WWTBAM Bored

I mean, besides the obvious.

Hand to God, just had an individual in my office ask, with a straight face, "Would I be better off hiring an attorney, or would a lawyer be better?"

TBF if he hired a lawyer he would have an attorney

The Michigan Bar Association has plenty of qualified attorneys and lawyers ready to serve! We will be happy to bill by both the hour and per sixty minutes....

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:38 pm

I mean, besides the obvious.

Hand to God, just had an individual in my office ask, with a straight face, "Would I be better off hiring an attorney, or would a lawyer be better?"

Was he British?

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:48 pm

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:38 pm

I mean, besides the obvious.

Hand to God, just had an individual in my office ask, with a straight face, "Would I be better off hiring an attorney, or would a lawyer be better?"

Was he British?

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:48 pm

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:38 pm

I mean, besides the obvious.

Hand to God, just had an individual in my office ask, with a straight face, "Would I be better off hiring an attorney, or would a lawyer be better?"

Was he British?

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

Because "were they" is dissonant.

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:48 pm

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:38 pm

I mean, besides the obvious.

Hand to God, just had an individual in my office ask, with a straight face, "Would I be better off hiring an attorney, or would a lawyer be better?"

Was he British?

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Y'all need biscuits. Or maybe cookies. What to do what to do.

The appraisal lady that was training me in made it very clear that she was married at the time to a scum sucking bottom feeder er I mean attorney and not a lawyer. She corrected me very firmly when I referred to him as a "lawyer."

BTW-do you have another planet as an option to live on?

Spock wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 10:27 am

The appraisal lady that was training me in made it very clear that she was married at the time to a scum sucking bottom feeder er I mean attorney and not a lawyer. She corrected me very firmly when I referred to him as a "lawyer."

BTW-do you have another planet as an option to live on?

There's a planet that's populated entirely by robots. It's much more peaceful than Earth.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:35 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:48 pm

Was he British?

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Because he never misses an opportunity.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:35 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:48 pm

Was he British?

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Because it's liberals legislating use of pronouns, not conservatives, duh!

Spock wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 10:27 am

The appraisal lady that was training me in made it very clear that she was married at the time to a scum sucking bottom feeder er I mean attorney and not a lawyer. She corrected me very firmly when I referred to him as a "lawyer."

BTW-do you have another planet as an option to live on?

Your allusions in a previous matter leave me with no alternative other than 'no comment,' per both my lawyer and my attorney.

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 10:45 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:35 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Because he never misses an opportunity.

I ignore tons of stupid stuff from you. There are opportunities most every time you post.

Estonut wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:08 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:35 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 pm

Why would you assume "an individual" identifies as male?

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Because it's liberals legislating use of pronouns, not conservatives, duh!

So I guess by that standard that conservatives get a free pass on anything they say.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 12:46 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:08 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:35 pm

And why would you call out Bob J on this when TMITSS used the same masculine reference earlier in this thread?

Because it's liberals legislating use of pronouns, not conservatives, duh!

So I guess by that standard that conservatives get a free pass on anything they say.

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 9:46 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 12:46 pm

Estonut wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:08 am

Because it's liberals legislating use of pronouns, not conservatives, duh!

So I guess by that standard that conservatives get a free pass on anything they say.

Who is leading cancel culture, dude?

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 4:59 pm

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 9:46 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 13, 2021 12:46 pm

So I guess by that standard that conservatives get a free pass on anything they say.

Who is leading cancel culture, dude?

The Repugnicans who want to start burning books.

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:19 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 4:59 pm

tlynn78 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 9:46 am

Who is leading cancel culture, dude?

The Repugnicans who want to start burning books.

Bob. Please

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:30 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:19 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 4:59 pm

Who is leading cancel culture, dude?

The Repugnicans who want to start burning books.

Bob. Please

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 8:51 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:30 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:19 pm

The Repugnicans who want to start burning books.

Bob. Please

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

Is that what you think should be taught? Not really shocked. Is that something you'd want shoved down your kids and grandkids throats?

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 9:28 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 8:51 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:30 pm

Bob. Please

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

Is that what you think should be taught? Not really shocked. Is that something you'd want shoved down your kids and grandkids throats?

Sorry, what is "that"? Anything that makes a student uncomfortable?

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 9:56 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 9:28 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 8:51 pm

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

Is that what you think should be taught? Not really shocked. Is that something you'd want shoved down your kids and grandkids throats?

Sorry, what is "that"? Anything that makes a student uncomfortable?

Do you not even know what you posted?
"Anything that makes a student uncomfortable [on account of the individual’s race or sex]".

Are you intentionally ignoring yourself?

You think it's OK to teach that black men are less intelligent and less moral that white men?

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 10:08 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 9:56 pm

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

You think it's OK to teach that black men are less intelligent and less moral that white men?

I'd be curious to see BiT discuss the morality of slavery and lynchings.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 11:37 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 10:08 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 16, 2021 9:56 pm

How about Texas House Bill 3979 that recently became law, which forbids instruction that causes students to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

You think it's OK to teach that black men are less intelligent and less moral that white men?

I'd be curious to see BiT discuss the morality of slavery and lynchings.

Tell us more "jokes" about African Americans killing white cellmates.