Just because you get constantly on when you go downstairs doesn't add any sting to your whining about the NBA forum.
Still with the "its legal" blinders and missing the wider "is it right" that everyone else is attempting to address.
ing dolt.
My question wasn't a legal one, it was a moral/ethical one.
If we wrote a law that made the legal penalty for overdue library books a bullet in the back of the head, you would jumping in your jackboots to be the first to pull the trigger. "I was only following the law."
The Nazi reference is entirely approrpriate, because they were as self-righteously vigorous in blaming victims.
That is the kind of moral justification and rationalization that allowed them to depopulate whole towns into shallow graves and ashes.
I'm sure you are incapable of seeing that, but hey, the rank and file NASDAP member didn't either.
Just because you get constantly on when you go downstairs doesn't add any sting to your whining about the NBA forum.
I think that it's immoral to compare the holocaust to some dumb failing to pay her HOA. And I think it's totally moral to gas anyone who draws such an analogy.
or they could take the non evil approach by simply cutting off the services provided by the HOA and go through a collection agency like any other en y such as credit lenders, utility companies, cable tv companies etc might do.
I'm not whining. I'm making fun of you for running with tired NBA forum shtick.
You should stop using your phone to avoid this constant reading comprehension fail, tbh.
Sure your whining. I'd be doing it to if I'd been made a fool of in this thread, live in a ty housing development, and was made a cuck by DAT BULL too. Thankfully, I'm not you.
Nah, not whining.
Just more making fun of your lame shtick and your whining about your phone.
More reading comprehension failure.
damn phone!
I didn't know we were making moral judgments here??
I'm looking at things from the legal side while wrapping my head around your logic.
You stated: it was only evil to deny blacks after 1948 after the court decision
No court decision has happened with hoas so does that deem them not legal per your logic??
Except these are not mutually exclusive. When you are providing things like security it's difficult to 'cut someone off' because it's done to the community Asa whole
While it may not be moral to foreclose based on an hoa fee, it's legally allowed to be done
That's not a remedy for past use.
If I buy a car from a dealership, but don't pay and keep the car -- the car dealership's barring me from buying another car doesn't compensate the dealership for the car I basically stole.
Post #3
evil but legalI'm looking at things from the legal side while wrapping my head around your logic.
You stated: it was only evil to deny blacks after 1948 after the court decision
No court decision has happened with hoas so does that deem them not legal per your logic??
The dealership/lender can repo that car. And rightfully so.
who doesn't know this
True, but if you've bought the car outright, they can't touch you. It's not like they can say, "You haven't been cleaning the car enough, therefore we're going to repossess it."![]()
Which is something people can do...
Right, but my hypothetical presumed you don't pay for the car.
Maybe a better hypothetical would be: you drop your car off (which you own outright) for service, but refuse to pay the mechanic. Does the mechanic have to give you your car back? Is there anything wrong with the mechanic selling your car to satisfy its lien if you don't follow up on your car for a year?
Which isn't fair to the people in the neighborhood who join a homeowners association so every other house is well kept and nice looking.
I don't plan on ever buying a house with a HOA because of this stuff, and I have no sympathy for people who chose to.
Pretty much this. The HOA in the neighborhood I grew up was ing terrible. They fined people for having basketball goals in their driveway, without warning.
Never gonna put up with any of dat bool .
Agreed, much better analogy.![]()
Or they could spend the better part of a year sending her a bunch of letters via certified mail asking her to pay the bill and notifying her what will happen if she doesn't. That seems much more logical than trying to figure out a way to keep her from using the pool or looking at all the community landscaping and thinking "boy my neighborhood sure does look nice".
Or better yet, she could just pay the damn bill like how she's paying some of her other bills........
not what you ing said.
this is what you said:
So it was not evil until 1948 when the Supreme Court said so.
vy65 still doesn't get it.
[insert many funny emoticons]
See where this logic issue is coming into play here?
He was being sarcastic in response to Vy.
If you want to buy a new house in a brand new neighborhood in the San Antonio area, no, you cannot.
sorry there is no sarcasm meter on here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)