If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   Dear Libs, you caused this. Thanks for nothing. -- Conservatives   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 331
    More: Misc, kilts  
•       •       •

10519 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2012 at 2:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



331 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-02 03:08:21 PM

MrBallou: Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".

I was told this would lead to people lying with animals. Guess there's a lag on that part.

Happy for the happy people. Here's to a better world.


You don't remember that Irish mother who died from an allergic reaction from humping a dog? Note that they have a weak, half-assed form of gay marriage in Ireland, which explains why she was sick enough to have sex with an animal, but still kept it relatively heterosexual.

/so not serious, I'm bored and your post reminded me of that story
 
2012-08-02 03:09:26 PM

gilgigamesh: OK, am I the only one who gets all teary-eyed at pictures of old gay couples?

I don't know what it is. There's something so tender and moving about it. I guess when I see an old gay couple I have this whole narrative in my head that they lived their whole lives as a lie, before finally finding true love in the final act. It's so storybook.

Scuse me... *SOB*


That's what gets to me, too. A lot of them have been together so long, had to make so many excuses, and now they can finally have the rest of the world acknowledge that they have a true, loving relationship.

I also love that elderly gay couples fly in the face of bigoted stereotypes that reduce homosexuality to just sex. It may seem that way if you're in the closet, but it's really about love and companionship.
 
2012-08-02 03:09:45 PM

Krymson Tyde: torr5962: Uchiha_Cycliste

I give you 10 maybe 15 years before you're a conservative. Only young people are that liberal and angry.

How long does it take? I'm 43 and very much liberal.


He forgot to add "and a brain injury" after "10 maybe 15 years".
 
2012-08-02 03:12:11 PM

ghare: torr5962: Uchiha_Cycliste

I give you 10 maybe 15 years before you're a conservative. Only young people are that liberal and angry.

You are dead wrong. Injustice makes liberals angry and there's a lot of injustice out there.


Society is hierarchical. Humans are a chimp troop with digital watches. Animals.

And there is no justice in nature.

No sense in being angry at things you can't change.
 
2012-08-02 03:16:07 PM

PocketfullaSass: As a parent whose only child, my 16 year old son, finally came out of the closet this week, I have to say this link made me tear up and happy-sappy cry because of how far equality has come in my lifetime. I know there is still a long way to go, but love will eventually win out.

When I was young, I had friends that were kicked out of their homes, lost their families, and got bullied and beaten for being gay.

When our son told the hubby and I, the three of us cracked open a bottle of champagne and stayed up half the night talking and laughing and just being together.

I love you, T.


Got a little dusty in the office all of a sudden. Thanks for sharing!
 
2012-08-02 03:17:13 PM

cman: Serious Black: cman: farkityfarker: Hopefully we'll have marriage equality in Washington State in less than 100 days.

I'm going to do my part to make it happen.

And hopefully the Supreme Court will refuse to hear the Prop 8 appeal and California will have it too.

I doubt that. SCOTUS loves precedent setting cases. They will take it.

I don't think they will. I agree that they love precedent-setting cases, but I think they'll be more likely to take up the case of DOMA, strike down Section 3, and then wait for another lawsuit from somebody who is in a civil union but isn't married to claim that the state is violating equal protection.

That is possible. But, in all reality, I really cannot see them not taking this case. You really think that members of SCOTUS are gonna let homosexual marriage pass without any sort of them putting their stamp on it? Sure, Kennedy will probably come to our side, but there are four conservative justices who may want to have a say in this case.


Here's the question: how much do you trust Kennedy or, possibly, Roberts to cross over and agree that the right to marry does not discriminate on gender like it doesn't discriminate on race? I would bet the farm that they'd agree with striking down Section 3 of DOMA, but I'm leery of predicting whether they will strike down every anti-marriage equality law in one fell swoop.
 
2012-08-02 03:20:29 PM

Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".


No need. Mitch McConnell is already married.
 
2012-08-02 03:20:40 PM

Serious Black: cman: Serious Black: cman: farkityfarker: Hopefully we'll have marriage equality in Washington State in less than 100 days.

I'm going to do my part to make it happen.

And hopefully the Supreme Court will refuse to hear the Prop 8 appeal and California will have it too.

I doubt that. SCOTUS loves precedent setting cases. They will take it.

I don't think they will. I agree that they love precedent-setting cases, but I think they'll be more likely to take up the case of DOMA, strike down Section 3, and then wait for another lawsuit from somebody who is in a civil union but isn't married to claim that the state is violating equal protection.

That is possible. But, in all reality, I really cannot see them not taking this case. You really think that members of SCOTUS are gonna let homosexual marriage pass without any sort of them putting their stamp on it? Sure, Kennedy will probably come to our side, but there are four conservative justices who may want to have a say in this case.

Here's the question: how much do you trust Kennedy or, possibly, Roberts to cross over and agree that the right to marry does not discriminate on gender like it doesn't discriminate on race? I would bet the farm that they'd agree with striking down Section 3 of DOMA, but I'm leery of predicting whether they will strike down every anti-marriage equality law in one fell swoop.


Good question. Roberts is definitely not gonna be on the side of the LGBT movement. ObamaCare was a fluke. Kennedy was the swing vote in the 2003 SCOTUS case striking down sodomy laws, so he does have a history of that. Whether or not this will extend to full marriage rights, I cannot be certain, but I do very much hope so.
 
2012-08-02 03:21:33 PM

cman: Serious Black: cman: Serious Black: cman: farkityfarker: Hopefully we'll have marriage equality in Washington State in less than 100 days.

I'm going to do my part to make it happen.

And hopefully the Supreme Court will refuse to hear the Prop 8 appeal and California will have it too.

I doubt that. SCOTUS loves precedent setting cases. They will take it.

I don't think they will. I agree that they love precedent-setting cases, but I think they'll be more likely to take up the case of DOMA, strike down Section 3, and then wait for another lawsuit from somebody who is in a civil union but isn't married to claim that the state is violating equal protection.

That is possible. But, in all reality, I really cannot see them not taking this case. You really think that members of SCOTUS are gonna let homosexual marriage pass without any sort of them putting their stamp on it? Sure, Kennedy will probably come to our side, but there are four conservative justices who may want to have a say in this case.

Here's the question: how much do you trust Kennedy or, possibly, Roberts to cross over and agree that the right to marry does not discriminate on gender like it doesn't discriminate on race? I would bet the farm that they'd agree with striking down Section 3 of DOMA, but I'm leery of predicting whether they will strike down every anti-marriage equality law in one fell swoop.

Good question. Roberts is definitely not gonna be on the side of the LGBT movement. ObamaCare was a fluke. Kennedy was the swing vote in the 2003 SCOTUS case striking down sodomy laws, so he does have a history of that. Whether or not Kennedy's view will extend to full marriage rights, I cannot be certain, but I do very much hope so.


FTFM, my bad
 
2012-08-02 03:23:21 PM

sendtodave: Society is hierarchical. Humans are a chimp troop with digital watches. Animals.

And there is no justice in nature.

No sense in being angry at things you can't change.


I [need] about half a dozen [citations] for this one.
 
2012-08-02 03:23:46 PM
s3-ec.buzzfed.com
 
2012-08-02 03:24:31 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: MrBallou: Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".

I was told this would lead to people lying with animals. Guess there's a lag on that part.

Happy for the happy people. Here's to a better world.

You don't remember that Irish mother who died from an allergic reaction from humping a dog? Note that they have a weak, half-assed form of gay marriage in Ireland, which explains why she was sick enough to have sex with an animal, but still kept it relatively heterosexual.

/so not serious, I'm bored and your post reminded me of that story


Wow! Arrested for "buggery". That is pretty cool.
 
2012-08-02 03:26:46 PM

cman: Godscrack: cman: At least those in the first picture with the suits had the sense to show up in GASP wedding clothes for a wedding

So, you came..?

Well excuse me for having a taste in clothing



cman:
i.imgur.com
 
2012-08-02 03:28:06 PM

PocketfullaSass: As a parent whose only child, my 16 year old son, finally came out of the closet this week, I have to say this link made me tear up and happy-sappy cry because of how far equality has come in my lifetime. I know there is still a long way to go, but love will eventually win out.

When I was young, I had friends that were kicked out of their homes, lost their families, and got bullied and beaten for being gay.

When our son told the hubby and I, the three of us cracked open a bottle of champagne and stayed up half the night talking and laughing and just being together.

I love you, T.


Thanks alot! I'd just gotten my freakin composure after looking at the pics, successfully convinced a coworker that I was seriously just having an allergy attack. THEN had to read this awesome post and the leakage started again (I find fake sneezing is the best cover for public bouts of tear-welling AWWWWWWW!)

Good for you and hubby, and so glad that your son got to come out in a way that embraces all that is good in this world: love, acceptance and booze.
 
2012-08-02 03:29:51 PM
s3-ec.buzzfed.com

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

I uhhh. I'm not sure where that says anything about gay marriage in there.
 
2012-08-02 03:32:53 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: MrBallou: Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".

I was told this would lead to people lying with animals. Guess there's a lag on that part.

Happy for the happy people. Here's to a better world.

You don't remember that Irish mother who died from an allergic reaction from humping a dog? Note that they have a weak, half-assed form of gay marriage in Ireland, which explains why she was sick enough to have sex with an animal, but still kept it relatively heterosexual.

/so not serious, I'm bored and your post reminded me of that story


That's a dangerous level of boredom, friend.
 
2012-08-02 03:32:57 PM

Moosecakes: I uhhh. I'm not sure where that says anything about gay marriage in there.


No, he's trying to do math. 2 = 23-24.

j.wigflip.com
 
2012-08-02 03:33:57 PM

PocketfullaSass: As a parent whose only child, my 16 year old son, finally came out of the closet this week, I have to say this link made me tear up and happy-sappy cry because of how far equality has come in my lifetime. I know there is still a long way to go, but love will eventually win out.

When I was young, I had friends that were kicked out of their homes, lost their families, and got bullied and beaten for being gay.

When our son told the hubby and I, the three of us cracked open a bottle of champagne and stayed up half the night talking and laughing and just being together.

I love you, T.


your story, it gave me something in my eye..............must be dusty around here
 
2012-08-02 03:34:16 PM

Moosecakes: [s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x447]

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

I uhhh. I'm not sure where that says anything about gay marriage in there.


Cleave is drawn from a Hebrew word which essentially says that you are forever and inextricably bound to the person. Funny enough, that specific word is used in the Bible in describing the relationship between Ruth and Naomi, and I believe it's also used to describe the relationship between David and Jonathan.
 
2012-08-02 03:36:53 PM

madden101: [s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x467]


=
www.prlog.org
+
msnbcmedia.msn.com
 
2012-08-02 03:37:52 PM

sendtodave: ghare: torr5962: Uchiha_Cycliste

I give you 10 maybe 15 years before you're a conservative. Only young people are that liberal and angry.

You are dead wrong. Injustice makes liberals angry and there's a lot of injustice out there.

Society is hierarchical. Humans are a chimp troop with digital watches. Animals.

And there is no justice in nature.

No sense in being angry at things you can't change.


No, there is no justice in Nature, but we are sentient, logical and reasoning. We have a structured and supposedly just society dedicated to preventing the lowest from being abused by the highest, There is a social contract that we are all born into, to be a member of humanity and that contract dictates we are all equals and all deserve the rights.
Animals don't have the ability to work out disputes with words and compromise, there is ONLY dominance and submission. I'd like to think we are better than that.
As an example, we have a justice system that exists in order to settle disputes. Whether person vs person or person vs society. When you take away the ability to settle disputes judicially and calmly all the remains is disputing through violence. Hence, black markets always breed violence. In the drug trade, if someone gets screwed they have no legal recourse and must get even with violence, threats and intimidation. If, say, drugs were legal, disputes could be settled by the courts and violence would be minimal and looked down upon as all other unwarranted attacks upon others.
 
2012-08-02 03:41:28 PM

PanicMan: cman: Jesus Christ, although I am happy for them, arent homosexuals usually known for having style?

Is it somehow not applicable to New York homosexuals? Wow that attire is horrible

I think it was people just wanted to get it done before an injunction, hold, repeal, etc. At least for the first groups getting married.


This was precisely it for us. Teeshirts and jeans. It was 90 something degrees out and raining. I am not wearing a schmancy dress in hot steaming rain. As it was I almost fainted by the end (I was fresh out of the hospital, not knowing when I'd go back.)
The fancy clothes are for my family and friends, not for a government dude. I worked in a county courthouse for quite a while and hardly even saw straight couples dress up for what amounts to civil registry.
 
2012-08-02 03:42:00 PM

cman: susansto-helit: cman: kingoomieiii: gilgigamesh: cman:
It is supposed to be a wedding, not a trip down to Walmart, which is how the (forgive me if I mess up the terminology) brides are dressed up as. Where are the white gowns?

Well will you listen to her?

Rowrr. Kitty's got claws. PFT! PFT!

What cman might look like

[blog.al.com image 240x310]

LOL

Come on, even you have gotta admit that they should be better dressed for a wedding. Its the most important day of their life, and looking good while you are at it is a prerequisite

My brother and sis-in-law got married in casual attire in a courthouse. Both outfits have been worn again. You can't really do that with a wedding dress.

Weddings are supposed to be special, and these people were the first homosexuals in NY to get married. They are part of history. Forgive me if I sound old fashion, but when I picture gay weddings, I want to see it in a church in proper gowns. That is how you stick it to the haters.


Whilst I most certainly appreciate the sentiment, and may just fake-marry a dude to piss the fundies off (I'm bi, female pref., FWIW), maybe these couples wanted to remember it for being their day, how they wanted it, and not as the day they made Sue-Belle get a case of the vapors. Or maybe their saving that for the non-legal part.
 
2012-08-02 03:43:25 PM

Aarontology: hubiestubert: In Mass, you know what happened after marriage equality happened?

Here in Connecticut, Hartford was destroyed by a meteor.


Isn't that the disaster that inflicted millions of dollars worth of improvements?

j/k, I've lived in CT, and love the northeast. Could do without all that snow, though.
 
2012-08-02 03:45:29 PM

ImpendingCynic: Aarontology: hubiestubert: In Mass, you know what happened after marriage equality happened?

Here in Connecticut, Hartford was destroyed by a meteor.

Isn't that the disaster that inflicted millions of dollars worth of improvements?

j/k, I've lived in CT, and love the northeast. Could do without all that snow, though.


There were tornadoes too! friggin tornadoes even near Worcster!
 
2012-08-02 03:48:46 PM

LarryDan43: Ugh, gross, sick, now ima hafta eat Chick-fil-A again for dinner just to get this bad taste out of my mouth.


I'm not eating there, so go ahead and eat 3 for me.
 
2012-08-02 03:49:21 PM

GameSprocket: Crotchrocket Slim: MrBallou: Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".

I was told this would lead to people lying with animals. Guess there's a lag on that part.

Happy for the happy people. Here's to a better world.

You don't remember that Irish mother who died from an allergic reaction from humping a dog? Note that they have a weak, half-assed form of gay marriage in Ireland, which explains why she was sick enough to have sex with an animal, but still kept it relatively heterosexual.

/so not serious, I'm bored and your post reminded me of that story

Wow! Arrested for "buggery". That is pretty cool.


Imagine if there had been a horse involved instead. "Arrested for horse buggery"- I'm sure it happens once in a while.

Damn surprising there is already a lot of bestiality in the world and we don't have gay marriage yet (consider that any human-animal sex is too much). Exactly how much is the post-gay marriage world going to be different than the one we live in now?
 
2012-08-02 03:50:08 PM

Rev. Skarekroe: What gives? I see "husband/wife/spouse" but no spot for "turtle".


The Republicons are still desperately trying to teach turtles to sign consent forms so their predictions of marriage doom can be true.
 
2012-08-02 03:50:50 PM

BMulligan: sendtodave: Society is hierarchical. Humans are a chimp troop with digital watches. Animals.

And there is no justice in nature.

No sense in being angry at things you can't change.

I [need] about half a dozen [citations] for this one.


Have some wiki, I'm lazy.

Social Dominance Theory was first formulated[2] by psychology professors Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto.[3][4] The theory begins with the observation that human social groups tend be organized according to group-based social hierarchies in societies that produce economic surplus. These hierarchies have a trimorphic (3-form) structure. This means that these hierarchies are based on (1) age (i.e., adults have more power and higher status than children), (2) gender (i.e., men have more power and higher status than women), and (3) arbitrary-set, which are group-based hierarchies that are culturally defined and do not necessarily exist in all societies. Arbitrary-set hierarchies can be based on ethnicity (e.g., Whites over Blacks in the U.S.), religion, nationality, and so on. Human social hierarchies consist of a hegemonic group at the top and negative reference groups at the bottom. More powerful social roles are increasingly likely to be occupied by a hegemonic group member (for example, an older white male). Males are more dominant than females, and they possess more political power (the iron law of andrarchy). Most high-status positions are held by males ([2], 1992). Prejudiced beliefs, such as racism, sexism, nationalism and classism, are all manifestations of this same system of social hierarchy.

Social Dominance Theory

A dominance hierarchy (in humans: social hierarchy) is the organization of individuals in a group that occurs when competition for resources leads to aggression. Schjelderup-Ebbe, who studied the often-cited example of the pecking order in chickens, found that such social structures lead to more stable flocks with reduced aggression among individuals.

Dominance hierarchies can be despotic or linear. In a despotic hierarchy, only one individual is dominant, while the others are all equally submissive. In a linear hierarchy, for example, in the above cited pecking order of chickens, each individual dominates all individuals below him and not those above him.

Dominance hierarchies occur in most social animal species that normally live in groups, including primates. Dominance hierarchies have been extensively studied in fish, birds, and mammals. Dominance hierarchies can be simple linear structures, which often arise from the physical differences among individuals in a group in relation to their access to resources. They are also influenced by the complex social interactions among individuals in the group.


...

Dominance hierarchies, though often more subtle, can be observed in human societies and are important for understanding the organization of family, tribe or clan, work organizations, politics, etc. in normal and abnormal social situations. It is not clear how much of dominance hierarchy in humans is due to the intrinsic biology of our brains, derived from evolution, and how much is due to cultural factors.

Dominance hierarchy

Humans, as social animals, are inherently hierarchical, and prefer to build and inhabit hierarchical systems. Some hierarchical systems you may have encountered recently:

Racism
Sexism
Gender roles
Caste
Religion
Government
Your boss
Your mom
etc.
 
2012-08-02 03:53:29 PM
Yes, how horrible it is to treat human beings like human beings.

And what if, totally as an accident, by cutting down on greenhouse gasses and co2 we end up making the planet better for the generations that follow us?

The horror... The horror..
 
2012-08-02 03:54:48 PM

gilgigamesh: OK, am I the only one who gets all teary-eyed at pictures of old gay couples?

I don't know what it is. There's something so tender and moving about it. I guess when I see an old gay couple I have this whole narrative in my head that they lived their whole lives as a lie, before finally finding true love in the final act. It's so storybook.

Scuse me... *SOB*


The old black and white dude? The ones who look like they were alive to see segregation and race riots growing up? Oh god yes.
 
2012-08-02 03:55:24 PM
Sorry libs, but all the cool people are over at Chick-fil-A, affirming their FAITH IN GOD by eating a chicken sandwich.

deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com
We love you SARAH!

media.bakersfieldnow.com
Ream Americans!

media.bakersfieldnow.com
Couponing for Jesus!

media.bakersfieldnow.com
This salad looks fab-u-lous!

cdn2-b.examiner.com
This pretty much says it all. You libs crossed the line this time. We are going to WIN this one!
 
2012-08-02 03:58:27 PM
Dear Conservatives,

STFU and go back to eating your Biggit Chikn!

Signed,

The Human Race
 
2012-08-02 03:58:59 PM

LabGrrl: PanicMan: cman: Jesus Christ, although I am happy for them, arent homosexuals usually known for having style?

Is it somehow not applicable to New York homosexuals? Wow that attire is horrible

I think it was people just wanted to get it done before an injunction, hold, repeal, etc. At least for the first groups getting married.

This was precisely it for us. Teeshirts and jeans. It was 90 something degrees out and raining. I am not wearing a schmancy dress in hot steaming rain. As it was I almost fainted by the end (I was fresh out of the hospital, not knowing when I'd go back.)
The fancy clothes are for my family and friends, not for a government dude. I worked in a county courthouse for quite a while and hardly even saw straight couples dress up for what amounts to civil registry.


I never factored anything like that in my thought process (working against a possible injunction). I did not know how serious it was. Wow, I am sorry about the way that you folk have been treated. Its a shame
 
2012-08-02 03:59:01 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: No, there is no justice in Nature, but we are sentient, logical and reasoning. We have a structured and supposedly just society dedicated to preventing the lowest from being abused by the highest, There is a social contract that we are all born into, to be a member of humanity and that contract dictates we are all equals and all deserve the rights.


We do?

We who? Look around the world, despots, dictators, religious dogma... Oh, you mean the enlightened West?

Look at the power dichotomy, even here. Look at the Gini coefficient of the US, it rivals the third world. Look at our criminal "justice" system. It is set up remove threats to the society, not to be "fair."

Look at all the rhetoric in Europe on how "multiculturalism has failed." Heck, look at the most enlightened, and equal states, the Scandinavian countries. They're starting to be unhappy with Muslims immigrating there. Muslims aren't like them. They're different, they're burdens... They are an out-group.

Humans like the stability of hierarchies. They just don't like being low on the ladder. That's when people fight: When the feel they should have higher status than what has been ascribed to them by the hegemons at the top.
 
2012-08-02 04:00:09 PM
Altar? Looked more like a podium in a courthouse.
 
2012-08-02 04:01:11 PM

sendtodave: Humans, as social animals, are inherently hierarchical, and prefer to build and inhabit hierarchical systems. Some hierarchical systems you may have encountered recently:


Problem is, those things aren't universal by a long shot
 
2012-08-02 04:01:12 PM

Rapmaster2000: Sorry libs, but all the cool people are over at Chick-fil-A, affirming their FAITH IN GOD by eating a chicken sandwich.

[deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 585x383]
We love you SARAH!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x388]
Ream Americans!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x368]
Couponing for Jesus!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x371]
This salad looks fab-u-lous!

[cdn2-b.examiner.com image 480x359]
This pretty much says it all. You libs crossed the line this time. We are going to WIN this one!


Oh good. It's you posting. For a moment I thought the farker was serious.
 
2012-08-02 04:01:16 PM

cman: That is possible. But, in all reality, I really cannot see them not taking this case. You really think that members of SCOTUS are gonna let homosexual marriage pass without any sort of them putting their stamp on it? Sure, Kennedy will probably come to our side, but there are four conservative justices who may want to have a say in this case.

Here's the question: how much do you trust Kennedy or, possibly, Roberts to cross over and agree that the right to marry does not discriminate on gender like it doesn't discriminate on race? I would bet the farm that they'd agree with striking down Section 3 of DOMA, but I'm leery of predicting whether they will strike down every anti-marriage equality law in one fell swoop.

Good question. Roberts is definitely not gonna be on the side of the LGBT movement. ObamaCare was a fluke. Kennedy was the swing vote in the 2003 SCOTUS case striking down sodomy laws, so he does have a history of that. Whether or not this will extend to full marriage rights, I cannot be certain, but I do very much hope so.



The honest issue is that you need to remember what it is the SCOTUS actually does, constitutionally. They are the court of last resort for Federal Law. That's it. As such, they tend to pick up cases that involve either 1) major interpretations of federal laws or 2) circuit splits (where various circuits have interpreted the same thing multiple ways). Given that the 9th Cir.'s opinion in Prop 8 was pretty much based on California's granting marriage then taking it away, its not really a matter of national importance (note: gay marriage may be, but the right of a state to grant marriages then take them away is really the issue here). This narrowness would allow the Supreme Court to punt, which is what they do. Seeing as how DOMA actually involves a series of varying contrary opinions in various federal courts on an issue that directly speaks to marriage equality, i see a DOMA case being much more likely for cert than prop 8.
 
2012-08-02 04:01:21 PM

Rapmaster2000: Ream Americans!


... Is that the, uh, homosexual agenda?
 
2012-08-02 04:03:25 PM

WhyteRaven74: sendtodave: Humans, as social animals, are inherently hierarchical, and prefer to build and inhabit hierarchical systems. Some hierarchical systems you may have encountered recently:

Problem is, those things aren't universal by a long shot


Some are. And the basis behind all of them is.

Face it, we're still a bunch of chimps.
 
2012-08-02 04:05:47 PM

Rapmaster2000: Sorry libs, but all the cool people are over at Chick-fil-A, affirming their FAITH IN GOD by eating a chicken sandwich.

[deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 585x383]
We love you SARAH!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x388]
Ream Americans!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x368]
Couponing for Jesus!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x371]
This salad looks fab-u-lous!

[cdn2-b.examiner.com image 480x359]
This pretty much says it all. You libs crossed the line this time. We are going to WIN this one!


Hmm, not a black person pictured. YOU DON'T SAY

/not a chicken joke
//probably should have been
 
2012-08-02 04:06:22 PM

cman: LabGrrl: PanicMan: cman: Jesus Christ, although I am happy for them, arent homosexuals usually known for having style?

Is it somehow not applicable to New York homosexuals? Wow that attire is horrible

I think it was people just wanted to get it done before an injunction, hold, repeal, etc. At least for the first groups getting married.

This was precisely it for us. Teeshirts and jeans. It was 90 something degrees out and raining. I am not wearing a schmancy dress in hot steaming rain. As it was I almost fainted by the end (I was fresh out of the hospital, not knowing when I'd go back.)
The fancy clothes are for my family and friends, not for a government dude. I worked in a county courthouse for quite a while and hardly even saw straight couples dress up for what amounts to civil registry.

I never factored anything like that in my thought process (working against a possible injunction). I did not know how serious it was. Wow, I am sorry about the way that you folk have been treated. Its a shame


On the plus side, my son had just turned 19. He was able to be our witness. Which was awesome. Seriously awesome. The fact that he signed it made it mean more to me...also the fact that he was like "duh, who else would you have sign it?" Saving the next fancy dress party for me and wifey's 20th anniversary next year...real anniversary, not the 'state allowing it' anniversary.
 
2012-08-02 04:06:38 PM

sendtodave: And the basis behind all of them is.


It may be, but there are and have been plenty of societies that haven't featured them.
 
2012-08-02 04:07:09 PM

cman: LabGrrl: PanicMan: cman: Jesus Christ, although I am happy for them, arent homosexuals usually known for having style?

Is it somehow not applicable to New York homosexuals? Wow that attire is horrible

I think it was people just wanted to get it done before an injunction, hold, repeal, etc. At least for the first groups getting married.

This was precisely it for us. Teeshirts and jeans. It was 90 something degrees out and raining. I am not wearing a schmancy dress in hot steaming rain. As it was I almost fainted by the end (I was fresh out of the hospital, not knowing when I'd go back.)
The fancy clothes are for my family and friends, not for a government dude. I worked in a county courthouse for quite a while and hardly even saw straight couples dress up for what amounts to civil registry.

I never factored anything like that in my thought process (working against a possible injunction). I did not know how serious it was. Wow, I am sorry about the way that you folk have been treated. Its a shame


Heterosexual people live incredibly sheltered lives. Even the most empathetic of us have trouble putting ourselves in others' shoes.

That said, congratulations LabGrrl! I wish you and your wife the best.
 
2012-08-02 04:08:01 PM

kukukupo: That was freaking nasty.

At least put a warning up that some material may not be suitable for work.



Shouldn't you be manning the deep fryer instead of Farking? People want their mediocre chicken sandwiches, you know.
 
2012-08-02 04:09:41 PM

cman: I mean, come on

[s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x443]

It is supposed to be a wedding, not a trip down to Walmart, which is how the (forgive me if I mess up the terminology) brides are dressed up as. Where are the white gowns?


one thing I find odd and cannot quite find an explanation is the differences between gays and lesbians. Almost every picture of lesbians had one in a dress and one wearing pants. Whereas all the men were wearing pants. I did not see one gay couple where one was dressed as men typically do and one was dressed as a woman (yes one pair was wearing kilts, but they both were). Anyone help me out on why lesbian couples seem to always have a stud who tries to look like a man, and you hardly ever see two femmes?
 
2012-08-02 04:09:57 PM

Rapmaster2000: Sorry libs, but all the cool people are over at Chick-fil-A, affirming their FAITH IN GOD by eating a chicken sandwich.

[deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 585x383]
We love you SARAH!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x388]
Ream Americans!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x368]
Couponing for Jesus!

[media.bakersfieldnow.com image 660x371]
This salad looks fab-u-lous!

[cdn2-b.examiner.com image 480x359]
This pretty much says it all. You libs crossed the line this time. We are going to WIN this one!


I have to admit, I almost bit into that post like Sarah was going to annihilate her right-wing hate poultry when she gets home.
/this Chik-Fil-A thing has gotten so stupid it's moved from being funny to annoying and back to funny again
 
2012-08-02 04:12:57 PM
s3-ec.buzzfed.com

Minorities, mixed-race couples, homosexuality and happiness. Everything the Tea Party despises in one photo.
 
2012-08-02 04:13:16 PM
Party of Small Government my @SS
 
Displayed 50 of 331 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report