|
|
| Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System (249463) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Nov 25 10:37:48 2011, in response to Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System, posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Fri Nov 25 03:27:25 2011. I apologize. Here is the correct link.http://www.subchat.com/buschat/read.asp?Id=246764 In the next to last line you state that no one is arguing the fact that anyone should be allowed to sit where they want. I interpreted that as anyone. Then in the last sentence you mention again how reporters are not legitimate travelers. So maybe you havent changed your position. But the notion that they are not is absurd. Anyone who pays a fare is a legitimate traveler. Yes she was out for a story, and that was the only way to get it, since what are the chances that an ordinary person who is offended by being asked to change seats would ever bother to make an issue of it? According to your logic, the police should never engage in sting operations to catch drug dealers or other criminals since they wouldn't be legitimate purchasers of those drugs. As far as the Hillary Clinton picture goes, thanks for digging up that information. It just proves that I was not the only one to come to the conclusion of brainwashing. Yes, they can apologize and deny all they want, but I don't buy it. You just don't make a blanket rule that every women cannot be shown in a newspaper photograph. That is plain ridiculous to suggest that a picture of any woman is sexually suggestive to men. If that were the case, photography of women should just be banned. Why would it be okay to display a picture of a woman in someone's house where it can be seen by all visitors, but not in a newspaper? I could understand their reasoning if they were objecting to the type of dress she was wearing, saying it was suggestive because it was too tight or too low cut. That would make sense if it were banned for religious reasons, but not to ban any photograph of a woman. There are just too many inconsistencies in Orthodox Judaism for it to appeal to me. Basically it is just a Board of Rabbis who can make any decision they want which must be obeyed, based on illogical reasoning, just to suit their purposes and give any reasons they want which cannot be challenged. Discussion is not permitted and if you want to call me anti-Semitic for saying that go ahead. No one is going to tell me that I don't have the right to think for myself. |
|
|
|