[stale2002]

Ok got it, so this means that your previously statement, where you said "My basic human freedoms should include the right to not do business with a hate group for example", is not true, or not your full opinion.

You actually think that there are certain situations where it is OK to force basic utilities to transact with everyone.

You just disagree where exactly the line is. But at the end of the day, yes you also agree that some companies should be forced to engage in certain transactions.

[tchaffee]

Interested in the topic but not interested in your aggressive style and putting words in my mouth and telling me what I believe. You can have the last word if you'd like.

[stale2002]

Yes, people usually don't want to engage when the contradiction of your new statement is put so clearly in contrast with your past statement.

I wasn't really expecting you to engage with the point in any way. It is so rare that people do.

The fact remains that you now admit that yes you want to force certain businesses, specifically utilities, to sell to people, and this contradicts your previous statement.

You even did one of the most effective forms of non engagement, where you say "you can have the last word" thereby making it so either your statement remains unchallenged, or making it seem like you "win" because I responded, which is what you told me to do.

[tchaffee]

No not for the reasons you claim, I don't want to continue because you're aggressive. I've happily engaged with people who point out what they think is a contradiction in my thinking. But not with people like you.

> non engagement

I didn't say I'd never speak to you again lol. Just that this topic is over because you can't seem to discuss it in a way that doesn't include personal attacks. Not interested in that style of debate in the least.