swedish UFA Forward Mathias Brome to Sign with Wings

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

11 hours ago, Akakabuto said:

https://torontosun.com/sports/basketball/nba/simmons-why-is-michael-jordan-such-a-loser-as-an-nba-owner

Steve Simmons with some Leipsic points under the ’Hear and There’ subheading.

Sucks for Leipsic he isnt a good enough hockey player to get a pass at this.  

Pretty solid take from Simmons. I'm glad he's echoing the point that half the league would be suspended if we could see their phones.

Quote

But this much we do know based on history: If Leipsic were a significant player, the Washington Capitals would have handled this differently. That’s the rub here. If you’re Auston Matthews and you get in trouble in Arizona in the summer, it goes away rather quickly. Years back, the Red Wings did everything to keep Bob Probert on their roster, no matter what trouble he got into. Others were let go in Detroit. Never the late Probert. He was too valuable.

I'll switch sides and play devils advocate here though. Shouldn't the Caps treat Kuznetsov differently? After all Kuzy is a much more valuable employee than Leipsic is. Any company X would treat an executive differently than a mail room guy. I know it doesn't seem fair that Auston with an O gets to show his ass to PTSD afflicted war veterans and keep his job, but he also sells tickets and scores goals A LOT.

I'm somewhat surprised NHLPA lawyers aren't jumping on a situation like this to say no you cannot terminate Leipsic for protected (debatably private) speech. But I also don't know what the CBA's morality clause is at all.

8 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

The guy is free to say whatever he wants (in the US anyway), but if he offends the wrong people, a mediocre player shouldn't get another chance per the media.

Unless of course he's a mediocre backup QB, who offended people who aren't woke, by exhibiting his Constitutional right. Then he deserves a 2nd chance, his own public tryout, special treatment, and the support of the media for his lawsuit against his former league.

The Gang Solves Colin Kaepernick

Educate me if I'm wrong (don't follow handegg that closely) but didn't Kaepernick end up not getting a job? Sure the media is heavily left leaning and many in that industry supported him, but I think the league/teams were smart enough to realize their fanbase is much more evenly split and they didn't want the backlash over a crumby QB. Couple that with the fact that the NFL has a ton of advertising deals with the US Army... doesn't look good for a guy who won't honor the flag. So he's sorta in the same boat as Leipsic, Leipsic just didn't have an entire army of media dumbies willing to go to war for him.

But also Brendan got exposed for being a Jerk, and Colin came right out with his as a political statement by his own will. I think a better comparison to Colin is Tim Thomas not wanting to visit Obama (which I think is equally as dumb as what Colin did).

At the end of the day I much prefer both Leipsic and Kaepernick receive gainful employment in their leagues regardless of their behavior. I really do not care that Bob Probert did cocaine. Or that the Russian 5 were soviets. Or that Datsyuk is homophobic. Or that Bertuzzi made Steve Moore a veg. Or that Babcock didn't wipe Marner's tushy for him. Or that Tim Thomas is a republican. Or that JT Brown is a democrat. Or that Phil Kessel eats only doritos and mt dew. Or that Leipsic says naughty things to his friends. I want players who can play to play. These things should all be interesting headlines and nothing else. But lord knows we gotta SHUT DOWN anything slightly outside the norm these days...

Edited May 10, 2020 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[kipwinger 8,492]

21 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

This one? (from an article)

I really didn't follow this. Hockey takes up enough of my time. What a bizarre statement though. You can sleep with other men and do whatever you want, but don't be seen with black people. It's weirdly almost progressive and racist at the same time lol.

Was this recorded in his own home? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought you have reasonable expectation of privacy in your own home and therefore it's illegal to record someone without their knowledge? I could be totally wrong on that. The FBI is listening to me through my Alexa right now.

The point that I think Kip will make, and I will make too, is that we're looking at free-market punishments. The NHL and NBA are businesses - not governments - and therefore they can choose to disassociate with whomever they like. Sterling or Leipsic. And I agree with that.

The point I have issue with is the privacy and the thought policing. I do have a huge problem with folks being attacked in their private lives. I do wanna cultivate an environment where folks can go home and pursure whatever douchey, racist, extremely religious, nutty, rebellious, sexual, progressive, life they want. Obviously that's become a lot harder with everyone having a camera and recorder in their pocket at all time, and everything on the web being "exposed" so to speak. It definitely feels like were at the beginning of manufacturing our own Orwellian nightmare. Maybe privacy law and online data stuff is due for an update? IDK, I dunno enough about the exact laws in place really. The message certainly seems to be get in line or suffer consequences though. Which I'll never advocate for. Go be your own f***ed up self and be free.

I love the Brome threads btw

That's all well and good.  And if dudes like Sterling wanna take part in that then more power to them, but they shouldn't sign business agreements saying they WON'T do that kind of s*** then. 

If you and I both owned franchises in an Italian restaurant, and you signed an agreement saying you won't do anything that makes the franchise look bad, and then the literal prostitute you were cheating on your wife with recorded you talking mad s*** about Italian people, you wouldn't be some kind of victim if I used the agreement we signed to take your business. 

 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Pretty solid take from Simmons. I'm glad he's echoing the point that half the league would be suspended if we could see their phones.

I'll switch sides and play devils advocate here though. Shouldn't the Caps treat Kuznetsov differently? After all Kuzy is a much more valuable employee than Leipsic is. Any company X would treat an executive differently than a mail room guy. I know it doesn't seem fair that Auston with an O gets to show his ass to PTSD afflicted war veterans and keep his job, but he also sells tickets and scores goals A LOT.

I'm somewhat surprised NHLPA lawyers aren't jumping on a situation like this to say no you cannot terminate Leipsic for protected (debatably private) speech. But I also don't know what the CBA's morality clause is at all.

The Gang Solves Colin Kaepernick

Educate me if I'm wrong (don't follow handegg that closely) but didn't Kaepernick end up not getting a job? Sure the media is heavily left leaning and many in that industry supported him, but I think the league/teams were smart enough to realize their fanbase is much more evenly split and they didn't want the backlash over a crumby QB. Couple that with the fact that the NFL has a ton of advertising deals with the US Army... doesn't look good for a guy who won't honor the flag. So he's sorta in the same boat as Leipsic, Leipsic just didn't have an entire army of media dumbies willing to go to war for him.

But also Brendan got exposed for being a Jerk, and Colin came right out with his as a political statement by his own will. I think a better comparison to Colin is Tim Thomas not wanting to visit Obama (which I think is equally as dumb as what Colin did).

At the end of the day I much prefer both Leipsic and Kaepernick receive gainful employment in their leagues regardless of their behavior. I really do not care that Bob Probert did cocaine. Or that the Russian 5 were soviets. Or that Datsyuk is homophobic. Or that Bertuzzi made Steve Moore a veg. Or that Babcock didn't wipe Marner's tushy for him. Or that Tim Thomas is a republican. Or that JT Brown is a democrat. Or that Phil Kessel eats only doritos and mt dew. Or that Leipsic says naughty things to his friends. I want players who can play to play. These things should all be interesting headlines and nothing else. But lord knows we gotta SHUT DOWN anything slightly outside the norm these days...

No, Kaepernick is still unsigned. He's the perfect example of a guy who isn't a good enough player for a GM to take the risk of signing him. Despite the fact that the mainstream media went out of their way to pressure teams to sign him.

But then you have guys like Michael Vick, who did much worse IMO, who have the skill to still get a job because their personal talent outweighs their personal baggage.

That's why guys like Kutnetsov will always have jobs and guys like Leipsic won't.

It's not fair, but it's just how the world works.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

At the end of the day I much prefer both Leipsic and Kaepernick receive gainful employment in their leagues regardless of their behavior. I really do not care that Bob Probert did cocaine. Or that the Russian 5 were soviets. Or that Datsyuk is homophobic. Or that Bertuzzi made Steve Moore a veg. Or that Babcock didn't wipe Marner's tushy for him. Or that Tim Thomas is a republican. Or that JT Brown is a democrat. Or that Phil Kessel eats only doritos and mt dew. Or that Leipsic says naughty things to his friends. I want players who can play to play. These things should all be interesting headlines and nothing else. But lord knows we gotta SHUT DOWN anything slightly outside the norm these days...

https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/pavel-datsyuk-on-new-russian-law-im-an-orthodox-and-that-says-it-all/

Datsyuk never said anything homophobic. He basically gave a generic "no comment" response. He didn't speak out against it.

Just because someone doesn't support something doesn't mean they oppose it. Tolerance falls somewhere in between.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/pavel-datsyuk-on-new-russian-law-im-an-orthodox-and-that-says-it-all/

Datsyuk never said anything homophobic. He basically gave a generic "no comment" response. He didn't speak out against it.

Just because someone doesn't support something doesn't mean they oppose it. Tolerance falls somewhere in between.

Datsyuk is a homophobic religious nut job

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Datsyuk is a homophobic religious nut job

Did you even read the article? And it's coming from the mainstream media who I would have expected to roast him.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Did you even read the article? And it's coming from the mainstream media who I would have expected to roast him.

"I'm an orthodox; that says it all" AKA I don't like homosexuals.

What's confusing to you about this?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

50 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

"I'm an orthodox; that says it all" AKA I don't like homosexuals.

What's confusing to you about this?

"So there have been many people who have jumped to the conclusion that Datsyuk is homophobic. He might or might not be, I don't know. It's just as likely that Datsyuk simply does not want to speak out against his church or to say something that would get him in hot water in Russia. To jump to a conclusion either way on that small quote is irresponsible...

By simply being asked that question Datsyuk is in a no-win situation; he supports the anti-*** laws and he is hammered in North America, he supports *** rights and he's in trouble in Russia."

From the article.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Scott R Lucidi 423]

Hey - man you talkin back to me?

TAKE HIM OUT

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 5/10/2020 at 3:26 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

"So there have been many people who have jumped to the conclusion that Datsyuk is homophobic. He might or might not be, I don't know. It's just as likely that Datsyuk simply does not want to speak out against his church or to say something that would get him in hot water in Russia. To jump to a conclusion either way on that small quote is irresponsible...

By simply being asked that question Datsyuk is in a no-win situation; he supports the anti-*** laws and he is hammered in North America, he supports *** rights and he's in trouble in Russia."

From the article.

You guys are such Datsyuk apologist shills.

The Eastern Orthodox Church is expressly against homosexuality and views it as a sin against god and the laws of nature.
Datsyuk: "I'm Orthodox". How dense do you have to be to not be able to read between the lines there? He's telling you his views on homosexuality in a very polite but clear way.

A. Orthodoxy doesn't like g-ays
B. Datsyuk is Orthodox

A + B = C

Get over it. Datysuk is entitled to his religious beliefs, no matter how screwy they are compared to the modern public perception.

Datsyuk: "I'm KKK"
Neo: "That doesn't necessarily mean he dislikes blacks"

Ya'll be slow.

On 5/12/2020 at 8:25 AM, Scott R Lucidi said:

Hey - man you talkin back to me?

TAKE HIM OUT

gotta keep em' seperated

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

3 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You guys are such Datsyuk apologist shills.

The Eastern Orthodox Church is expressly against homosexuality and views it as a sin against god and the laws of nature.
Datsyuk: "I'm Orthodox". How dense do you have to be to not be able to read between the lines there? He's telling you his views on homosexuality in a very polite but clear way.

A. Orthodoxy doesn't like g-ays
B. Datsyuk is Orthodox

A + B = C

Get over it. Datysuk is entitled to his religious beliefs, no matter how screwy they are compared to the modern public perception.

Datsyuk: "I'm KKK"
Neo: "That doesn't necessarily mean he dislikes blacks"

Ya'll be slow.

gotta keep em' seperated

He was trying to give an answer that wouldnt get him into hot water on either side. Jumping to conclusions on vague comments is irresponsible. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

14 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

He was trying to give an answer that wouldnt get him into hot water on either side. Jumping to conclusions on vague comments is irresponsible. 

It's not a vague answer. When asked about his views on homosexuality he explicitly cited his church that objects to it. He's saying my churches views are my views on it.

If you asked me "CRL what's your view on firearms?" and I answered "I'm a member of the NRA" what's the conclusion you draw there? You're really gonna tell me that doesn't spell out that I'm pro-gun to you?

Edited May 15, 2020 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

3 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

It's not a vague answer. When asked about his views on homosexuality he explicitly cited his church that objects to it. He's saying my churches views are my views on it.

If you asked me "CRL what's your view on firearms?" and I answered "I'm a member of the NRA" what's the conclusion you draw there? You're really gonna tell me that doesn't spell out that I'm pro-gun to you?

So you've never seen a Catholic get divorced? Or a Lutheran live with someone before marriage? Your assumption (an incorrect one) that every follower of a religion agrees with every teaching and lives their life by it is laughable. The Methodist Church is about to split over whether to accept homosexuality or not, which would never happen if everyone just accepted the church's teaching on it and agreed with it.

[Akakabuto 1,744]

11 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Or a Lutheran live with someone before marriage?

This would never happen. We Lutherans live by the book.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Akakabuto said:

This would never happen. We Lutherans live by the book.

My point was that you can't automatically determine an individual's personal beliefs based on their identified religion. We all have free will. You can identify as something even tho you don't live by it. Happens all the time.

The same way you will find people who don't entirely agree with the platform of the political party they belong to.

[kipwinger 8,492]

Your take, as usual, is absurd.  He was clearly insinuating something.  The word "insinuate" exists because it's a real thing.  A way of saying something without saying it.  For example...

Person: Don't you think Neo goes to idiotic lengths to defend right-wing dips***s who don't need defending?

Me: My mother always said "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". 

 

See, I didn't ACTUALLY say you act like a dummy sometimes in your defense of the indefensible but I sure did INSINUATE it.  Not altogether different than how Datsyuk insinuated he was against homosexuality with his statement about the church.  It's odd how people get SUPER literal suddenly whenever political or social obfuscation aligns with their personal views.

[_SP_ 129]

On 5/1/2020 at 12:02 PM, kipwinger said:

Pro athletes don't make money for being in shape.  They make money for being good at their sport.  And Jimmy has been a good goalie for a long time. 

Making fun of overweight people is low hanging fruit.  It's easy and stupid.  And it's disingenuous to pretend like you're being an ******* about it "for their own health".  You don't give a s*** about them. They're just an easy scapegoat.  It's about as lowbrow as you can get.  Which is fine for dumbf*cks, but you should probably hold yourself to a higher standard.

Kid 1: My mom fought in Afghanistan!

Kid 2: My dad was an ICU nurse during the COVID pandemic!

Kid 3: My dad got into an argument on the internet with a guy who was defending fat people!

Though I'm sure he'll be a chip off the old block.  He'll be punching weaker kids and laughing at ugly girls before you know it. 

Holy F you are the most whiney fat arse I've ever encountered on the internet.

As much time as you've spent typing your responses, you could have knocked out 400 situps. 

But you'd rather be fat and complain about others calling you fat than doing diddly s*** about it.

You are pathetic.

[_SP_ 129]

On 5/6/2020 at 10:58 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

As a person who is overweight myself, I have no one to blame but myself.

2 years ago I hired a personal trainer, went to the gym twice a week, consulted a nutritionist, and started eating sensibly. I lost close to 75 pounds in like 8 months and was the fittest and healthiest I had been since my 20's.

Then life happened. Got married. New house. New father. Money and time was no longer there to keep it up. Gained most of it back since then.

That said, as a "fatty", fat shaming does not bother me or offend me. I am where am I because of my own bad choices, poor diet, lack of exercise, etc. It IS my fault. I am NOT healthy at any size, and it's NOT a disease. If people are going to call me out on my choices, then so be it. I have the power to stop it.

I don't need others to be offended for me. I am perfectly capable of being offended on my own. And I am not a fragile, weak-minded person who has to be offended by every little joke aimed at obesity. They just don't bother me.

And I find it hard to believe that there are people out there who are so delicate that they need a "safe space" to cry when their wittle feewings git hert. This is not helpful to cope in the real world, which is NOT always nice.

Prejudice is bad. Hate is bad. Violence and abuse are bad. But if shaming those who shame others is the solution, then no one is a good person.

As someone that is 5'8" and 185lbs, it may not sound like a lot, but when I look at college pictures that are barely 10 years old, I see 150lb me in the best shape of my life, passing PT tests like a boss.... 

Yeah, I can fat shame because I know it is self-inflicted and I deserve shaming too. And Jimmy sure as hell deserves it when physical fitness greatly impacts athletic outcomes.

[HoweFan 74]

Is this the Mathias Brome thread?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 5/15/2020 at 10:07 PM, kipwinger said:

Your take, as usual, is absurd.  He was clearly insinuating something.  The word "insinuate" exists because it's a real thing.  A way of saying something without saying it.  For example...

Person: Don't you think Neo goes to idiotic lengths to defend right-wing dips***s who don't need defending?

Me: My mother always said "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". 

 

See, I didn't ACTUALLY say you act like a dummy sometimes in your defense of the indefensible but I sure did INSINUATE it.  Not altogether different than how Datsyuk insinuated he was against homosexuality with his statement about the church.  It's odd how people get SUPER literal suddenly whenever political or social obfuscation aligns with their personal views.

No Kip. I just choose not to irresponsibly jump to conclusions about what someone's intentions are based on one statement that doesn't clearly state them.

It's called "Giving someone the benefit of the doubt." Perhaps you should try it. Not just in regards to what Datsyuk said, but in what others say in here as well. You may think you're omniscient, but ur not.

Datsyuk: "I'm an Orthodox."

Kip and CRL: "He's clearly homophobic. There's no other way to interpret it."

Others: "I could interpret it that way. I could also interpret it as someone who's stuck in the middle who could be harmed publicly in Russia for speaking out. Saying 'I'm an Orthodox' is his way of ending a conversation he doesn't want to have. He may not even agree with it, but he's Russian and Orthodox, so he can't publicly oppose it. Either way, without clarification or a follow up response, I can't fairly make a judgment."

But I suppose that would mean not thinking badly of other people. Or looking for the worst in people. I try to look for the good in others. I try to be fair and not jump to conclusions. You should try that. Maybe you wouldn't be so angry all of the time. It's not healthy.

2 hours ago, _SP_ said:

Holy F you are the most whiney fat arse I've ever encountered on the internet.

As much time as you've spent typing your responses, you could have knocked out 400 situps. 

But you'd rather be fat and complain about others calling you fat than doing diddly s*** about it.

You are pathetic.

Don't worry. Kip gets plenty of exercise.

 

53 minutes ago, HoweFan said:

Is this the Mathias Brome thread?

Yeah. We should probably shut this one down, lol.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 5/15/2020 at 4:50 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

So you've never seen a Catholic get divorced? Or a Lutheran live with someone before marriage? Your assumption (an incorrect one) that every follower of a religion agrees with every teaching and lives their life by it is laughable. The Methodist Church is about to split over whether to accept homosexuality or not, which would never happen if everyone just accepted the church's teaching on it and agreed with it.

You're using whataboutism and straw men arguments. That's the only thing laughable here.

I'm not suggesting religious practitioners follow - or even believe - every teaching their dogma espouses. And that fact has no bearing on my argument whatsoever.

Datsyuk wasn't asked "what religion do you follow?" and then fans extrapolated his views on homosexuality. No, he was asked what his views on homosexuality were, and he invoked his religion, which has a clear stance on homosexuality. His answer is quite clearly that he follows his religious teachings in regard to this matter.

IDK why you're so desperate to cover for Datysuk here and make him out to be some SJW politically correct person. He has the right to his religious views and the beliefs that come with them same as anyone. Your conspiracy theory about him pretending not to like homosexuality just to look good for Russia is just as bizarre. Did it ever occur to you that maybe he's an honest guy and meant exactly what he said? Heaven forbid. Russia is not even some evil g-ay hating country either. They're in the 1990s in terms of LGBT rights. They have don't ask don't tell in the military and pride marches in every major city.

On 5/15/2020 at 7:00 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

My point was that you can't automatically determine an individual's personal beliefs based on their identified religion. We all have free will. You can identify as something even tho you don't live by it. Happens all the time.

The same way you will find people who don't entirely agree with the platform of the political party they belong to.

Again, Datsyuk was asked about homosexuality and invoked his religion. If he didn't agree with his religions teachings on homosexuality he wouldn't have invoked them.

I think it's sad that there exists a desire to white wash every player to make them socially palatable in 2020. Datysuk is old-school Orthodox. Big whoop. Get over it.

Edited May 18, 2020 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 5/15/2020 at 7:07 PM, kipwinger said:

Your take, as usual, is absurd.  He was clearly insinuating something.  The word "insinuate" exists because it's a real thing.  A way of saying something without saying it.  For example...

Person: Don't you think Neo goes to idiotic lengths to defend right-wing dips***s who don't need defending?

Me: My mother always said "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". 

 

See, I didn't ACTUALLY say you act like a dummy sometimes in your defense of the indefensible but I sure did INSINUATE it.  Not altogether different than how Datsyuk insinuated he was against homosexuality with his statement about the church.  It's odd how people get SUPER literal suddenly whenever political or social obfuscation aligns with their personal views.

Reporter: Do you eat bread?
Datsyuk: I'm on the Atkins diet and that says it all
LGW: Okay, that doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't eat bread. Not all Atkins dieters follow their diet strictly. He likely only said that to appease non-bread eaters. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt here. Datsyuk probably eats bread.

Edited May 18, 2020 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

14 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You're using whataboutism and straw men arguments. That's the only thing laughable here.

I'm not suggesting religious practitioners follow - or even believe - every teaching their dogma espouses. And that fact has no bearing on my argument whatsoever.

Datsyuk wasn't asked "what religion do you follow?" and then fans extrapolated his views on homosexuality. No, he was asked what his views on homosexuality were, and he invoked his religion, which has a clear stance on homosexuality. His answer is quite clearly that he follows his religious teachings in regard to this matter.

IDK why you're so desperate to cover for Datysuk here and make him out to be some SJW politically correct person. He has the right to his religious views and the beliefs that come with them same as anyone. Your conspiracy theory about him pretending not to like homosexuality just to look good for Russia is just as bizarre. Did it ever occur to you that maybe he's an honest guy and meant exactly what he said? Heaven forbid. Russia is not even some evil g-ay hating country either. They're in the 1990s in terms of LGBT rights. They have don't ask don't tell in the military and pride marches in every major city.

Again, Datsyuk was asked about homosexuality and invoked his religion. If he didn't agree with his religions teachings on homosexuality he wouldn't have invoked them.

I think it's sad that there exists a desire to white wash every player to make them socially palatable in 2020. Datysuk is old-school Orthodox. Big whoop. Get over it.

Serious question: If I told someone that owning an automatic assault rifle is illegal, does that mean I hate the 2nd Amendment?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Serious question: If I told someone that owning an automatic assault rifle is illegal, does that mean I hate the 2nd Amendment?

No. But that's not at all a similar example.

If someone ASKED you: What're your views on the 2nd amendment? And you responded "I'm a member of the NRA" or "I'm a member of CSGV" your POV can be reasonably inferred. That's an equivalent question.

 

[HoweFan 74]

Why don’t you guys open up a cat fight thread?