[Sabertooth]

I'm uncertain whether repeated insinuations that have been ruled to be slander by several courts are considered abusive at FR, but I'd be interested in the moderator's opinion.

Without taking a position on accuracy, when I read "gay blinders," I took that to mean a certain sort of tunnel vision with regard to gay issues, not an insinuation that you are gay and blind because you are gay. That's how it looked to me; anyway, I could be wrong.

[AntiGuv]

In either case, my replies would have become far less civil upon the next repetition, so it seemed advisable to put a preemptive end to that. If I have any "blinders" in regards to gay issues, it's that I rigorously avoid personalizing the matter with reflexive homophobia in the course of my remarks. If I were discussing my personal feelings, I would note that I find homosexuals disturb my mental equilibrium & I do have a reflexive aversion to homosexuality. That's all fine and good, but the law is not based on my personal feelings. I am fairly hostile to arguments that seek to leverage themselves on irrational sentiments rather than principled grounds.

[VRWC_minion]

Without taking a position on accuracy, when I read "gay blinders," I took that to mean a certain sort of tunnel vision with regard to gay issues, not an insinuation that you are gay and blind because you are gay. That's how it looked to me; anyway, I could be wrong.

Exactly.