Oh.

I missed the part where you redefined "fact" and "opinion" to mean the same thing.

what? I don't get how you can possibly draw a direct line between "dancing naked" and "no respect" . . . every time I've been to the Gentleman's Club (which isn't often enough, sadly), the strippers are well-respected, and make a killing. Look, b/c you say it doesn't make it happen, chief.

What? Nice straw-man.

Why aren't children allowed to drink, or allowed into R-rated movies? And before you jump back up onto the Christian Coalition soapbox, my friend, think of all the movies that are rated R that have redeeming cultural and artistic value . . . b/c children aren't allowed, are these invalidated?

This is just an ineffective strawmanning of the argument.



OK, I'll play by your rules . . .

In my suburb, no boats are allowed in the driveway (or RVs, campers, etc) unless they cost over a certain amount of money (100k for boats, 400k for RVs, I think) . . . does that make fishing a horrific act?

NO - you're confusing one group's opinion (or egocentric self-interest) for moral validation. Do you want to extend this further? We can . . . and it'll get ugly.

Your logic is appalling - take a freaking class. Look, you can't fix this because you can't piece together a cogent argument. "Fully erect"? Kick me in the face - ridiculous comment. If you can't argue this subject like a real person, quietly exit the thread and go back to converting heathens.

It doesn't bother me - NOT IN THE LEAST - it's just like any other profession, be it law, medicine, taking out the trash, or fighting other nations. YOUR MORALITY IS NOT THE ONLY MORALITY.

If I have a daughter, and she decides the most efficacious way for her to earn money is to strip at an up-scale gentleman's club, then isn't it less dignified for me to deny her the opportunity? Isn't it less dignified to force her to work two jobs to make ends meet rather than allowing her to make an adult decision? Isn't it undignified for me to bite your argumentation style, and appeal to emotion rather than making valid points?

really, don't argue with Rob, he wins everytime.

man, i hate smart people ;)

I support you on this!

-Rudey
--But I gotta warn you...upscale or not, I tip with pennies.

A logic class is so key, so key.
I agree with everything that Rob says and I wanted to say it but he got to if faster tham me (bastage).

The argument regarding children not being able to see it is no agrument at all. There are a lot of other things that children can't do before a certain aga and that is called law. They are restriced to do these until they reach the legal ege to do so.


Remember this for the next time you argue morals and ethics from a legal standpoint: Ethics and morals are hardly the standards or basis in which laws are created and Laws are not always created from an ethical and/or moral standpoint.

Children are also not allowed to view acts of sex before the age of 18 (yet many still do). So, just because children are not allowed to see this sort of act - is the act of sex unethcial?

Remember, for those who are against their BF/husband attending strip clubs, he doesn't have to be in a strip club to look at other women suggestively.

When I was 16, I worked at Wendy's ,for about three weeks. I wore an orange and brown polyester uniform, smelled like grease on the way home from work, had to clean toilets (after people who had terrible aim) and get yelled at by customers who held me personally responsible for the fact that it cost 10 cents extra to get a tomato slice on their burger. For that I was paid the princely sum of $3.35 an hour.

THAT is degrading! Only instead of being degraded by a club owner I was degraded by Dave Thomas

bump