We Need To Export MAGA to Canada.

[DrYouth]

Apparently it ain't easy being green.

[Speaker to Animals]

He really is Pepe.

[Smitty-48]

So Mitch Marner missed practice and is listed as "day to day", which, is comforting on the one hand, since if it was a serious shoulder injury, he'd be going on the IR, but he's still on the roster and Babcock says "if it was up to me he would play", so sounds like the doctors are just being extra cautious, so I'm not as sick with fear as I was, none the less, "day to day" can sometimes last for a month, you never know.

On the bright side, it is an opportunity for others to step up, one thing the Leafs do have, is depth of scoring, Nylander is back on a line with Matthews and Leivo is getting his chance to prove himself on the power play, if the rest of them just quit their lollygagging, they can still make the playoffs, but the lollygagging has to stop now, and I'm not confident that they can keep it from coming back, with or without Marner.

This team is just immature, and the veterans like JVR and Bozak, those guy's are not really leaders, much as JVR is a reliable goal scorer, he's so one dimensional and lazy, I have no desire for them to re-sign him at big dollars, he's fine for $4 million, but at $7 million he'd be a rip off, hard to trade him if you're in a playoff hunt, but even if you don't trade him, spend that $7 million somewhere else, preferably the back end.

[TheReal_ND]

But can he throw his gloves?

[Smitty-48]

But can he throw his gloves?

Actually, Marner is a tough little kid, that's another great thing about Marner, he doesn't get intimidated, nobody is expected to fight somebody out of their weight class, but I'm sure he would throw down against the other teams version of himself, and the code would not demand any more than that, mind you, we don't want him doing that, lest he break his hand or something, but he would answer the bell if he had to.

Here he is going after somebody in a line brawl in Junior... the linesmen drag him out of it of course, as they should with a superstar player, but he shows up and takes a man, which is all the code demands...



... and the kid he goes after there, Kevin Spinnozi, Marner is not picking his spots with that kid, Spinnozi is a nasty piece of business, and he is 6'2" 210lbs, to Marner's 5'10" 157lbs.

Marner is no floater, he's all heart, just another reason why he's the Franchise.

[TheReal_ND]

This is my sport now

[StCapps]

This is my sport now

Back when my team used to be good.



God I miss when fights like this used to happen in the playoffs. Those Avalanche-Red Wings series in the late 90's were so dope. Patrick Roy just couldn't stop the takedown but he sure could bail Claude Lemieux out of a bad spot.

[Smitty-48]

The Leafs had one old time hockey game this year, against Vancouver, when Rielly smoked Hansen and Kadri smoked Sedin on the same rush, not exactly rock em' sock em 1976, but about as good as it gets in the No Hit League of today.

[atanamis]

Boom

All of that makes fine sense. Trying to force people to "respect" one another is really no different than trying to force them to have a particular set of religious beliefs. In both cases, you are trying to control what someone thinks and believes, and that is simply outside the power of government to mandate. I would recommend reading the work of John Locke on the topic to anyone in doubt here. And I do agree that much of the LGBT... community are trying to mandate respect through the law when that isn't really a feasible goal. Protection from violence and harassment are absolutely things the law can and should do, and which it has at times past often not done well for this community. But you can't mandate respect.

The student asking the question had some major issues with not understanding what the words they were using meant, including their confusion of pronouns and adjectives and their usage of the word respect. That said, the student wasn't really talking about respect, but about courtesy. I had many professors over my time in college for whom I had little respect, but I still referred to them in speaking as Dr. Whoever instead of "incompetent person who somehow managed to get some power". And it is courteous to address someone in the way that they ask to be addressed, whether that be by a nickname or title or whatever. I've had friends who wanted to be called all manner of silly nicknames, and while I have often refused I do think that doing so was rude of me.

So then the real question here ends up being whether government should mandate courtesy. Can government legitimately pass laws against being rude to people? I would tend toward no on this, but it isn't nearly the thought policing that trying to mandate respect would be. I do think that an employer can mandate that its staff use courtesy in their interactions with others on the job, for example. I would support firing a teacher who cussed out a student, for example. I really can't see myself supporting government legal action though against someone who referred to students by the wrong genders though, regardless of genetic or physical sex. I can see the claim that such treatment would be discourteous, but not that it should be illegal.

Pulling around to this topic though, the statement below remains categorically dishonest:
"
Jordan Peterson, for example, is facing being locked in a cage like an animal because he refuses to cooperate with the leftist delusion about gender fluidity by using the many insane gender pronouns they invented.

That's fucking crazy. He is going before what is essentially an inquisition to defend himself and hope they don't do the closest thing they can do to burning him at the stake in Canada.
"

There has been NO evidence presented that he is facing any kind of criminal law proceeding, or that he is likely to face being locked in a cage like an animal. (That does raise the question though of whether the US locking so many people up in cages is part of "Making America Great Again", or if your caging opposition extends to our own problem with it here.)

[Speaker to Animals]

Boom

All of that makes fine sense. Trying to force people to "respect" one another is really no different than trying to force them to have a particular set of religious beliefs. In both cases, you are trying to control what someone thinks and believes, and that is simply outside the power of government to mandate. I would recommend reading the work of John Locke on the topic to anyone in doubt here. And I do agree that much of the LGBT... community are trying to mandate respect through the law when that isn't really a feasible goal. Protection from violence and harassment are absolutely things the law can and should do, and which it has at times past often not done well for this community. But you can't mandate respect.

The student asking the question had some major issues with not understanding what the words they were using meant, including their confusion of pronouns and adjectives and their usage of the word respect. That said, the student wasn't really talking about respect, but about courtesy. I had many professors over my time in college for whom I had little respect, but I still referred to them in speaking as Dr. Whoever instead of "incompetent person who somehow managed to get some power". And it is courteous to address someone in the way that they ask to be addressed, whether that be by a nickname or title or whatever. I've had friends who wanted to be called all manner of silly nicknames, and while I have often refused I do think that doing so was rude of me.

So then the real question here ends up being whether government should mandate courtesy. Can government legitimately pass laws against being rude to people? I would tend toward no on this, but it isn't nearly the thought policing that trying to mandate respect would be. I do think that an employer can mandate that its staff use courtesy in their interactions with others on the job, for example. I would support firing a teacher who cussed out a student, for example. I really can't see myself supporting government legal action though against someone who referred to students by the wrong genders though, regardless of genetic or physical sex. I can see the claim that such treatment would be discourteous, but not that it should be illegal.

Pulling around to this topic though, the statement below remains categorically dishonest:
"
Jordan Peterson, for example, is facing being locked in a cage like an animal because he refuses to cooperate with the leftist delusion about gender fluidity by using the many insane gender pronouns they invented.

That's fucking crazy. He is going before what is essentially an inquisition to defend himself and hope they don't do the closest thing they can do to burning him at the stake in Canada.
"

There has been NO evidence presented that he is facing any kind of criminal law proceeding, or that he is likely to face being locked in a cage like an animal. (That does raise the question though of whether the US locking so many people up in cages is part of "Making America Great Again", or if your caging opposition extends to our own problem with it here.)

Courtesy means denying objective truth now?