Hey subby, come back to me when you have your civil rights denied to you, and tell me how tolerant you feel of those who denied you said rights.

Personally, I think the gay community has been extremely docile in their fight for equal rights. I think the same thing about the African American civil rights movements. Many other groups in other cultures would have started violent resistance by now.

So how much is Michelle Malkin paying to keep flooding FARK with twitchy shiat?

You're intolerant of my intolerance!


Yeah. Malkin's twitter aggregator is the pulse of all things liberal.

Lionel Mandrake: So how much is Michelle Malkin paying to keep flooding FARK with twitchy shiat?

Beats me, but I'll be damned if I'll be lectured on kindness and tolerance by Michelle Malkin. Besides, culling tweets or internet posts for rudeness is like shooting fish in a barrel. The only thing it does is give Malkin the smug satisfaction that there are dark-hearted people just like her all over the place.

Dusk-You-n-Me: You're intolerant of my intolerance!

Dusk-You-n-Me: You're intolerant of my intolerance!

Dusk-You-n-Me: You're intolerant of my intolerance!

Dusk-You-n-Me: You're intolerant of my intolerance!

Conservatives wish we'd just get out of their face when they act all bigoty. Can't we just let them be bigoted in peace? That's what Jesus would want.

Why not make the amendment sponsors nightmare possible. If a person introduces a bill or amendment to discriminate against gay people and the bill fails the sponsor must commit a public sex act with a member of the same sex. The time for the performance would be announced well in advance so all the people afraid that a piece of paper will make their kids gay can make sure the kids can be safely ensconced in a closet.

eurotrader: Why not make the amendment sponsors nightmare possible. If a person introduces a bill or amendment to discriminate against gay people and the bill fails the sponsor must commit a public sex act with a member of the same sex. The time for the performance would be announced well in advance so all the people afraid that a piece of paper will make their kids gay can make sure the kids can be safely ensconced in a closet.

Caligula would smile upon you. :)

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Unless you support this in addition to your opposition to gay marriage, then it's all about being a bigoted shiatstain. It's right there in the Bible folks. God Himself commands victims of rape to marry their attackers, so you'd better support that aspect of traditional biblical marriage.

First of all, this ban doesn't add anything more than does a second condom.

Second, demographically speaking, these people are on the wrong side of history, and will be dead soon. What seems like a step backward in reality is just that last desperate gasp before drowning.

Give it five years. These idiots will be but a shameful memory.

How did they get liberals collectively to all say the same thing at once?

gilgigamesh: First of all, this ban doesn't add anything more than does a second condom.

Second, demographically speaking, these people are on the wrong side of history, and will be dead soon. What seems like a step backward in reality is just that last desperate gasp before drowning.

Give it five years. These idiots will be but a shameful memory.

If it's a matter of 'waiting for old people to die out for progress to being,' it'll take longer than five years. My generation (Generation 'X') isn't much better than the baby boomers. So it'll be left up to the millenials (spelling), which will take about 15 to 20 years for them to get 'congress aged.'

In my opinion, that's far too long to wait. Fifty years is long enough.

LOL:
fark the bigoted motherfarkers voting for Amendment 1. I hope you all get your dicks locked between two Legos.-
Dennis (dmerser91) (@dmerser91) May 08, 2012

It's not news, it's Tweets.

Intolerance of intolerance is active tolerance. Nothing hypocritical about it.

Claiming to cherish individual liberty, and voting against gay marriage on the other hand...

Twitter is full of morons. News and weather at 11.

gilgigamesh: First of all, this ban doesn't add anything more than does a second condom.

Sure it does. It probably farks with unmarried heterosexual's benefits and probably damages the ability of kids to be covered by healthcare. That's a bit more than a second condom of protection, that's like a hard plastic chastity belt covered with desensitizing cream of protection.

BMulligan: Right after Arizona, I say nuke North Carolina first. Is that tolerant enough for you, you knuckle-draggers?

Would you please allow me to move out of the state before you go nuking it? Thanks.

Since when does wanting equal rights for everyone mean that you have to be tolerant?

If you are being a farktard I'm going to tell you and not let your farktardery interfere with the rights of others. I wouldn't let others interfere with the farktards' rights either. Denying those rights to other people is NOT a civil right.

Diogenes: Yep. Just one more step to the SCOTUS where we can put this nonsense to rest.

What reason is there to believe that the SCOTUS will get this one right? They haven't stepped in on any of the other challenges to homosexual marriage. I'd like them to rule that it violates equal protection (in my mind, I don't see how it can't) but as of yet, that's a no go.

DoBeDoBeDo: I'm not exactly sure what everyone is all pissed about. All this did was make it so SOCTUS has more reason to hear the next case about gay marriage and civil rights from NC.

In fact everyone should be supporting multiple state amendments, the louder they get the more SOCTUS has to act.

SCOTUS only has to rule once, I imagine, and that would be on Prop-8. The impending DOMA challenge may be another matter.

Even if SCOTUS rules that prop-8 is unconstitutional, I worry it'll be like Roe vs. Wade all over again, and state after state will past one measure after another trying to limit gay rights piecemeal fashion.